[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Violent Pro-Trump Neo-Nazis to Crash GOP Convention (non-libertarians for Trump)

Chairman claims Nevada Libertarian Party ‘infested with idiots’

fine deranged logic you got there ... voting for your unviable Paultard choice in anyway --- keeping the Chicago urban zoo animal out of the whitehouse?

The dangers of de-policing — will cops just stand down?

John Stossel pushes Libertarian view on terrorism: Do Nothing !!!

Homicide Rates Jump in Many Major U.S. Cities, New Data Shows

Libertarians for Trump

Cop Accused of Sexually Assaulting a Child Says She Wanted It — “It was Absolutely Consensual”

Media Silent as Secret Service Agent Exposes Clinton White House as Coke Den, Full of Mistresses

Video shows Silver City, State Police ignore DWI investigation of district attorney

Why Radical Libertarians Are the New Communists - A toxic strand of a political ideology

This U.N. official accidentally crushed his own throat right before he was set to testify against Hillary Clinton

SHOCKING POLL: Libertarians are too Stupid to Understand What ‘Libertarian’ Really Means!

Judge tosses Libertarian Frank Tamburri from U.S. Senate ballot

Full Speech: Donald Trump Delivers Economic Policy Speech in Monessen, PA (6-28-16)

Turkey Istanbul: Explosions and gunfire rock Ataturk airport

White House: Benghazi report is political

‘Super Racist’ Water Safety Poster Prompts American Red Cross Apology

Obama Could Be Facing 10 Years To Life In Prison... TALIBAN SWAP RESULTS

Here’s What the Brexit Did to the World’s 400 Richest People

Here’s Why You Shouldn’t Say “Christian Conservative”

FBI Transcript Shows Nobody Died in Orlando Shooting Until SWAT Teams Entered the Building at 5:13 AM

Judge Richard Posner: ‘No value’ in studying the U.S. Constitution

Officials Reveal America’s National Security is “Controlled” by the Jihadists

Our Lost Constitution: The Willful Subversion of America's Founding Document

The Government Made Me a Litterbug

A Libertarian Lexicon

Clinton Removes The Mask—Goes Full Merkel On Immigration

After Brexit, a Trump Path to Victory

Cleveland Is Purposefully Setting the Stage for Mass Protester Violence at the RNC (Westboro Baptist Church, July 20 Perk Plaza)

Liberal Foreign Policy explained

How Liberal Journalists Think

Meet the Liberal Elite!

Wow, Justice Sotomayor Kind of Agrees With Justice Thomas on a Gun Case!

Big ruling for abortion rights in Supreme Court's Texas case

A Chat about Illegal Immigration

Barack Obama explained

Normal Guy debates gun control with hillary supporter

European SUPERSTATE to be unveiled: EU nations 'to be morphed into one' post-Brexit

‘It Will Happen Very Soon’: European MEP Issues Dire Warning on Fate of EU After Historic Brexit Vote

Court upholds reach of US gun ban for domestic violence

Federal Court Rules Govt Can Hack Your Computer Without a Warrant, No Probable Cause

The FDA is stockpiling military weapons — and it’s not alone

Pope Francis makes groundbreaking apology to gay people and says the Catholic Church must seek forgiveness for the way it treated them in the past

Judge Jeanine Pirro's Opening Statement June 25, 2016

Hank ‘Meltdown’ Paulson Cites Hillary’s Globalist Platform as Reason for Endorsement

Anyone on a no-fly list ... should not be able to purchase --- a kitchen utensil

I’m suing the US government for its data on who’s entering the country

Which candidate said what?

Democratic Sen. Calls For Ammunition Control [VIDEO]


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles

Title: Are ‘Sock Puppets’ Propaganda?
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/are-sock-puppets-propaganda/
Published: May 21, 2012
Author: By Jordan Bloom
Post Date: 2012-05-21 18:07:49 by We The People
Keywords: None
Views: 361

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) sure has some strange priorities.

Last week, he formed the left flank of the Amash-Smith coalition to upend the indefinite detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act. It failed, 238-182. 

Three days ago, BuzzFeed reported that he had proposed another amendment, along with Texas Republican Mac Thornberry, to “strike the current ban on domestic dissemination” of Pentagon and State Department propaganda:

In a little noticed press release earlier in the week — buried beneath the other high-profile issues in the $642 billion defense bill, including indefinite detention and a prohibition on gay marriage at military installations — Thornberry warned that in the Internet age, the current law “ties the hands of America’s diplomatic officials, military, and others by inhibiting our ability to effectively communicate in a credible way.”

The bill’s supporters say the informational material used overseas to influence foreign audiences is too good to not use at home, and that new techniques are needed to help fight Al-Qaeda, a borderless enemy whose own propaganda reaches Americans online.

Critics of the bill say there are ways to keep America safe without turning the massive information operations apparatus within the federal government against American citizens.

Recognizing that some legal limits on domestic information operations are probably a good thing, it remains clear that the limits in place up until now haven’t exactly prevented either agency from advancing their own agendas in the press.

This is not new. Complete separation of state and media has always been a fallacy; in fact venerable broadcasters like Edward Murrow, who President Kennedy appointed head of the U.S. Information Agency more than a decade after the Smith-Mundt Act‘s passage, have turned to the state messaging apparatus in the face of the perceived market failure of broadcasting to deliver news as anything other than entertainment.

It’s a salient anecdote because a subsidiary of the USIA, Voice of America, provided the pretext for some of the provisions of Smith-Mundt; the bill’s supporters were concerned about how an organ like VOA might be used if it were allowed to broadcast domestically. The first attempt to permanentize the agency was blocked in 1946 by Sen. Robert Taft. Back then, VOA was justified as providing a way to make sure the recipients of our foreign aid knew where it was coming from; hearts and minds and all. Therefore, the assumption went, it was better for academicians and the traditional media to bring it home instead, with an acceptably independent spin. This is a significant development because it extended the antagonistic wartime understanding of information ops–it’s ok to broadcast propaganda over there, but not here–to peacetime.

Now, due primarily to the internet, it’s nearly impossible to separate foreign and domestic dissemination.  If the old Smith-Mundt bill was paranoid in its apparent fear of government leaflet operations over Peoria, the repeal provisions now before the House seem to have a paranoid belief that Al Jazeera’s presence in domestic markets will make Americans unduly skeptical of our current mideast policy of promiscuous military intervention. So why not repeal an ineffective law?

Because this is all about wartime messaging. Repealing portions of the law would only give more cover to the military for violating the spirit of the law, which they already do in several ways. It was revealed earlier this year that the military was engaged in creating armies of social media “sock puppets” to drum up support for its policies. When two USA Today staffers started to look into the propaganda contracting, they found themselves on the receiving end of it.  And the sock puppets are just the automated version of their earlier talking heads.  That is, the Pentagon’s military analysts program, which provided VIP trips to Guantanamo and other perks for retired military officers who would then appear on cable news and reliably tout DoD talking points.

Consistent messaging and a complacent public are enormously important to the war managers at the Pentagon. Not to get all Alex Jones-y, but my favorite example thereof is this lovely white paper from 1980 on Mindwar–”The Psychology of Victory”–co-written by Fox News military analyst Paul Vallely and avowed satanist Michael Aquino. (You’re not allowed to ask if there’s anything wrong with a satanist writing policy briefs on U.S. military information policy, by the way. Aquino dismisses earlier objections as an “absurdly comic opera.”) Nearly every sentence reads like an unholy hate-child of Orwell, Machiavelli, and Freud, but here’s the most relevant:

MindWar must target all participants if it is to be effective. It must not only weaken the enemy; it must strengthen the United States. It strengthens the United States by denying enemy propaganda access to our people, and by explaining and emphasizing to our people the rationale for our national interest in a specific war. 

Under existing United States Law, PSYOP units may not target American citizens. That prohibition is based upon the presumption that “propaganda” is necessarily a lie or at least a misleading half-truth, and that the government has no right to lie to the people. The Propaganda Ministry of Goebbels must not be a part of the American way of life.

Quite right, and so it must be axiomatic of MindWar that it always speaks the truth. Its power lies in its ability to focus recipients’ attention on the truth of the future as well as that of the present. MindWar thus involves the stated promise of the truth that the United States has resolved to make real if it is not already so.

Yet, based on its own actions, the military has already claimed the prerogative to determine that truth, and suppressed two journalists’ ability to contradict it. So why give them even more license to turn the bullhorn on us? (1 image)

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com