The Dirty Truth in One Paragraph

[Clara T]

This from the US Army War College. Nothing is hidden. No need to speculate on motives. Machiavelli on steroids.

Constant Conflict

RALPH PETERS

From Parameters, Summer 1997, pp. 4-14.

"There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing."

http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/97summer/peters.htm

11 People Killed in U.S. Raid
By ZIAD KHALAF, Associated Press Writer Wed Mar 15, 2:16 PM ET

ISAHAQI, Iraq - U.S. forces flattened a house during a raid north of Baghdad early Wednesday, killing 11 people — mostly women and children, while insurgent attacks elsewhere left five dead, police and relatives said.

The U.S. military acknowledged the raid and said it caught one insurgent. It took place near Balad, about 50 miles north of the capital. But the military said only four people were killed — a man, two women and a child.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060315/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_violence

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. open to our cultural assault.

Cultural assault is another term for "promoting democracy".

[TheDebbieDee]

4. With the Neocons currently running things.......

cultural assault can also be religious indoctrination.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

5. Yes.... and peddling Little Debbies on street corners, I mean

disrupting the indigenous diets of other nations with junk food and empty calories is rather insensitive as well... :)



http://www.littledebbie.com/about/brief_history.asp
Brand History

In 1960, McKee Foods founder O.D. McKee was trying to come up with a catchy name for their new family-pack cartons of snack cakes. Packaging supplier Bob Mosher suggested using a family member's name. Thinking of what could be a good fit for the brand, O.D. arrived at the name of his 4-year-old granddaughter Debbie. Inspired by a photo of Debbie in play clothes and her favorite straw hat, he decided to use the name Little Debbie® and the image of her on the logo. Not until the first cartons were being printed did Debbie's parents, Ellsworth and Sharon McKee, discover that their daughter was the namesake of the new brand.

[file83]

2. War = Peace, right? Gotta love this New World Order!

The only problem is, the New World Order seems to thrive off of DISORDER. That must be some sort of sick inside joke somewhere in the pinnacles of power.

[liberal N proud]

3. the bu$h regime has opened hells gate and unleashed its fury upon

generations.

[leftchick]

6. PNAC 101

you know, I am getting pretty fucking sick of knowing this shit for five years now and the so called jornalists in this country have not gotten a wiff. Or so they let us think.

[TahitiNut]

14. Yep. The author, Ralph Peters, is a long-time PNAC member.

He's a piece of Army flotsam, out as a Lt. Colonel - no doubt never to become a flag officer.

The PNAC group is led by Chairman William Kristol, other members are Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, James Woolsey, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, James Bolton, Zalmay M. Khalilzad, William Bennett, Dan Quayle, Jeb Bush, Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Elliot Abrams, Dov Zakheim, John Bolton, William Schneider, Jr., Paula Dobriansky, Robert Kagan, Vin Weber, Robert B. Zoellick, Jeffrey Bergner, Francis Fukuyama, Peter W. Rodman, Frank F. Gaffney, Peter Beinart, Daniel Blumenthal, Max Boot, Eliot Cohen, Clifford May, Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, Michael O'Hanlon, Ralph Peters, Danielle Pletka, Stephen P. Rosen, Randy Scheunemann, Walter Slocombe, James B. Steinberg, Frank Carlucci, Gary Bauer, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Charles Krauthammer, John Lehman, Steve Forbes, Dennis Ross, and Marc Ginsberg.

http://www.culture-of-corruption.net/pnac.htm

He's the asshole who, in the New York Post, likened Howard Dean and his supporters to Nazis in early January 2004.

[Clara T]

16. "This deflects attention away from the systemic origins of the war"

Many explanations have been advanced in the face of the obvious failures of the official US and British explanations to account for why a war is being waged on Iraq. Most are unifactorial; that is, they invoke a single factor or reason to explain why US forces marched into Baghdad. “It’s the oil,” is emblematic of this class of explanation. Also, many alternative theories avoid reference to social or economic forces, (perhaps because anonymous forces are difficult to grasp and deal with), and dwell, instead, on the personal characteristics of central figures. The US president George W. Bush is said, for example, to possess a “drive for war” that impelled him to order an attack on Iraq and engineer public support for it. This theory simply infers a psychological trait (a drive for war) from a pattern of behavior (the waging of war), and offers the behavior as proof of the trait. The explanation is, in other words, circular; it explains nothing. Significantly, most alternative explanations, whether their proponents realize it or not, serve a conservative political function; they portray war on Iraq as deriving from the personal characteristics of central political figures, not systemic causes, and as being of an anomalous character rather than a recurrent feature of US foreign policy. This deflects attention away from the systemic origins of the war, and thereby defines the bounds of political action as limited to working for the electoral victory of parties and candidates who are judged to have more redeeming personal characteristics.

http://gowans.blogspot.com/2006/03/weve-done-it-before-so-why-all-shock.html

[TahitiNut]

17. His analysis (in the entire article) is right on, imho.

It's no accident that I'm an independent, that I've repeatedly said that we're seriously infected with a corporatist flavor of fascism finding deeper root in an increasingly authoritarian/parental culture, and that I've steadfastly predicted that it'll take us at least two decades to recover to just the level of healthy liberalism we had in the late 70s if we recovered at the fastest conceivable pace. It's not just a matter of the 2006 elections or 2008 elections and even those hold little prospect for change if people are merely willing to settle for ABB.

To the degree people think "impossible" to my repeated objective of 'Impeach! Indict! Imprison!' we're unlikely to recover any semblance of a just and liberal democracy within the lifetime of the person reading it and thinking that way.

[leftchick]

20. that explains every piece of filth that spews forth from him

vile, vile VILE!

[file83]

7. Another interesting quote from that Carlisle paper....

(same source)

The number one priority of non-Western governments the coming decades will be to find acceptable terms for the flow of information within their societies. They will uniformly err on the side of conservatism--informational corruption--and will cripple their competitiveness in doing so. Their failure is programmed.

The next century will indeed be American, but it will also be troubled. We will find ourselves in constant conflict, much of it violent. The United States Army is going to add a lot of battle streamers to its flag. We will wage information warfare, but we will fight with infantry. And we will always surprise those critics, domestic and foreign, who predict our decline.

Kind of ironic, wouldn't you say, that in one paragraph, this Carlisle paper claims that governments that try to control the flow of information will, by "programmed" design, lead to failure. YET, in the very next paragraph it goes on to declare that the U.S. will "wage information warfare".

So, that begs the question, is our failure "programmed" as well? I think it's pretty obvious that the Bush Administration (which errs "on the side of conservatism") is struggeling to come to terms with it's own "acceptable terms for the flow of information within their" society.

[Clara T]

9. I think

most of the folks who write these lengthy position papers in their sterile think tanks know little of how sloppy and unpredictable the outside world can be. But their perfectly happy to architect this path to murder and mayhem as long as they don't get their hands dirty or bloody or run any personal risks whatsever.

[file83]

10. I forget which documentary I heard this in (Power of Nightmares?) but...

...these think tanks were summed as: The promotions go to the people that can think up the darkest, worst scenarios.

[Clara T]

12. Graduates of Kissinger College no doubt

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles
to restore order . Tomorrow they will be
grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an
outside threat from beyond , whether
real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that
all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one
thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this
scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee
of their well-being granted to them by the World Government." -Dr.
Henry Kissinger

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

13. I'm almosdt certain that's a made up quote

It really doesn't sound like anything Kissinger would say (other than what certain John Birch types suspect). It's sometimes cited as coming from a speech at a Bilderberg conference, but never where that transcript was obtained. Although I'm sure some more detailed records are kept, I've read the published notes leaked from a couple of Bilderberg meetings and they never give direct quotes (or identify speakers other than by nationality IIRC).

[file83]

18. Here are a few claims as to when/where Kissinger said that...

I think it's obvious there is no agreement or "authority" on when this was actually said. For some reason, "May 21" comes up but either in 1991 or 1992. That certainly puts the authenticity of the quote into question. Actually, I just looked it up. The 1992 meeting was on May 21-24 in Evian, France. The 1991 meeting was in Germany on June 6-9. Not to mention, there is no "Evians" with an 's', it's Evian. So, now I'm starting to really question the authenticity of the quote. It probably is just one of those internet "urban legends" - such is life on the internet!

(These are other people's claims - not mine - I'm just cutting and pasting from various websites that have posted this quote.)

In reference to the LA Riots (Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991 )

--Henry Kissinger speaking at Evian, France, 5/21, 1992 Bilderburgers meeting. Unbeknownst to Kissinger, his speech
was taped by a Swiss delegate to the meeting.

Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

-- Henry Kissinger - 1991 Bilderberger conference, Evians, France.

Henry Kissinger
Evians, France - 1991
Bilderberg Conference

Such supine acquiescence by a fearful citizenry was, indeed, predicted by former President Nixon's National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger during a 1992 speech given in Evian, France. (counterpunch.org)

Addressing the 1992 Evian, France Bilderberg meeting, Kissinger has been attributed with saying:

Henry Kissinger in an address to the Bilderberger meeting at Evian, France on May 21, 1992.

judging from a statement he made at a 1991 Bilderberger conference in Evians, France

—Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

-- Henry Kissinger speaking at Evian, France, May 21, 1992 Bilderburgers meeting. Unbeknownst to Kissinger, his speech was taped by a Swiss delegate to the meeting.

- Henry Kissinger in an address to the Bilderberger meeting at Evian, France, May 21, 1992.

Allegedly, Henry Kissinger in an address to the Bilderberg organization at a meeting in Evian, France, May 21, 1991, said, (worldnetdaily.com)

[Clara T]

22. Seems to fit the Kissinger mindset

Of course, if one listens to Alexander Haig and Henry Kissinger--two architects of the last major US foreign disaster in Vietnam--they might think that the only way to get out of Iraq is by blowing the country and its inhabitants to hell. Indeed, Mr. Haig, who was a general, Secretary of State under Reagan, and an advisor to Richard Nixon (even serving as his Chief of Staff during the final months of Nixon's presidency), told an audience of a conference on the Vietnam War at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, ``Every asset of the nation must be applied to the conflict to bring about a quick and successful outcome, or don't do it." This is from a man, who helped engineer (among other things) the Christmas bombings of 1972, the mining of Haiphong harbor and the bombing of Hanoi and the dikes of northern Vietnam, and the invasion of Cambodia. What does he suggest the US do in Iraq? Break out some tactical nuclear weapons? The mindset that Haig represents seriously believes that the US military was restrained in Vietnam and that a similar situation exists in Iraq. This is despite the fact that more ordnance has been dropped on those two countries than on any other country in history.

His fellow panel member, Henry Kissinger, would probably like that idea. After all, it was Mr. Kissinger who considered the use of nuclear weapons against northern Vietnam in 1969, but was convinced such an idea might be a bad move after hundreds of thousands of US residents filled the streets of DC and several other cities on November 15, 1969 in a national mobilization to end the war in Vietnam.

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m21601

[file83]

25. I completely agree - Kissenger is a globalist - no question about that.

In actuality, whether or not that quote is actually something Kissenger said in one breath is beside the point. The quote does represent, accurately, Kissenger's life long body of work, actions, and idealogies. In-other-words, it sure sounds like Kissenger.

And the fact is that Kissenger was at the 92 Bilderberg meeting in Evian, France. So...he hangs out with the globalists and is one himself.

[catzies]

11. Right you are. Who said Iraq was goig to be a cakewalk, anyway?

A PNACer for sure, but I forget who.

[sweetheart]

21. who are "we" to that source

"We" are apparently the kapital assets of the United States, not the people.
Our failure is programmed by spamming our own airwaves without any
benchmarks for truth or authenticity. Funnily, the same priotity of
"non-western" governments is that of the bush admin.

If "we" are the forces of light, good, truth and knowledge on this earth,
then who is "non-western", is it people who are not reading this?
Or are the people who are reading it, the non-westerners, and we are all
having trouble with our own information flows, as our jobs are emailed abroad,
coming to terms with all that.

The paper speaks the truth... just the subject words are improper and
ambiguious. It should say, "the number one priority of control freaks is
to control information in a free speech zone". Those who are threatened,
are likely the corrupt, and that's a good thing they are exposed (implied moral).

The failure of knowledge is pre-programmed, it is manifestation, and lives
only as long as it is reflected in the eyes of its mortal lover. A society
based on fear will consume itself and collapse, a society founded in love
lives forever. Where is the freedom for a society based on liberty and
the right not to be oppressed by a global preatorian guard of supermarket guards.

[Minnesota Libra]

8. The article by Ralph Peters is truly frightening, written in 97 it is.....

.....right on the mark of everything happening today and it's so easy to see how this will continue for the rest of our lives as the essay claims. That is truly scary.

[Clara T]

15. We were warned years ago

Nazis of the Nineties
Abid Ullah Jan
January 05, 1998
The Frontier Post

In his book "The Road to Serfdom," Friedrich Hayek warned Americans in 1944 that despite their military war against Nazis, they were travelling the philosophical and economic road to that the Nazis were travelling. The Americans ignored that warning. Now along the Americans we are left with the consequences that are coming home to roost in the nineties: a government of omnipotent size and power using its power to kill innocent, peaceful citizens at home and abroad. Today, the number of its victims is in the millions. But at the end of this road lie the deadly bombing and concentration camps for the multitudes.

The name of the new game to be played in the last year of the twentieth century is "catastrophic terrorism" and it has been made frightening, not because it conceivably could really happen but because of what people who choose to dwell on the possibility, however remote, want to do about it. The anti-biological and anti-weapons of mass destruction American propaganda and actions are already duplicating Hitler's prior to World War-II tactics.

Any further terrorism from now onwards would be justified in the name of combating "catastrophic terrorism," which is defined as going far beyond what the US Secretary of Defence William Cohen calls "the conventional type of terrorism." That is the work of "cowards," he says, who "rejoice in the agony of their victims." They then "retreat to villages where they hide behind the skirts of women and the laughter of children and dare you to strike back - and strike back we will."

"We have to depend upon intervention" he declared on December 8, 1998 and the same views have been expressed by Ashton Carter, John Deusch and Philip Zelikow, two former high-level Defence Department Officials, and a former staff member of National Security Council, in the Foreign Affairs magazine. This propaganda would justify the US armed attack in any part of the world as "prevention" of the sensed danger. Afghanistan and Sudan were probably the first victims of an undeclared Nazi agenda for dominating the world.

http://www.icssa.org/ICSS%20-%20theme_terrorism_nazis_of_nineties.htm

[undergroundpanther]

19. The Fundies need to UNDERSTAND this quote

Liberty always looks like weakness to those who fear it.

Tell them thier"masters" and role models wrote it ,and according to thier plans the zealot masses are tools,and they are in for a darwin award if they don'tget out of the "faith based" fantasty they are in and start looking at reality..They have been sold out.

[bobthedrummer]

23. We were given ample signals for decades.

The warnings increased after the selection and installation of the George W. Bush administration.

The Internet is now part of C4I warfare. Here's a data dump for those that care. Suggest that you save these links and use them as the need arises.

on edit:
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/infowar.htm

http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_510.shtml

http://www.crisispapers.org/topics/spyscandal.htm

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/hr2977.html

http://www.au.af.mil/info-ops/perception.htm#

http://www.datafilter.com/mc/remoteBehavioralInfluence.html

http://www.angelfire.com/or/mctrl/decoding.htm

[Jim__]

24. Does anyone accept the analysis in this paper?

I'd say it has already proven wrong.While he is arguing for the type of weapons systems that will be needed in the 21st century, he is arguing that our strength is based on the fact that we have, and freely disseminate, so much information. For example:

We will outcreate, outproduce and, when need be, outfight the rest of the world. We can out-think them, too. But our military must not embark upon the 21st century clinging to 20th-century models. Our national appetite for information and our sophistication in handling it will enable us to outlast and outperform all hierarchical cultures, information-controlling societies, and rejectionist states. The skills necessary to this newest information age can be acquired only beginning in childhood and in complete immersion. Societies that fear or otherwise cannot manage the free flow of information simply will not be competitive. They might master the technological wherewithal to watch the videos, but we will be writing the scripts, producing them, and collecting the royalties. Our creativity is devastating. If we insist on a "proven" approach to military affairs, we will be throwing away our greatest national advantage.


....

It remains difficult, of course, for military leaders to conceive of warfare, informational or otherwise, in such broad terms. But Hollywood is "preparing the battlefield," and burgers precede bullets. The flag follows trade. Despite our declaration of defeat in the face of battlefield victory in Mogadishu, the image of US power and the US military around the world is not only a deterrent, but a psychological warfare tool that is constantly at work in the minds of real or potential opponents. Saddam swaggered, but the image of the US military crippled the Iraqi army in the field, doing more to soften them up for our ground assault than did tossing bombs into the sand. Everybody is afraid of us. They really believe we can do all the stuff in the movies. If the Trojans "saw" Athena guiding the Greeks in battle, then the Iraqis saw Luke Skywalker precede McCaffrey's tanks. Our unconscious alliance of culture with killing power is a combat multiplier no government, including our own, could design or afford. We are magic. And we're going to keep it that way.

We've already begun to suppress the free dissemination of information. His article is seriously outdated, and his arguments, e.g. we're going to keep it that way, already proven wrong.

[file83]

26. The other way to look at it, is that this same paper states that

governments which begin to corrupt the flow of information are doomed to failure. So, maybe in one sense, the paper is wrong in predicting that the US will keep information "flowing free". This Administration has completely turned that prediction upside down. But I would have to agree with this conclusion:

The number one priority of non-Western governments the coming decades will be to find acceptable terms for the flow of information within their societies. They will uniformly err on the side of conservatism--informational corruption--and will cripple their competitiveness in doing so. Their failure is programmed.

It seems that this explains the state of our union perfectly.

[Jim__]

27. I agree that the US is hurting itself today by its supression of

information. I believe we are in danger of falling behind other nations in scientific research.

I am not so sure about the proposition that the society with the free-est flow of information will always outproduce other societies. In general I think its true, but I also think there are other parameters that must be factored into the equation and that under some circumstances the release of information can be damaging - but, I'm not sure about that.