Latest Shouts In The Shoutbox -- View The Shoutbox
The shoutbox is currently offline!

[ Smilies | BBCodes ]

Click Here and visit PuPPs FREE StuFF

This website contains controversial information that may be disturbing to some viewers.
The theories, conclusions and commentaries are presented in an attempt to reveal the hidden truths.
It is up to the viewer to determine what they choose to believe after evaluating all available sources of information.


Does your government represent your best interests?

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."
~ Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.



There is no law preventing the U.S. news media from intentionally lying to the public. Whistle blowers and honest reporters are fired for telling the truth.

Read the Poison Warning label on your toothpaste, then call the 800# and ask;
"Why do you put poison in my toothpaste?"

by Dr. Joseph Mercola

Also: Conspiracy of Silence Video

Equal, Nutra-Sweet and over 6000 food and beverage products contain Aspartame

6. On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2,000,000,000,000 (2 Trillion) in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for.
Such a disclosure normally would have sparked a huge scandal. However, the commencement of the [9/11] attack on the World Trade Center and The Pentagon the following morning would assure that the story remained buried.
Serving the greater Los Angeles area,
Los Angeles Drinking Water is proud to offer Reverse Osmosis filtration systems
that remove trace elements such as arsenic, mercury, lead and fluoride
which are known to be in Los Angeles tap water according to
the 2013 DWP Water Quality report.

"If our nation is ever taken over, it will be taken over from within."
~ James Madison, President of the United States

  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> CIA Internet Map, Growing popularity of CIA Psyops

Freedom Fighter
Group: Members
Posts: 579
Member No.: 470

Posted: Apr 10 2007, 03:21 PM
Quote Post
Hiya Mark .. waving.gif

Heres a real beauty I found this morning ..
Its a MUST READ ..
I thought you in particular would find it relevant as it confirms many of the
things you've said about disinformation, forum plants ..etc ..
And it comes with a handy diagram !!!

I posted this in parts cos it's such a large amount of information.

Mark I apologise in advance about the size of the first pic, tried to resize it
but it seemed to small ...

Thanks to Ganesh for loading the pix. hugs.gif
Thanks and kudos to Hidatsa Ena Sa for this compilation of information. respekt.gif

user posted image

CIA's Internet Presence

An Internet security firm in London spent a couple of days trying to figure out the CIA's server setup by using public sources and legal techniques. They produced a diagram of the CIA's internal server network. One comment about this diagram: from our logs, it's clear that casual Internet surfers at the CIA appear either as:

or as:

The diagram makes it appear as though the relay2 channel is only for incoming email, but this channel is definitely also used for outgoing web surfing traffic.

Also, there is a site at that provides access to FOIA documents. This site is not on the diagram. It appears to be outsourced to Digex, Inc. and has an IP number of

This Digex site, designed by Olympus Group, sets a weblog analysis cookie that expires in 2010 and includes your IP number. It's labeled EGSOFT_ID. That surprised us, as we recall that during the Clinton administration, an order went out telling government sites to avoid this sort of thing. (Oh well, I suppose if you're authorized to carry out assassinations, a mere spurious cookie probably won't get you into trouble with your boss.) By the way, every FOIA document we've seen that's offered through the CIA's FOIA site is utterly boring and insignificant.

(Sometimes their site even seems deliberately misleading. Try a search for "Condor" and assume that you're interested in the Operation Condor that half of Latin America is screaming about. None of the five documents is remotely relevant; the only thing you come away with is their tracking cookie. Now try our site.)

A warning: don't do port scans or excessive pings on the CIA's servers. They might think you're an Arab and ask the FBI to break down your door and take your computer. But feel free to block them from your website.

``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` The Internet and Psychological Operations
by Angela Maria Lungu

Angela Maria Lungu, Major

US Army

A paper submitted to the Faculty of the Naval War College in partial satisfaction of the requirements of the Department of Joint Military Operations.

The contents of this paper reflect my own personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy.


As an information medium and vehicle of influence, the Internet is a powerful tool, in both open societies as well as in those whose only glimpse of the outside world is increasingly viewed and shaped through webpages, E-mail, and electronic chat rooms.

Moreover, the sword cuts both ways, as unconstrained (legally, socially, politically) adversaries find the Internet an effective vehicle for influencing popular support for their cause or inciting the opposite against the U. S. or its interests. Consequently, the realm of military psychological operations (PSYOP) must be expanded to include the Internet.

Just as obvious is the need for action to remove or update current policy and legal constraints on the use of the Internet by military PSYOP forces, allowing them to embrace the full range of media, so that the U. S. will not be placed at a disadvantage. Although current international law restricts many aspects of PSYOP either through ambiguity or non-currency, there is ample legal room for both the U. S. and others to conduct PSYOP using modern technology and media such as the Internet. Existing policy and legal restrictions, however, must be changed, allowing military PSYOP forces to both defend and counter adversarial disinformation and propaganda attacks which impact on the achievement of military objectives. By examining this issue, I hope to highlight the importance of the Internet for PSYOP and foment further discussion.


Subcomandante Marcos of the Zapatista National Liberation Army uses a laptop computer amidst the jungles of Chiapas to send carefully written communiqués and appeals to international organizations and journalists, ultimately garnering domestic and international support. 1 Only a few years later and a continent away, a dark-haired girl scowls from the wheelbarrow her father is pushing across the Kosovo border into Albania, in a photo on the U. S. Information Agency's 2 Kosovo website. A few clicks away, on a Serb website, another little girl is seen smiling in a snapshot with the caption: "Brutally killed by NATO a few days before her birthday." 3

These two vignettes demonstrate a modern twist on von Clausewitz: the Internet as "an increasing continuation of war by other means." 4 This cyberspace "clickskrieg" 5 represents a dramatic shift in strategic thinking regarding national security and changes the ways of looking at warfare. One defense analyst notes "we have to get beyond the notion that warfare is only about hurling mass and energy at our opponents--it's also about hurling information." 6 From the Amazon jungle to Kosovo, new technologies are enabling organizations to use information power to counter or fortify raw power." 7

As an information medium and vehicle of influence, the Internet is a powerful tool, in both open societies as well as in those whose only glimpse of the outside world is increasingly viewed and shaped through webpages, E-mail, and electronic chat rooms. Moreover, the sword cuts both ways, as unconstrained (legally, socially, and politically) adversaries find the Internet an effective vehicle for influencing popular support for their cause or inciting the opposite against the U. S. or its interests. Consequently, the realm of military psychological operations (PSYOP) must be expanded to include the Internet. By examining this issue, I hope to highlight the importance of the Internet for PSYOP and foment further discussion.


U. S. public diplomacy plays an important role in national power, as a component of both the diplomatic and informational elements, and military PSYOP can be used to exercise public diplomacy within the scope of military operations (specifically, within a defined operational area outside the U. S.).

As defined by Joint Publication 3-53, PSYOP are operations planned to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals. The purpose of PSYOP is to induce or reinforce foreign attitudes and behavior favorable to the originator's objectives. 8

One of the principal missions of PSYOP personnel is to serve as the supported military commander's "voice to foreign populations to convey intent, including political decision-makers, military commanders, forces, and civilian populations, as well as sources of external support." 9 Similarly, public diplomacy is defined as "[ promoting] the national interest of the U. S. through understanding, informing and influencing foreign audiences," 10 sharing the same objective as PSYOP. Moreover, it is critical that all themes and objectives reflect and fully support the U. S. national policy, and national informational programs must integrate Department of Defense (DOD) PSYOP efforts into all international information programs to ensure consistent, non-contradictory messages or information. 11

Growing Popularity of PSYOP

There is presently a renewed interest in the use of coordinated information programs, military PSYOP in particular, due to three compelling reasons. First, there is a politically driven movement to prevent a potential adversary's escalation towards violent resolution of differences. Second, due to the Internet and technology, it is almost impossible for governments to regulate the flow of information across their borders, thus making potential target audiences more accessible to PSYOP messages, both friendly and otherwise. Third, the growing world trend towards urbanization, particularly in the third world, 12 coupled with the ubiquitous and scrutinizing international media, makes the use of overwhelming firepower far less palatable in view of large noncombatant populations.

Moreover, especially in the context of actions in Mogadishu and Grozny, these lessons have been learned and applied by potential adversaries of the U. S. In all of these situations, the requirement for U. S. forces to be able to communicate effectively and persuasively with local groups, organizations, and leaders is key to achieving both military and political goals.

More importantly, in many cases the "destructiveness of conventional weaponry is too much and diplomacy is not enough," in which case non-lethal weapons such as PSYOP "could be used to fill that gap and at the same time reduce the risk of military overkill, international censure, political repercussions, or media criticism, neatly [fitting] the gap between diplomacy and combat." 13


Despite this growing interest, there are still significant legal boundaries constraining PSYOP. Currently, both U. S. policy and law prohibit military forces from conducting PSYOP against American citizens, 14 in addition to restrictions imposed by international law.

This becomes a crucial point since today's public diplomacy messages are increasingly delivered to both domestic and foreign audiences by many of the same media (CNN, the World Wide Web, and international wire services) and can be accessed on the Internet from anywhere, which in turn have a significant impact on PSYOP forces' dissemination means.

Domestic Law

There are several laws that govern public diplomacy which, because many PSYOP products and their dissemination constitute a form of public diplomacy, also govern military PSYOP. The Smith-Mundt Act 16 was introduced in 1948 as an outgrowth of President Wilson's Committee on Public Information 17 and President Truman's "Campaign of Truth" programs. 18 It was passed unanimously by Congress, becoming the basic charter for postwar public diplomacy policy, and established of the U. S. Information Agency (USIA), whose two-fold mission was to "[ project] an accurate image of American society and [explain] to foreign audiences the nature, meaning, and rationale of our foreign policies." 19 The Foreign-Relations Act of 1972 amended the Smith-Mundt Act to include a ban on disseminating within the U. S. any "information about the U. S., its people, and its policies" 20 prepared for dissemination abroad, and the Zorinksy Amendment further restricted public diplomacy by prohibiting any funds to be used "… to influence public opinion in the [U. S.], and no program material … shall be distributed within the [U. S.]." 21 Additionally, the 1998 Foreign Relations Restructuring Act merged several agencies, to include the USIA, under the Department of State (DOS), and authorized the DOS to conduct Foreign Public Diplomacy. 22

The point of contention rests on the difficulty of sending one message to international audiences while sending another to domestic media, particularly when viewed through the legal lens. 23 The charter of Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 68, International Public Information, focused on this point, making clear that international public information (IPI) activities "are overt and address foreign audiences only," while at the same time noting that domestic information should be "deconflicted" and "synchronized" so as not to send a contradictory message. As one administration official said, "In the old days, the [USIA] and State were the main agencies for communicating internationally. With the information revolution, all agencies now have the ability to communicate internationally and interact with foreign populations. IPI is a mechanism that has been established to make sure that these various actors are working in a coordinated manner." 24

International Law

In addition to the domestic limitations, there exist international legal barriers to using the Internet for PSYOP. Both explicit regulations of particular actions or more general principles of international law may constrain PSYOP due to the fact that information technology is far newer than existing laws, resulting in ambiguity of what is legally defined as war and an absence of provisions that explicitly prohibit information attacks. Consequently, there exist several areas of contention in the realm of information warfare. 25

There are several reasons for the difficulty in resolving these issues. While the perpetrators of cyberwar (knowledge-related conflict at the military level) attacks may be formal military forces, netwar (societal struggles most often associated with low intensity conflict) attacks may not even be traditional military forces, 26 but instead may "often involve non-state, paramilitary, and irregular forces." 27 Additionally, it has not been established that information attacks, especially when they are not directly lethal or physically destructive, constitute the use of "force" or "armed attack" under such provisions as the United Nations (U. N.) Charter, 28 and may thus be legal forms of coercion even in peacetime. 29 Distorting enemy perceptions may also be illegal or limited by laws against perfidy. 30

In spite of the legal constraints, there are many areas of PSYOP that are considered within the realm of international law. For example, the rules of the International Telecommunication Union do not apply between belligerents, making wartime communications fair game. Specifically relating to PSYOP, manipulating enemy perceptions, spreading confusion or disaffection by covertly altering official announcements or news broadcasts, or confusing or frightening leaders by spoofing intelligence or other government communications in principle would not violate the laws of war. However, manipulating an adversary nation to the extent that its citizens or leaders become unhinged from reality, or using propaganda, video morphing, or deceptive broadcasts to the extent that they spur unrestrained civil war or genocide may also be illegal. 31


The major arguments against Internet PSYOP primarily concern isolation of target audiences, namely, preventing Americans from viewing Internet products. Using traditional media whose dissemination can be somewhat controlled, target audiences can be pinpointed with relative assuredness. Historically, the use of language as well as geographic ranges and reach of dissemination devices have been the primary means for targeting specific audiences.

The changing linguistic demographics within the U. S. (rise of Spanish and other non-English languages) as well as an increasingly global culture and media network (alá Hollywood and CNN) make this approach progressively impractical. The Internet, plainly, is only one (albeit the most obviously least restricted) of many other platforms. Central news services (Associated Press, Reuters), the more economical (yet less diverse) sharing of foreign TV correspondents and bureaus, and a dominant U. S. influence globally (" Americanization") are primarily responsible for this situation. Collectively, these media have a far greater reach and are far less controllable than ever before. Today, the "transmission of data is almost instant, regardless of where sender and receiver are." 32 Since narrowing the target audience is almost impossible, many of these unintended consequences can be avoided by focusing on dissemination of credible information primarily in response to adversarial propaganda as well as development of messages appealing to specific groups. Up until its incorporation into the DOS in 1999, for example, the USIS maintained two separate websites: one for American citizens with its USIA title, and the other intended for foreign audiences (under its U. S. Information Service title).

Even today, the English language website of the DOS' Office of International Information Programs (formerly USIA) differs from its French and Spanish language websites, primarily in that the non-English sites contain links to articles on human rights (specifically on abuses in Cuba and Peru), drugs, and corruption, as well as reports with such titles as "Towards a Community of Democracies" and "The World AIDS Epidemic," none of which appear on the English site. Of particular note is that both the French and Spanish sites also contain links to the Voice of America site, which by law cannot be broadcast into the U. S. Additional content differences are obviously selected based on regional interest and relevancy. This cursory content analysis is not intended to discredit the DOS, but rather to highlight how they are currently handling the issues of Internet target audiences.

Clearly, current policies have become obsolete and must be reexamined. Without changing the restrictions against specifically targeting American citizens, it is still possible to change existing policies prohibiting the use of the Internet by these forces, thereby enabling them to disseminate relevant and timely products to target audiences best reached through the Internet, as well as to effectively counter propaganda directed against the U. S.


Internet Proliferation

The Internet is an important medium for reaching and influencing audiences. Currently, the backbone of the Internet moves information at gigabits per second 33 and involves access to information through a variety of means, including newsgroups, World Wide Web, E-mail, gopher, Telnet, file transfer protocol, and Internet relay chat. There are currently 375 million Internet users worldwide (36% in the U. S.), growing to 840 million by 2005 and over 1.8 billion by 2010. 34 Between 2002 and 2005, broadband connections, web cellular phones, web entertainment appliances, and web interactive TV service will be among the most important factors driving the growth of the Internet. 35

The next generation cellular technology (3G) may be the biggest broadband of them all and is estimated to be deployed in Japan and Europe two years ahead of the U. S., extending the number of web users (with web cellular phones), most notably in developing countries where fixed phone lines are limited. 36

These factors are particularly relevant since greater multimedia content can be transferred to a greater number of people, especially in previously inaccessible regions, with larger audiences being influenced by Internet media. Future Warfare and PSYOP

Increasingly, information technology rather than traditional military means will be the preferred method of attacking U. S. interests, attempting to "manipulate policy-and decision-makers by attacking our information infrastructure through selected, discriminate releases via both legitimate news organs and nontraditional means." 37 This can be accomplished in a variety of ways, as the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection describes:

Offensive information warfare is attractive to any because it is cheap in relation to the cost of developing, maintaining, and using advanced military capabilities. It may cost little to suborn [bribe] an insider, create false information, [or] manipulate information…. against an information system connected to the globally shared information infrastructure. 38

This theme was further expanded in a prescient 1989 Marine Gazette article examining the evolution of warfare, which predicted that in the "fourth generation" the battlefield would envelop entire societies…. and military objectives would no longer involve annihilating tidy enemy lines, but rather eroding popular support for the war within the enemy's society…. collapsing the enemy internally rather than physically destroying him. 39

Although the Internet was not yet a driving force in 1989, the authors warned that highly sophisticated PSYOP might become the "dominant operational and strategic weapon in the form of media/ information intervention… especially through manipulation of the media." 40

What is alarming is that, against this non-traditional warfare, "a lot of capabilities we have just simply aren't relevant," says Michael G. Vickers, director of strategic studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. 41

Implications for PSYOP

There is without a doubt a growing relevance of the Internet as a medium for not only information, but as a means of reaching and influencing decision-makers and their constituencies. According to a senior defense analyst, today's battle-space is people's minds, with the criteria for winning or losing heavily culture-dependent. Weapons of mass destruction are "weapons of mass disruption," and the combat zones are now Usenet newsgroups. 42 "The consumer's center of gravity is rapidly shifting to the Internet; broadcasting is no longer how the media works," continues a recent Defense Science Board report, and radio and TV transmissions are increasingly irrelevant in molding public opinion. 43 Today, in order to remain relevant, PSYOP must demonstrably influence audiences in an increasingly sophisticated international information environment… Without a fundamental change in the way PSYOP forces are permitted to conduct day-to-day functions, they can never co-opt the information cycle of a sophisticated adversary such as the indigenous media in Bosnia. 44

The Internet, as an increasingly more potent influence medium, is also an increasingly more relevant PSYOP tool. The capabilities of the Internet as a medium for PSYOP are further enhanced when viewed in terms of audience and objectives. State and non-state actors are increasingly turning to the Internet as a means for garnering domestic and international support and approval, which in turn helps legitimize the issue among international organizations. As the executive agency for the 1997 Dayton Accord, for example, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) used the Internet to complement more conventional public information and voter information efforts as a means of reinforcing its legitimacy as an international organization, while also gaining continued support. 45 It is of particular interest in how the Internet was used to indirectly distribute information to both local and international media, as recounted by Peter Clarey, OSCE Public Information Officer:

All BiH [Bosnia and Herzegovina] media use our webpage to gather information on the OSCE and elections, and in turn distribute it to the BiH public. As well, over 100,000 out-of-country voters, in more than 80 countries, use our webpage as a source of information on the elections – with the OSCE BiH webpage, general election information and election results which would normally be impossible to find is only as far away as their fingertips. In the month leading up to the last election, the OSCE BiH webpage received over two million hits, but the majority of these were from outside of BiH rather than within. 46

Going beyond simply providing information, the Mexican Zapatistas also used this technique, as did the Serbs and Kosovars in what has been described as the first online war in which both sides used websites and E-mail lists to "make their case, to set goals, retell histories, and make stands." 47 As information operations 48 become more popular and more refined, it is apparent that instead of simple denial-of-service, Information operations should increasingly be about affecting the perceptions, and thus the resultant behavior, of a selected human target set… done by manipulating the information available to the target so that, in a given situation, the behavior we desire on the part of the target will occur. 49

Potential adversaries recognize this as well, and Arquilla and Ronfeldt note, "Protagonists are more interested in keeping the Net up than taking it down, so they can use it to mobilize their forces, disseminate their views, and try to affect the beliefs and opinions of other people." 50

After NATO bombed Serb media outlets considered a source of Milosevic propaganda, for example, the U. S. government decided not to cut off Serb Internet sites. DOS spokesman James Rubin responded, "Full and open access to the Internet can only help the Serbian people know the ugly truth about the atrocities and crimes against humanity being perpetrated in Kosovo by the Milosevic regime." 51 However, as noted by many analysts and commanders, at the start of the conflict, Serbia maintained information superiority over the minds of its citizens and, to a lesser extent, outside Serbia. Admiral Ellis, Commander-in-Chief of NATO's Allied Forces Southern Europe, recounted not being able to counter Milosevic's state-controlled media or his attempts to gain international sympathy, as well as having to respond to NATO's collateral damage problem while Milosevic's forces killed hundreds of people. 52 The Serbs also used the Internet to spread various campaign themes, causing the USIA to expend great efforts to control the fallout effects on U. S. credibility. 53 In this way, Milosevic was able to asymmetrically respond to U. S. and NATO actions.

Yet another implication is the changing dynamic of how the media sees and reports on conflicts, which is significantly affected by the interactivity of the Internet. "[ Talking] to the enemy without the intervention of propaganda or governments" during the NATO bombing of Serbia via E-mail and chat rooms, for example, evoked interesting responses from media leaders. The international editor of the MSNBC. com site maintained an ongoing conversation with about 36 Serbs and stated that it was a revelation for him "to see how it has given people on both sides of this struggle incredible access to news decision makers." 54

According to the New York editor of the online magazine Slate, who published the diary of a Slate correspondent in Belgrade during the bombing, "It does change the terms of the engagement. It is very democratizing. It makes it much more difficult to demonize the enemy." 55 In this way, the more traditional media is being ever more influenced by online media and "non-journalists, often with a personal interest in how the war if fought and how it ends," 56 ultimately impacting public opinion and decision-makers at the highest levels.

Rather than exploit the Internet through webpage content, however, some countries attempt to restrict or control access to the Internet in order to reduce or eliminate the influence of controversial or adversarial groups. In China, the Ministry of State Security shut down the website of the New Culture Forum, accusing the group of posting "counter-revolutionary content," the latest of a supposedly ongoing attempt to contain "the spread of political dissidence and pornography on the Internet." 57 This was quickly followed by a call to arms by the People's Daily in Beijing against enemy forces at home and abroad that use the Internet as a "battlefront to infiltrate" China. China employs other tactics as well, such as blocking undesirable websites to limit release of information from China-based Internet content providers, and has also deliberately slowed down Internet traffic on its international routes. 58 The country has expended vast resources to contain its perceived "Internet threat," helping to earn China the title of one of the 20 enemies of the Internet in 1999. 59

Interestingly, the Chinese government, recognizing the role of the Internet, has invested a great deal in establishing a national telecom infrastructure (China Telecom), a Government Online Project (bringing government agencies to the Internet), and a similar Enterprise Online Project for Chinese industry. Through these initiatives and America Online-type promotions, China, although an Internet latecomer, is now fifth in international rankings of Internet users, with a 4.2% share (ahead of Canada, South Korea, France, and Australia). 60 It is clear that this is a coherent and targeted strategy, as Major General Wang Pufeng outlined, "In situations of information defense, we must strive for an active approach in a reactive situation and use every means possible to destroy the opponent's information superiority and transform our inferior position in information." 61

Other examples of restricting the Internet include Britain's Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act that gives its police sweeping access to E-mail and other online communications, the outlaw of access to gambling websites in South Korea, and even the U. S. law requiring computer filtering software in federally funded schools and libraries to "block material harmful to the young." 62 Most recently notable has been the French ruling against Yahoo! that ordered the company to either find some way to prevent French users from seeing the Nazi memorabilia posted on its American sites or else pay a daily fine of FFr100,000. 63

A government can also use the Internet to censor. 64 Singapore began attempts to censor the Internet, and other Asian countries such as Vietnam, China, Indonesia, and Malaysia soon followed suit. Russia attempted to remove the Chechen site from a U. S. server by launching a diplomatic offensive just before the Russian attack on Chechnya, and the U. S. server complied, saying the Chechen site contained terrorist propaganda and hate material. 65

Censoring is only temporary, though, since the affected group or organization can quickly find a publicly accessible news server that carries the censored newsgroup (e. g., via webpage or E-mail); take out an account with an Internet service provider (ISP) in a different country; or employ third parties to send and receive newsgroup contributions. 66

When the Serb government cut off the independent radio station B92, for example, which was being used to coordinate protest demonstrations over the Milosevic government's refusal to accept the local election results, the leaders of the demonstrations rerouted B92's broadcasts to the Internet, whose Real Audio transmissions were then picked up by Voice of America and the British Broadcasting Corporation in the Netherlands and rebroadcast back into Serbia – thus allowing the demonstrators to continue. Radio Belgrade similarly rerouted their broadcasts after NATO bombing of their radio stations through Germany. 67

Whether used offensively or defensively, it is clear that the Internet is an important tool for PSYOP and can bring tremendous capabilities and informational advantage to forces employing this medium. It is easy to see that "the most powerful state or entity will be the one that controls and manages information the most effectively." 68


Given the strategic opportunities afforded by the Internet, there are several options for employing this medium. DOD, in particular, could use the Internet offensively to help achieve unconventional warfare objectives, as well as to address and counter adversarial propaganda, disinformation, and neutral party information.

During the Kosovo crisis, former-USIA chief information officer Jonathan Spalter stated, "the measure of [USIA's] success is the extent to which we are perceived not as propaganda but anti-propaganda." 69 In addition to websites, pre-empting messages and developing Internet products such as streaming audio/ video, online video games, mediated newsgroups, and ad banners can also be leveraged for their strategic value and reach. The recent Defense Science Board report on PSYOP also suggested some less obvious potential tools using emerging media technologies, such as chat rooms and instant messaging services that could be used for "guided discussions" to influence how citizens thinks about certain topics," and even noted that both U. S. presidential candidates and the Chinese government have used similar Internet technologies for information dissemination. 70

Information could also be transmitted over the Internet to sympathetic groups operating in areas of concern that allow them to conduct operations themselves that the U. S. might otherwise have to send its own special forces to accomplish." 71 During conflict, the Internet is invaluable for getting news out of the region and into the U. S. government, getting information from the U. S. and other nations into the region, and cultivating political (and even operational) support for the U. S. side and opposition to the other side. 72

Because journalists may not always have access to the crisis locations, they may also rely on Internet sites for information, which serves to further multiply the effectiveness of whatever side was able to get its story out. The crises in Kosovo as well as in Chechnya are two good examples. Both the Serb government (www. serbia-info. com) and the Kosova Liberation Army (KLA) (www. kosova. com) are using websites and e-mail lists to make their case, with both sides competing for international support. The Serb and KLA sites report daily events that "differ so completely they seem to come from separate planets." 73 In January 1999, the KLA posted disturbingly graphic photos of what they claim to be the Racak Massacre, while the Serbs offer reports from an Italian journal and French newspapers (Le Figaro, Le Monde) that offer "proof" that there was no massacre in Racak – that it was a setup. 74

The Chechen site (kavkaz. org), run by the former Chechen information minister, takes lessons from the Serbs and features footage of Russia's bombing and shelling campaign.

[Putin] flatly denied… that Russian tanks had fired on a bus in northeastern Chechnya… killing dozens of civilians. But the Chechens had already posted photographs on the Internet showing a bus shot to pieces and the mangled corpses of several female passengers. 75

As a result, then-Prime Minister Putin launched the Russian Information Center (RIC) ( to combat the Chechen site, putting out only Russian government information, and limited access to the region by journalists. After losing the propaganda war in 1994-96, senior Russian strategists developed a concentrated media plan (using the RIC) to target Russian popular support for Moscow's actions during the second Chechen war. The results have been dramatic, with a complete reversal in the ratio of Russians who support military force in Chechnya. 76

The Internet can also be used as a defensive technique, primarily guarding against defacement of official websites and databases. Filtering and blocking software can be installed on individual computers, at an ISP, or on country gateways linking to the rest of the world, and websites themselves can block users based on the user's Internet protocol address, which can identify particular computers as well as their locations. 77 Acting more offensively, PSYOP forces could use the Internet to address and counter adversarial propaganda, disinformation, and neutral party information. 78


"No law can change as swiftly as can technology; unless law is to somehow stop technology's seemingly inexorable worldwide progress, it cannot fully control the use of its fruits for warfare." 79 It is clear that the Internet is a potentially valuable medium for PSYOP given the trends in today's world, and increasing numbers of state and non-state actors are taking full advantage of this opportunity. The Internet is an inevitable extension of today's battlefield and using this medium for psychological operations during war is a critical capability that must be employed. Just as obvious is the need for action to remove or update current policy and legal constraints on the use of the Internet by military PSYOP forces, allowing them to embrace the full range of contemporary media and not place the U. S. at a disadvantage in future conflicts. It is critical that U. S. decision-makers balance offensive opportunities against defensive vulnerabilities when considering policy options. 80

Although current international law restricts many aspects of PSYOP either through ambiguity or non-currency, there is ample legal room for both the U. S. and others (like the double edged sword, it can cut both ways) to conduct PSYOP using modern technology and media such as the Internet. Current policy and legal restrictions, however, must be changed, allowing military PSYOP forces to both defend and counter adversarial disinformation and propaganda attacks which impact on the achievement of military objectives. As warned by the Defense Science Board, "while the U. S. is years ahead of its competitors in terms of military technology, in terms of PSYOP there are already competitors on a par with or even arguably more sophisticated than the U. S." 81

It is therefore necessary for the DOD to address PSYOP use of the Internet "directly and explicitly as an integral asset," instead of as an "uncontrollable element of the environment whose role is determined by happenstance or as an afterthought in order to use it in the most productive manner possible. Furthermore, "if viewed as a resource and systematically integrated into U. S. planning and operations, the Internet can make some important contributions to conflict management and assuring the success of U. S. foreign policy." 82 "Bombs and missiles will still determine who militarily wins or loses a conflict… PSYOPS [sic], though, will help determine how long a conflict lasts and the impact of a military struggle on long-term U. S. strategic interests."

user posted image


This post has been edited by Nodstar on Apr 10 2007, 03:57 PM

user posted image"In PuPP We Trust" user posted image
PMEmail Poster

Freedom Fighter
Group: Members
Posts: 579
Member No.: 470

Posted: Apr 10 2007, 03:35 PM
Quote Post
(here's part 2)


* 1 Introduction
* 2 "Alternative media" and "conspiracy" websites
* 3 Forums, Wikis and chat-rooms
o 3.1 Wikipedia
* 4 Front corporations and organisations
* 5 Books and stories
* 6 Good and honest people
* 7 See also
* 8 Headlines
* 9 More information on the Internet


"Electronic computer systems, bulletin boards, and information superhighway in general is an area of considerable importance to efforts to combat the activities of The Disrupters Movement. The ability of opponents to utilize computer bulletin boards to pass information and educate people must be met with an active program of disinformation and attack." (Codeword: Cablesplice)

Fully understand this:

* Anyone who are interested in learning or spreading the truth where government or organizations are deliberately lying are considered opponents.
* Those who are interested in covering up the truth have huge resources available. They can start and fund grass-root organizations, they can buy out alternative media, they can start and run dozens and dozens of websites, they can hire people to work full-time editing publicly editable projects like Wikipedia, they can hire people to debate and harass in public forums - in short, those who want to replace information based on factual objective evidence can and will use any means possible to do so.
* Again, because it is vital to realize this: Those who want to hide information have huge, really huge, resources available. They have billions, not millions.

It is VERY important to always keep these things in mind when you are considering any kind of information, whether you are watching television, reading the newspaper, debating in forums on the Internet and so on.

"Alternative media" and "conspiracy" websites

There are many "alternative media" and "conspiracy" websites on the Internet.

Many of these are now growing bigger than many "mainstream" news outlets and many of them bring sensational information.

Not all of them are what they seem to be. Be specially aware of sites who are all singing the same "alternative" tune along very similar themes. There are, in fact, a huge amount of fake alternative-media sites who are deliberately spreading disinformation mixed with a few facts who are already disclosed by real alternative media websites. And fake-media sites tend to quote and link back and forth, all referencing each other on the same "spin", all designed to make you think in a particular way or in a particular direction...

"None of these internet sensations will ever discomfort the mainstream. They, and a plethora of similar spins are intended to waste your time and divert your energy as surely as the Osama no-show terror attack.

A fake alternative media unable to champion the real issues, is in continual desperate need of half-plausible-sounding drivel to fill the pages and try divert from real alternative news.

The Orwellian news managers have the market beautifully segmented by see-no-evil Chinese walls, which allow the manufacture of crude opinion zones: Fox News fanaticism; gun-totin' Patriots; Mainstream myopia; Soros-funded MoveOn; Deaniac Dems; the Green Gremlins; CounterPunching Lefties; 9/11 Truthers; God-dammed Communists; and End of the Worlders.

The information war boys have a gambit for each of those markets. And they have a wide range of specialist media fronts, well placed to roll out these ploys. It must cost a bundle, but hey, your taxes pay for it all anyway." (The CIA's Fakes List +)

user posted image

Forums, Wikis and chat-rooms

One thing you will find when you read debates on controversial issues is that there are active disinformation agents in almost all the major forums.

Mention that 11. September 2001 didn't happen as explained on television on Slashdot and you will get a reply with a link to the propaganda magazine Popular Mechanics. What is even more telling about the amount of disinformation websites on the Internet is that users replying with links to disinformation or simply post slander or try to ridicule in order to divert attention from the issue commonly have their own website and such setup in order to make them look like real people.

Fake users or simply real actually existing users who are in fact working for some intelligence agency are also commonly present in big chat-rooms and so on.


There is not a single localized Wikipedia-project website where at least one person from the local intelligence agency is assigned to keep an eye on things and edit away any even remotely honest and accurate information on a broad variety of subjects.

If you doubt it then check and research it yourself; a long hard look at the history page on interesting subjects will clearly show you that this is in fact the case. You may also add relevant accurate sourced information to such subjects and verify for yourself that such information is deliberately discretely removed by disinformation terrorist.

Front corporations and organisations

A good way to lead the public is to setup front organisations and corporations who expose issues who are likely to inevitably be exposed by the real alternative media at one point or another. Giving away "breaking news", "controversial" or "classified" information which have already been exposed somewhere else anyway together with false information or simple gossip designed to divert attention away or make the masses look in a given direction are commonly used techniques.

Books and stories

"One of the most effective disinformation programs has been the selected use of “expose” books and stories, all reputedly written by former government and super-government officials, but in fact developed within the NSA and CIA." (Codeword: Cablesplice#III. Disinformation Programs:)

Good and honest people

Understand one thing: Those who are interested in uncovering and presenting the truth ARE ACTIVELY ATTACKED in all and every way.

* They will be harassed in public forums.
* They will be ridiculed.
* Intelligence agencies will try to infiltrate their organizations
* Those who uncover and present too much of the truth will be subject to Surveillance, Psychotronics and (Gang-)Stalking Operations and attacked using Directed energy weapons

"The objective seems to be to attack and "neutralize" those who are seeking the answers. Those who are sincere, who do bona fide research and seek to explicate the truth, are infiltrated, attacked, and marginalized according to standard COINTELPRO procedures." (How to Spot COINTELPRO Agents by Laura Knight Jadczyk, 2. January 2006)

It is vital to understand this for several reasons: Very few people have the guts to resist and refuse the fascist global mind control state once they realize how bad it really is behind the facade. This is why the really are very few good and honest websites available on the Internet today. Also, too many who initially had good and honest websites have bent over, been paid off or for other reasons turned over to the dark side. However, there are still a few decent websites left on the Internet. But not enough. If the truth is even remotely important to you then you really should start your own website immediately.

See also

* Trojan Horse Media - The Fake Alternative Media
* Codeword: Cablesplice
* Disinformation
* Directing peoples paths of thinking
o Mind control


* 2006-01-27: US plans to 'fight the net' revealed
o "A newly declassified document gives a fascinating glimpse into the US military's plans for "information operations" - from psychological operations, to attacks on hostile computer networks


This post has been edited by Nodstar on Apr 10 2007, 03:50 PM

user posted image"In PuPP We Trust" user posted image
PMEmail Poster

Freedom Fighter
Group: Members
Posts: 579
Member No.: 470

Posted: Apr 10 2007, 03:40 PM
Quote Post
part 3


(This is a secret document being circulated among Top Government And UN people)

An Aggressive Program to Counter The Disrupters Movement

Recent efforts by The Disrupters Movement to gain political influence are beginning to seriously and adversely affect public perceptions and understanding of ongoing programs aimed at smoothing the transfer of sovereignty and power from national governments to super-national statist organizations unless such efforts are countered and discredited, the task of creating a unified global government under UN control will be far more difficult. The most dangerous element of The Disrupters Movement are those that are part of the Christian Fundamentalist majority. The following memorandum offers a set of policy prescriptions designed to counter-act their, efforts,


Although there has always been opposition from groups and individuals with a conservative, isolationist attitude, the recent growth of such opposition, and the ability and organizational success of these groups has raised serious concern in recent years. Unless steps are taken to meet the challenge posed by The Disrupters Movement, it is possible that these groups could make serious inroads into the public complacence which has been so carefully nurtured over the past fifty Years, The threat is two-fold. First, there is the traditional conservative political threat, one which can be traced back to pre-W.W.II isolationism and political conservatism. These groups are not of particular concern as their organizing ability and numbers do not suggest the capability for amassing significant political power. It is the second category, the "Christian Fundamentalists," that pose the greatest threat. These people are representative of a massive population of Americans and if allowed to propagandize and organize that base could present serious obstacles to further progress,

I. Overt Programs;

Overt programs to counter growing influence of Christian and other groups should take various forms:

A. An active effort aimed at promoting the benefits of global organizations and institutions. Media stories, books, conferences, and other means should be utilized to get the story out in appropriate fashion.


B. Appearances by political figures, well-known celebrities and other influential figures at events connected to international and super- national organizations and institutions. Of particular use are events which involve "feel-good" operations such as UNICEF, Feed the Children, Americare, etc.

C. Promotion of peaceful uses of atomic energy, disarmament as a necessary condition to peace and security, and tolerance and acceptance of non-Christian faiths should be promoted consistently but with enough subtlety so as not to turn off the targeted populations.

1. Under no circumstances, however. should such efforts be allowed to raise fears regarding those goals, nor should they provide substantive evidence of the true objectives of U.S.G. policy.

2. An important means of developing support for disarmament and the reliance on the United Nations to impose global order is through raising fears of nuclear weapons. By playing up the danger of nuclear war, It should be possible to generate considerable public support for further movement towards the disarmament of national states. This diverts attention from the real nature of disarmament effort by portraying it as necessary to world peace, rather than a step on the road to world government.

D. A massive attack on The Disrupters Movement, and especially Christian religion groups. This assault would challenge them as intolerant, hateful, exclusionist, and potentially dangerous. Such a program would include the following:

1. Efforts should be made to falsely portray their objectives as the creation of a religious theocracy and the imposition of strict religious interpretation of the Bible as the basis for political participation in "The New Christian America." This can best be accomplished by focusing on the most outrageous and extremist statements and members, while down playing the more moderate membership.

2. " Christian " groups should whenever possible be portrayed as fringe elements of the country's religious population, not especially numerous and certainly not representative of "most" Christians. 3. At every opportunity these "Christian" groups should be presented as vicious, intolerant, and especially as anti-Semitic. The selective use of quotes, and if necessary, the use of invented statements, can be most effective means of accomplishing this task.


4. Arrest either on criminal charges or on mental Inquest warrants certain members of The Disrupters Movement who by their fanatical religious life-styles and/or their EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS would be psychologically and physically prepared to survive outside of the government control.

5. Harassment on criminal charges or mental inquest warrants of those who listen to and/or sympathize with The Disrupters Movement.

II. Covert Programs: Covert programs may be equally as important, if not more so, to countering the increasing effectiveness of The Disrupters Movement.

A. Infiltration of The Disrupters Movement by sympathetic agents is an extremely useful tool in combating their efforts.

1. By carrying out extreme acts, and especially acts of violence, such individuals can bring discredit and public condemnation against The Disruption Movement.

2. By raising confusion , and care fully encouraging splits and controversy within The Disrupters Movement, such agents will be able to reduce the effectiveness and coherency of those groups.

B. Individuals who have been groomed to operate outside the usual channels of political activity should be activated and placed in positions in which they appear to be in opposition to USG policy.

1. These persons would speak out publicly in opposition to our policies, but would be in fact be sympathetic to our long term objectives. By carefully and selectively providing false or misleading information, and information of a seemingly scandalous or dramatic nature, they would seem to be supporting the agenda of The Disrupters Movement. But when the information the promulgated was shown to be patently false, It would further damage the credibility of the opposition.

2. The use of certain talk radio personalities along the lines suggested in paragraph 1 has already proven quite effective and further ventures along these lines could be beneficial.

3. In extreme situations, it may become useful or even necessary for these undercover assets to carry out certain operations against members of The Disrupters Movement who are interfering with CABLESPLICE. In some cases, termination's with extreme prejudice may be called for.


C. Subversion and Elimination of the Second Amendment

1. One of the most critical efforts must be the removal of firearms from individual control. The on-going long-term program to accomplish this is to bear efforts along current lines are advised.

a. The use of "agent provocateurs," individuals who are seemingly insane (but who are never taken alive) who create highly publicized mass killings with automatic weapons has been particularly useful in molding public opinion. Similarly, the regular use of random killings in large urban areas as a way of creating a climate of fear and violence has resulted in significant gains for the gun-control point of view. Such programs are extremely useful and should be continued and possibly expanded.

b. On-going efforts to gain small footholds in gun-control are worthwhile as they open the door to further controls later on. The importance of eliminating the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms cannot be stressed too much.


These programs should be designed to carefully seed the media with false and misleading information about long-term goals and plans, as well as forged and deceptive details about The Disrupters Movement.

A. Careful and selective placement of spurious and potentially damaging news stories in the popular media is an excellent means of raising doubts and fears of the population. Our opponents have made good use of this technique, we should do likewise.

B. One of the most effective disinformation programs has been the selected use of "expose" books and stories, all reputedly written by former government and super-government officials, but in fact developed within the NSA and CIA.

1. Connections to actual government operations, and the bona fides of such expose authors are deliberately vague in order to make tracing and verifying their stories difficult.

2. Although the books and information "exposed" would seemingly be extremely critical of our long-term programs and objectives, the contradictions contained within, the difficulty of verifying either authors or details, and the wild-eyed style verging on the Irrational would all work to discredit and raise doubts.

The presentation

3. The presentation of fringe and extremist religious doctrine and beliefs, or the presentation of Christian religious beliefs in particularly dogmatic and intolerant fashion, would help to turn popular opinion against The Disrupter Movement.

IV. Other Propaganda Efforts

A. Print Media/Publications

1. Appropriate use of popular media intended to discredit and attack opponents is a fundamental tool of countering The Disrupters Movement.

2. While control of the major media outlets is crucial to such efforts, it is through "fringe" media publications that the most damage can be done to The Disrupters Movement. Continued use of assets within the counter media can be beneficial.

B. Electronic/Computer Systems: Electronic computer systems, bulletin boards, and information superhighway in general is an area of considerable importance to efforts to combat the activities of The Disrupter Movement. The ability of opponents to utilize computer bulletin boards to pass information and educate people must be met with an active program of disinformation and attack.

1. One means of countering the effectiveness of such opposition efforts is the simple expedient of overloading their bulletin boards. A single operator with one computer can set a program in motion that will send out thousands of messages. The sheer volume of such messages is more then the content. Most people will give up rather then read through hundreds and thousands of messages.

2. A second means of countering the opposition's use of computer technology is through the careful placing of disinformation agents. Such agents can take two forms:

a. Agents may be placed who will simply argue against the opposition, using delaying and confusing tactics such as constantly demanding references and "proof" of allegations, referring to obscure and difficult to find documents as evidence that the opposition is wrong, and generally forcing the opposition to waste tremendous amounts of time simply defending itself from spurious and irrelevant attacks.


b. Other agents have been placed with a more subtle purpose mind. Such agents would take on the persons WA attitudes of members of The Disrupters Movement, but would present the opposition case in ways that will ultimately discredit them. The necessary effort to correct. the messages posted by these agents, and the resulting appearance of disarray within their camp should present considerable opportunities for further assaults on The Disrupters Movement.

3. In cases of computer networks where it is highly imperative that the efforts of The Disrupters be neutralized, coordinated assaults can be arranged using aliases and multiple membership ID's to present a wide array of negative and meddlesome messages.

C. Diversionary efforts

1. Bread and Circuses

a. Celebrities: The use of celebrities is a proven means of diverting attention from serious political Issues. Moreover, the use of selected celebrity figures as political spokesperson can be a very effective means of getting our message across.

b. Sports: Sports are useful as a means of diverting attention from serious political issues and dulling the minds of the populace. By focusing all their energies on sporting events, we can prevent people from undertaking the intense and serious study necessary to take effective political action.

c. Gambling: The provision of numerous outlets for public gambling serves multiple purposes; it serves to keep the popular attention engaged on sporting events, as well as what has become known as "lottery fever. " Perhaps more important, widespread gambling not only keeps the general public poor, it provides needed income for our own uses-- especially when allowed in the form of state lotteries which purport to provide money for education, senior citizens, or other popular purposes. In fact, through the careful use of accounting manipulation, much of the funds raised are being diverted to support many of the other programs and efforts described in this memo.
Supporting the validity of Cablesplice:

Outpost of Freedom
Gary Hunt
November 19, 1996

I have, recently, posted "Informants Amongst Us" and "C3CM" to demonstrate what means are used by government to create as much confusion, criticism and division in the Constitutionalist Community as possible. There are a few more pieces that I have become aware of in the past seven or eight years. Operation Cablesplice is one of those 'items' that, although subject to controversy, should be red for what is said, not, necessarily, for where it comes from. As you read the following 'document', consider that it may have been written by someone other than the government, perhaps as a detraction, perhaps as a spoof. In either event, the government surely has read the document, and if they have not adopted the policies presented therein, they are foolish enough to have relinquished power by now. I first received a copy of Cablesplice back in the earlier days of fax-networking. There were many (among them, myself) who felt that the concepts of Cablesplice were being applied even then. The Internet, however, has opened a whole new forum for the propagation of the time of methods outlined in Cablesplice.

As most are aware, now, Marshall Richards, of the West Virginia militia, was an informant. The means by which the government achieved 'control' over Richards may be as outlines in "Informants Amongst Us", and is definitely consistent with Cablesplice.

Nearly every recent 'bust' of patriots was achieved by an informant and an active agent, working together. We can usually see these situations, after the fact, but we know that they are there. Let's look a little further. Look at the proliferation of information/disinformation circulating, daily, on the Internet. Take, for example, a recent claim that last Friday's (November 22) 20/20 program was going to air some revealing interviews, with government agents, that would blow the cover off of the government's involvement in the OKC Bombing. After the program didn't air, excuses were made, and blames laid. The bottom line, however, is that this is exactly what saps the energy from the movement. Whether the issue be flying saucers, comets striking earth, indictments (how many, how many times now?) against Billary, or any other issue that is not directly relevant to the cause, it is a drain.

Had Mike Kemp or the Georgia Militia, and soon the Viper militia, the energy expended on them that is wasted on this irrelevant crud, perhaps we would begin seeing change.

Start wondering what the Founders did before the events of April 19, 1775, hurled them into war. Were they as ill prepared as we are today? The answer, quite frankly, is NO! They were prepared, and that preparation did not come from bantering about, acting as if the knowledge of all events was evil, and that each was an expert. They organized themselves into Committees of Protection, Correspondence and Safety, and they prepared themselves, mentally and physically, for what they perceived to lie in their future. It is no surprise, when the true history is read, that they were able to achieve what they did. And, more, surprisingly, the odds against them were far worse than they are against us, today.

Now, read "CODEWORD -- OPERATION CABLESPLICE, and begin to understand that the enemy uses his head. It is time that we start doing the same!

Gary Hunt
Contrary view:

Gary Hunt, government agent provocateur, is at it again. He was in Waco trying to sabotage efforts to save the Branch Davidians... he then went to Connecticut and called for Militias to march to combat the State when the State tried to collect cigarette tax from some people on private land they claimed was an Indian Reservation who claimed to be Native Americans. The land was NOT a reservation and the people were not Native Americans... one was Black and the other was White. When the scam was exposed Hunt moved on to more scams each attempting to get Militia members or Patriots involved in activities sure to get them discredited or arrested.

Hunt claims to be a penniless Florida surveyor who runs something called "The Outpost of Freedom", a do-nothing, fund less, front for his activities. Despite being broke Hunt travels all over the nation all the time turning up at every supposed crises and drumming up the Militia to march out and meet the enemy at every moment. Hunt has no visible means of support and has admitted being "broke", yet always has money and travel funds.

We are in possession of a video tape which shows Gary Hunt as a pall bearer at the funeral of an ATF agent some years ago... we are in the possession of a photograph which shows three ATF agents standing together... all wearing ATF "T" shirts... one of the three is Gary Hunt. We are also in possession of many witness affidavits that confirm by positive identification that Gary Hunt was a guest at the Grand Continental Hotel in Oklahoma City a full week before the bombing. We also have a video tape taken by a local TV station that clearly shows Gary Hunt and a companion, each carrying transmitters, walking swiftly away from the just bombed building... Whoooooopssssss! They are clearly surprised and upset that they are being filmed and show no surprise or concern for the dead and wounded behind them.

The so-called "Operation Cable Splice" document that Hunt has put out is an obvious FAKE... FRAUD... PHONY... etc. Operation Cable Splice was a CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD exercise that took place over two decades ago. It was not then and is not now a national or federal operation. You can read about it in my book "Behold A Pale Horse".... as I am the one that exposed the REAL "Cable Splice". It is so easy to prove a fake that I am amazed at Hunt's sheer stupidity.

Gary Hunt is again doing what the government pays him to do... and once again the sheople are falling for it... hook, line, and sinker. Notice the obvious target of this fake document... just like the last fake document that Hunt put out the target appears to be me... and other effective radio talk hosts. But like all of Hunt's bullshit... and totally unlike Gary Hunt... it won't wash on me... I document and source everything on my broadcasts.

Don't get me wrong... there is some obvious honey in the fake document... but I exposed that honey many years ago... Hegel would love Gary Hunt.

Wake Up ! Hunt is ENEMY all the way.

William Cooper
Director, Intelligence Service
Second Continental Army of the Republic

This post has been edited by Nodstar on Apr 10 2007, 03:48 PM

user posted image"In PuPP We Trust" user posted image
PMEmail Poster

Freedom Fighter
Group: Members
Posts: 579
Member No.: 470

Posted: Apr 10 2007, 03:44 PM
Quote Post
part 4

The 9/11 Minority Report PART 2

The CIA's Internet Fakes
by Fintan Dunne, Editor, 4th August, 2005

Note: We do not contend that everyone associated with these websites are knowing intelligence operatives. Some have been professionally manipulated, others merely misled. In any event these are promoting the psyop agendas and disinformation themes of the covert controllers. This is also not meant to be a fully comprehensive listing of all the fake websites.


For the last three years we have been quietly investigating the cover-up of the 9/11 attacks. Ours has been a wide-ranging inquiry which paid special attention to those who claim to be already exposing the truth.

During this time we have interviewed many people with alternative views on who were the real perpetrators. All the while, we kept our own counsel. Much of the time we played it as if we were uncritically buying the lines being put out on various alternative media.

We have examined a great deal of evidence and methodically traced the methods and networks used to mislead us all. Now we present the first of our findings.


We published our first investigative articles on the 9/11 attacks --just 7 and 14 days after the event. We knew, as did many others, that the real planners were not 'Al-Qaida'. That's the easy part. The challenge was to actually determine -rather than merely guess: who did carry out the attacks?

In uncovering those perpetrators, we felt that an investigation of the cover-up would be as much --if not more-- revealing than our examination of the attacks themselves.

Our analysis of the cover-up shows it requires, and has used, the official intelligence resources of more that one state. One of the ways of deflecting investigators from this grim reality has been to spin the facts to allege that a 'rogue group' within government carried out the attacks.

But we now state that the depth and multinational scope of the cover-up shows no mere rogue group was involved. The 9/11 attacks and cover-up have covert governmental support -deployed through an intelligence framework.

What will be the most startling aspect of our investigation for many people is the vast scale of governmental control of the 9/11 movement and alternative investigators and media. From websites to commentators; from analysts to political personages, this has given the cover-up team unprecedented control of alternative media perceptions.

In short, the government is running not only the 9/11 movement, but also controlling the 9/11 issue in the alternative media. It was relatively easy to do so, because they have controlled both mainstream and alternative media and politics increasingly over the last twenty years. This was just an extension of those operations.


Here's a quote from a recent article on the UK Guardian:
"The Chinese government, employs an estimated 30,000 internet police, as part of a long-standing policy to control the web so that it can be used by businesses but not by political opponents."

Think the ideology and practice of the USA would be any different? Of course not. Just well cloaked under a veneer of free expression.

In the US, it's less a case of internet 'police' and more a question of Internet fake opposition, misdirection websites, front organizations, pseudo-activist groups and a host of professional blogging and web journalism liars, acting in concert to create an impenetrable fog.

These people are all over the Internet They are all over the 9/11 issue; all over the 'stolen' election of 2004; behind the psychological operations designed to inspire fear of earth changes, of global warming, of the Super-State and the so-called New World Order; all over the landscape of anti-corporate, antifascist expression on the Internet.

This army of information controllers is all over the 'free' information you are getting on the Internet. Time we opened our eyes to see them. It's not just the mainstream which is controlled. From the moment the Internet became prominent, a vast budget has been expended to control all the high-trafficked intersections on the information superhighway.


Many of these sites/assets were put in place long before 9/11. A key goal was to ensure that if some truth must come out, it will be a truth designed and controlled by intelligence agencies -- with agency assets in a position to ensure misdirection and damage limitation.

To this end, an orgy of evidence [See Minority Report Part I] in the form of deliberately misleading 9/11 'clues', were designed into the 9/11 operation from the start --to give these assets prearranged talking points with which to fill their column inches and programming. This has served to confuse and confound.

All this activity rose to a crescendo around the time the Kerry presidential bid hit it's planned implosion in the 'stolen' election. [The stealing of which was carefully managed in the controlled alternative media as a psychological operation against the left.]

The hyping of the 9/11 issue up until the 'defeat' of Kerry was designed to max out activist interest in the issue, then bury it with the aid of general post-Kerry, left-wing political disillusion -against the backdrop of division in the 9/11 Movement itself.

Also part of a similar confounding exercise were the subsequent 9/11 Movement 'flame wars', as different assets attacked each other to undermine their collective credibility and disillusion ordinary grassroots 9/11 truth activists.


A persistent theme of the disinformation spread by these assets is to portray the machinations of this elite group acting through the CIA/NSA/ETC. as if they originate from somewhere other than the US security/intelligence apparatus.

Suspicion is directed instead onto the Israelis, the 'City of London', 'International Bankers', The Rockefellers, The Bildebergers, and most infamously, the ill-defined, so-called New World Order. Of course, some of these elements are complicit in certain events, but the aim is to downplay the U.S. establishment's guiding hand and the broad CFR/corporate support.

Some may be surprised by the range and scope of the misinformation sites we have detailed, and may even be disconsolate to see the sheer scale of the social and political control which their virtually unlimited budget can achieve.

All we can say is.... deal with it. We had to. It's better than us all flailing around in ignorance. And it explains why men and women of good heart have been getting nowhere.


This level of deception has been going on since the 1950's and 1960's at an accelerating rate. Following the psywar against civilians induced by the nuclear arms race 'crisis,' the subsequent JFK killing was indeed an assassination, but it was also at heart an extension of these 1950's nuke-scare psychological operations.

The killing of Kennedy was not necessary for political reasons -but it was a powerful tool for social control via psychological warfare. Kennedy was killed to deliberately drive the US population into a grief state which would hamper the development of political opposition.

This type of PsyOps directed at the civilian population was, and still is the modus operandi. By now, it has produced a range of operations as varied as AIDS, SARS, 9/11 and the G8/Live8 London bombing.


Given the number of assets deployed in support of the 9/11 operation, and the operational requirements of the 9/11 attacks themselves, their origin is now clear. 9/11 was not carried out by some 'rogue group,' nor was it a fully official US Government-sanctioned operation.

But it was orchestrated by the highest levels of the US Military and military-industrial complex; on behalf of the national and international politicians, corporates, and moneyed interests. It had, and still has the full support of the US Military/intelligence apparatus -who control much of the alternative media and the 9/11 movement.

This post has been edited by Nodstar on Apr 10 2007, 04:24 PM

user posted image"In PuPP We Trust" user posted image
PMEmail Poster

Freedom Fighter
Group: Members
Posts: 579
Member No.: 470

Posted: Apr 10 2007, 03:47 PM
Quote Post
part 5

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

Well .. I know its a large body of information ..
but WELL WORTH your attention ..

Peace, love, and Mung Beans .. loveshower.gif

user posted image"In PuPP We Trust" user posted image
PMEmail Poster

Topic Options Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll


[ Script Execution time: 0.0546 ]   [ 16 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]

"Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce."
~ James A. Garfield, President of the United States


"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws."
~ Amschel Mayer Rothschild