 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)w M w ...and 324 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614286 Today 7 Topics 127553 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Lol....check this out |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"For full access to our site, please complete this simple registration form. As a member, you'll enjoy: " cant you just cut n paste it? i hate to register.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ASHINGTON, Dec. 15 — The Defense Department is considering issuing a secret directive to the American military to conduct covert operations aimed at influencing public opinion and policy makers in friendly and neutral countries, senior Pentagon and administration officials say. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has not yet decided on the proposal, which has ignited a fierce battle throughout the Bush administration over whether the military should carry out secret propaganda missions in friendly nations like Germany, where many of the Sept. 11 hijackers congregated, or Pakistan, still considered a haven for Al Qaeda's militants. Such a program, for example, could include efforts to discredit and undermine the influence of mosques and religious schools that have become breeding grounds for Islamic militancy and anti-Americanism across the Middle East, Asia and Europe. It might even include setting up schools with secret American financing to teach a moderate Islamic position laced with sympathetic depictions of how the religion is practiced in America, officials said. Many administration officials agree that the government's broad strategy to counter terrorism must include vigorous and creative propaganda to change the negative view of America held in many countries. The fight, one Pentagon official said, is over "the strategic communications for our nation, the message we want to send for long-term influence, and how we do it." As a military officer put it: "We have the assets and the capabilities and the training to go into friendly and neutral nations to influence public opinion. We could do it and get away with it. That doesn't mean we should." It is not the first time that the debate over how the United States should marshal its forces to win the hearts and minds of the world has raised difficult and potentially embarrassing questions at the Pentagon. A nonclandestine parallel effort at the State Department, which refers to its role as public diplomacy, has not met with so much res |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"In peacetime, I.O. supports national objectives primarily by influencing foreign perceptions and decision-making," the proposal states. "In crises short of hostilities, I.O. can be used as a flexible deterrent option to communicate national interest and demonstrate resolve. In conflict, I.O. can be applied to achieve physical and psychological results in support of military objectives." Although the defense secretary is among those pushing to come up with a bolder strategy for getting out the American message, he has not yet decided whether the military should take on those responsibilities, the officials said. There is little dispute over such battlefield tactics as destroying an enemy's radio and television stations. All is considered fair in that kind of war. But several senior military officers, some of whom have recently left service, expressed dismay at the concept of assigning the military to wage covert propaganda campaigns in friendly or neutral countries. "Running ops against your allies doesn't work very well," Adm. Dennis C. Blair, a retired commander of American forces in the Pacific, advised Pentagon officials as they began re-examining the classified directive over the summer. "I've seen it tried a few times, and it generally is not very effective." Those in favor of assigning the military an expanded role argue that no other department is stepping up to the task of countering propaganda from terrorists, who hold no taboo against deception. They also contend that the Pentagon has the best technological tools for the job, especially in the areas of satellite communications and computer warfare, and that the American military has important interests to protect in some countries, including those where ties with the government are stronger than the affections of the population. For example, as anti-American sentiment has risen this year in South Korea, intensified recently by the deaths of two schoolgirls who were crushed by an American armored vehicle, some Pentagon offic |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Pentagon officials were prompted to consider ways of influencing Korean public opinion outside of traditional public affairs or community outreach programs, one military official said. No detailed plan has yet emerged. Those who oppose the military's taking on the job of managing perceptions of America in allied states say it more naturally falls to diplomats and civilians, or even uniformed public affairs specialists. They say that secret operations, if deemed warranted by the president, should be carried out by American intelligence agencies. In addition, they say, the Pentagon's job of explaining itself through public affairs officers could be tainted by any link to covert information missions. "These allied nations would absolutely object to having the American military attempt to secretly affect communications to their populations," said one State Department official with a long career in overseas public affairs. Even so, this official conceded: "The State Department can't do it. We're not arranged to do it, and we don't have the money. And U.S.I.A. is broken." He was referring to the United States Information Agency, which was absorbed into the State Department. One effort to reshape the nation's ability to get its message out was a proposal by Representative Henry J. Hyde, an Illinois Republican who is chairman of the House International Relations Committee. Mr. Hyde is pushing for $255 million to bolster the State Department's public diplomacy effort and reorganize international broadcasting activities. "If we are to be successful in our broader foreign policy goals," Mr. Hyde said in a statement, "America's effort to engage the peoples of the world must assume a more prominent place in the planning and execution of our foreign policy." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
This has been happening since the Red Scare/Cold War era. Funny that is't being publicized |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Dirty US propaganda? Yes Great Satan. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its fucked up.. they had a beuro (sp?) which was supposed to leak and controll us propaganda in media all around the world a time back.. i think they said they closed it when the public found out about it. but i doubt it.. i will have to take up my old habit of mcdonalds night time trashing. :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i repeat: dolleaters, your avatar looks like one of those gladiator chicks. who is it? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Jay from Jay and Silent Bob. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
okay, he looks like an angry chick |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the us government.... using propaganda?? nahh... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Hee hee.... I reckon they are trying it here in New Zealand they have arrested their first alleged "terrorist" who is asking to speak to a lawyer. Then the New Zealand Herald daily paper ran a main headline "New Zealand ready for the SMALL POX Terror with vaccines" This conicides with a visit to the US by Helen Clark, PM who is kissing butt for a free trade agreement. Brrr I am so scared that I think I will make myself a martini and terrorise the neighbors with Windowlicker |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its all to distract people from the US wanting to lower oil prices they're scrambling to find something to avert the dumbass americans attention - SUV'S FOR EVERYONE and asthma |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
