NYT: Pentagon Weighs Use of Deception in a Broad Arena

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/13/politics/13info.html?ei=5094&en=86117d4f693ff0fb&hp=&ex=1102914000&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print&position=

The Pentagon is engaged in bitter, high-level debate over how far it can and should go in managing or manipulating information to influence opinion abroad, senior Defense Department civilians and military officers say.

Such missions, if approved, could take the deceptive techniques endorsed for use on the battlefield to confuse an adversary and adopt them for covert propaganda campaigns aimed at neutral and even allied nations.

Critics of the proposals say such deceptive missions could shatter the Pentagon's credibility, leaving the American public and a world audience skeptical of anything the Defense Department and military say - a repeat of the credibility gap that roiled America during the Vietnam War.

The efforts under consideration risk blurring the traditional lines between public affairs programs in the Pentagon and military branches - whose charters call for giving truthful information to the media and the public - and the world of combat information campaigns or psychological operations.

[silverweb]

1. What debate?

They've been doing this all along!

:shrug:

[Geek_Girl]

7. That's exactly what I was thinking

I don't think they've exactly been honest.

[silverweb]

14. No they haven't been.

Remember back at the beginning of the war, Rummy said he would lie to us? This is nothing new at all.

[donheld]

17. They've also been doing it

for many years IMHO. Long before the Iraqi war. They are more or less lawless.

[Rose Siding]

28. What Pentagon credibility?

Critics say "such deceptive missions could shatter the Pentagon's credibility"

It is sort of funny that the story about them going all covertly deceptive was leaked by unnamed civilian and military sources.

[Sara Beverley]

36. Isn't the problem already that our Pentagon believes its own lies?

You know they won't be able to keep straight what is truth and what is lies. We are already confused and remember Bush WMD lie.

[truthisfreedom]

2. funny thing with these a-holes... they're torn between lying their a--'s

off and silencing dissent.

[The Zanti Regent]

19. When haven't they lied?

Hell, those assholes lied at my only child's funeral when they said he died in service of his country and I yelled at them saying he was NOT in service of the country, he was in service to Halliburton.

[Albert Einstein]

3. In other words, lying will be standard procedure.

So we should assume any exuses the pentagon gives for anything are lies.

[luaneryder]

25. Always question it

They use an abundance of half truths, grains of truth, twisted logic as well as downright lies.

[punpirate]

4. The administration and, by, extension, the military...

... never tells the truth unless forced to do so. This has been true for time immemorial. What is different now is that the government believes it now has a tool to do so effectively--propaganda. The question, then, is not whether to use it, but how effective it will be.

The argument is about using it on our country's citizens. Propaganda is useless on foreign peoples who trust nothing of what our government says.

[Stand and Fight]

5. This is unreal!!!

It's become acceptable to report that our government is considering just how to lie or not to lie, or even how to silence the opposition! What the hell is going on? This is nuts. This is absolutely frickin mad crazy!

[MO_Dem]

9. It sure is unreal!

Just a few short years ago, lying was an impeachable offense, according to republicans.

This "morality" that we are told is so popular nowadays is really mysterious to me.

[The Zanti Regent]

20. now, you know what kind of lie counts

If you lie about SEX, that is impeachable

If you lie about killing my only child, that's OK!

[Journeyman]

6. Didn't Rumsfeld say they would do this up front right after 9/11?. . .

Does anyone have a link to that outrageous statement?

[Zhade]

12. Office of Strategic Influence. Allegedly dead. As if!

http://www.fair.org/press-releases/osi-followup.html

MEDIA ADVISORY:
The Office of Strategic Influence Is Gone, But Are Its Programs In Place?

November 27, 2002

The Federation of American Scientists has pointed to a startling revelation by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that mainstream media have missed: In remarks during a recent press briefing, Rumsfeld suggested that though the controversial Office of Strategic Influence (OSI) no longer exists in name, its programs are still being carried out (FAS Secrecy News, 11/27/02, http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/2002/11/112702.html ).

The OSI came under scrutiny last February, when the New York Times reported (2/19/02) that the new Pentagon group was “developing plans to provide news items, possibly even false ones, to foreign media organizations.” The news was met with outrage, and within a week the Pentagon had closed down the OSI, saying that negative attention had damaged the office’s reputation so much “that it could not operate effectively" (AP, 2/26/02).

The plan was troubling for many reasons: It was profoundly undemocratic; it would have put journalists’ lives at risk by involving them in Pentagon disinformation; and it’s almost certain that any large-scale disinformation campaign directed at the foreign press would have led, sooner or later, to a falsified story being picked up by U.S. media. (See Extra! Update 4/02, "Behind the Pentagon's Propaganda Plan.")

At the time, Rumsfeld claimed that he had “never even seen the charter for the office,” but Thomas Timmes, the OSI’s assistant for operations, said that Rumsfeld had been briefed on its goals “at least twice” and had “given his general support” (New York Times, 2/25/02)...

[Journeyman]

15. Thanks for the response, Zhade. . .

but what I'm looking for is a specific comment Rummy made in the run-up to the attack on Afghanistan. It was flat out, 'We may lie to you,' or something equally bold, given during one of those crazy moments when he was trying to pump himself up as some bad ass warrior.

[ParanoidPat]

34. I think this may be it.......

.......:evilgrin:

D5E:destruction, degradation, denial, disruption, deceit, and exploitation

CONCEPT PAPER


Working Group on Preventive and Preemptive Military Intervention


William W. Keller and Gordon R. Mitchell1
Project Coordinators

<Snip>

U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, called for an FBI investigation into the forgery of documents cited by President Bush and Secretary Powell as proof of Iraq’s nuclear transactions with Niger. As Rockefeller explained in a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller: "There is a possibility that the fabrication of these documents may be part of a larger deception campaign aimed at manipulating public opinion and foreign policy regarding Iraq."26

The timeliness of Rockefeller’s proposed inquiry was underscored by the appearance of official documents that lay out official American deception plans: "In a document last autumn, the joint chiefs of staff stressed the need for strategic deception and influence operations as tools of war. The army, navy and air force have been directed to devise plans for information warfare."27

According to defense analyst William Arkin, the Bush strategy lays out goals for information warfare that pursue D5E: "destruction, degradation, denial, disruption, deceit, and exploitation." Arkin notes that the wide array of sites and ractices of information control brought into the range of this policy "blurs or even erases the boundaries between factual information and news, on the one hand, and public relations, propaganda and psychological warfare on the other."28

This fusion of military deception programs with media propaganda efforts enabled the Office of Strategic Influence to commission officers from the U.S. Army's Psychological Operations Command to work as interns in the news division of CNN.29

Eventually, the Bush Administration was burned by the political heat generated when the Office of Strategic Influence was leaked to the media. The ensuing firestorm of controversy prompted Secretary Rumsfeld to close the propaganda unit. Yet less than a year later, Rumsfeld stipulated that his action had only been symbolic, and that information warfare missions were still underway at other Pentagon offices: And then there was the Office of Strategic Influence. You may recall that.
And "oh my goodness gracious isn't that terrible, Henny Penny the sky is going to fall." I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing, fine, I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have.30

The political implications of blurring military strategic deception and public sphere propaganda are worth exploring, given Arkin's concerns about military deception that "while the policy ostensibly targets foreign enemies, its most likely victim will be the American electorate."31

<More>

[Supersedeas]

31. In same breath, also deny having operatives POSING as journalists

"During the cold war, American intelligence agencies had journalists on their payrolls or operatives posing as journalists, particularly in Western Europe, with the aim of producing pro-American articles to influence the populations of those countries. But officials say that no one is considering using such tactics now."


Well, nothing in the Constitution requires separation between the MSM and the State.

Yes, we know there are journalists who are just 'talking point' stenographers.

But, could there be more to what we hear and see?

[msgadget]

8. 'Could' shatter the Pentagon's credibility?

The discussion should be on how they can break themselves of it.

[Nordic]

11. Yeah that jumped out at me, too. WHAT credibility?

they've been lying through their teeth since day one.

[ScrewyRabbit]

10. More fascinating is that the NYT doesn't even pretend

to question the premise

[Trillo]

13. Sounds like there's an internal dissent problem at the Pentagon.

I grew up indoctrinated that the military was largely honorable. Yet, when I've looked back at my life, and although I didn't experience it through the explicit looking-glass control of the military, I've come to realize that there has always been a misinformation campaign being waged against the truth--

There were many metaphorical soldiers in this battle. In my particular case, I experienced the greatest deceptions at the hands of educators who themselves appeared to be following orders from above. I'm certain others experienced dishonor elsewhere. Right now, many voters are experiencing a deceptive election system. This is a dangerous aspect of a hierarchical system. What institutions in our society today are not hierarchical?

I wonder if this news could be telling us that there is no war in Iraq, that it's all just a propaganda campaign to starve the beast and strike fear into the hearts of the enemy?

[jbnow]

16. Washington Post was reporting they do it at home

Guess they want to be fair and share it with the world. I don't have the article link, just this reference to it from CNN Lou Dobbs show.

That was easy to go back and find. Earlier that day a friend told me her son, just out of boot camp, was excited about the possibility of getting into psy-ops in military. An hour later I was hearing Lou Dobbs say they (MSM) were being used in psyops operations by the Pentagon.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0412/03/ldt.01.html

DOBBS: Roger, let me turn to one journalism question for all of you. As you know, the Washington Post reporting that the Pentagon used a number of -- well, sources, if you will, for misinformation campaigns, including this network. What is your sense as to what should be both the reaction of the media, to being used by -- for psyops operations by the Pentagon and what should be the reaction of the American people?

SIMON: I think it's wrong. If the Pentagon claims that's not Pentagon policy. But I don't know a reporter in this town who doesn't think he is not lied to at one time or another. Or I don't know most reporters who don't feel that way.

And I think it undermines an important institution of democracy, which is a free press. And if the public can't believe what they watch on a free press, when the Pentagon is selling one message, they won't believe it when the Pentagon is selling another message. And truth is the antidote to that problem.

BROWNSTEIN: Let's face it, credibility abroad is one of our central problems now in terms of our diplomacy. Obviously, everyone believes that we are engaged in a long-term war of ideas in the Middle East and in the Arab world more broadly. We need to have people believe what our government says when it says it.

[GeorgeGist]

18. Note to NYT: this is not news.

It's Bushco policy to deceive on all fronts, domestic and foreign.

[neweurope]

21. This is hurting the whole world and not many are aware of it.

The biggest news channels are in US-hands; and German newspapers for instance rely on them. Thank God for the French initiative of supporting an individual news channel. At least some Europeans are aware of what's going on.

[proudbluestater]

23. New Europe, but at least Europe views CNN International

I saw a startling comparison a week or so ago on the two channels, CNN and CNN International.

During the toppling of Saddam's statue, that is ALL that was aired ad infinitum on CNN that day, over and over. Who can forget it.

But on CNN International, there was a split screen. The statue being toppled on war side, and the horrors of war on the other, complete with victims and bombings.

Odd that WE are allowed the sanitized version only, but they will show other countries how very low this country is.

[neweurope]

27. Oops. And I thought "our" CNN was bad...

Saw it only once (don't have a TV) and found it terrbily shallow and opinionated. So yours is even worse? Oh my.

[Cooley Hurd]

22. Lies, lies, lies, lies, lies...

Lies which affect every world citizen on a personal level.

Compare to the supposed Clinton lie (about sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky) to the DAILY lies perpetrated by the present administration. They went as far as impeachment for that ONE lie, yet not ONE word from any ranking members of congress about the lie factory now in business at 1600 Pennsylvania. NOT ONE WORD.

At the height of the impeachment, they shrieked, "What will we tell the children?"

Yeah, what WILL we tell the children? :grr:

[donkeyotay]

30. Our representatives are silenced by fear

"not ONE word from any ranking members of congress about the lie factory now in business at 1600 Pennsylvania. NOT ONE WORD."

Every system protecting our freedom has been privatized. What's to stop them now: the press, Congress, courts, elections? Privatization was just a code word for subordinating the "world's greatest democracy" to an organized crime family.

Everyone is silent because they're afraid to tell the truth about how bad it really is.

Wave them flags real hard, folks, and repeat after me, "It can't happen here."

[luaneryder]

24. This is a killer

"traditional lines between public affairs programs in the Pentagon and military branches - whose charters call for giving truthful information to the media and the public"

The charter may call for it, but that is not the practice. My experience with the Army PAO was "lie whenever it is bebeneficial." One that stands out was when I got an inquiry about Delta Force-I had to deny their existence (under orders to do so) although the inquirer was well aware of my lie. And the relationship with any media was antagonistic.

Very strange that AIT in both PA and Psyops stressed truth telling when in practice at your duty station that flew out the window.

On edit: I've been out a few years and although the relationship between the media and the military was antagonistic the (Reagan, BushI) I wonder what has happened now. The journalists then wouldn't give up and kept digging when they scented our lies. Now the media just reports the lies handed to them with few exceptions.

[LynnTheDem]

26. "could shatter Pentagon's credibility"...WHAT "Pentagon credibility"???

'Tain't nothing there to shatter.

Besides, it won't work anyways. The Pentagon will say "A"...and the world, who DO have real reporters, will say "LIAR!!!" and report on the Pentagon PROPAGANDA saying "A" while in REALITY it's "z".

All of which will simply make the Soviet State of America look dumber than it already does.

[Supersedeas]

32. faith based credibility - manipulated by Rovian spin

[LynnTheDem]

33. That's the idiots IN the USA...

No one outside the USA believes a word anyone in the US gov says.

[Supersedeas]

37. what??? you mean the reality based world no longer finds the blunt

gravity driven side of a daisy cutter credible?

[jmcgowanjm]

29. It is a court(s) martial offense for an officer to tell a lie -120204

U.S. Psychological Operations: Military Uses Networks to
Spread Misinformation

This is one of the first times when a military officer has
actually and visibly crossed the line. And that's a big
deal because the military is the only profession I know
where lying is a criminal offense. In the uniform code of
military justice, it is a court martial offense for an officer to tell
a lie. And frankly, this lieutenant who talked to CNN is
subjected himself to potential court martial.

And that's the notion that an officer's word is his bond.
Whether he is speaking to the troops, to other officers, or
in public. When we cross the line, when you begin to not be
able to trust the word of an officer, we have begun to destroy
the military from within.

-Col. Sam Gardiner, retired Air Force Colonel. He has
taught strategy and military operations at the National
War College, AirWar College and Naval War
College.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/12/02/1513248

[Pathwalker]

35. Why not? It works well for the MSM.

Just following their lead.