Twenty-First Century Information Warfare and the Third Offset Strategy

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Twenty-First Century Information Warfare and the Third Offset Strategy U.S. Navy E-2C Hawkeye 2000 aircraft assigned to “Wallbangers” of Carrier Airborne Early Warning Squadron 117 approaches flight deck of USS John C. Stennis while ship is underway in Pacific Ocean, July 13, 2006 (DOD/John Hyde) Twenty-First Century Information Warfare and the Third Offset Strategy By James R. McGrath While the United States and our closest allies fought two lengthy wars over the past 13 years—the rest of the world and our potential adversaries were seeing how we operated. They looked at our advantages. They studied them. They analyzed them. They looked for weaknesses. And then they set about devising ways to counter our technological over-match. —DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROBERT WORK 16 Forum / Twenty-First Century Information Warfare and the Third Offset Strategy JFQ 82, 3rd Quarter 2016 t is well established that both military in pursuit of the Nation’s capabilities. Regrettably, the appeal for state and nonstate adversaries are core and enduring national interests, the development of new operating con- I gaining parity with current U.S. most notably safeguarding national cepts and wargaming techniques seems military-technological capabilities, security, promoting democratic values, to be overlooked in the media and most and as a result adversaries are eroding maintaining long-term economic defense policy think tanks. the tremendous asymmetrical con- prosperity, and preserving the current What many analysts fail to realize is ventional warfare advantages once international order.4 The solution to that the operating environment, spe- exclusively enjoyed by U.S. forces.1 this problem—one that has yet to be cifically the information environment This leveling of the playing field has fully articulated and bounded in scope, (IE),7 has changed, and our adversaries been enabled through decreased costs much less solved—has been named the are undermining our asymmetrical of modern information technology Third Offset Strategy, meaning that advantages through innovative use of and low barriers of entry to attaining there are a series of strategic capabilities the information space, particularly by precision weapons; stealth capabilities; that must be developed to give U.S. operating in the informational and cogni- sophisticated commercial and military forces a decisive military-technological tive dimensions on a global scale.8 What command and control (C2) capabilities; offset that generates lasting asymmet- should be obvious—but unfortunately is advanced intelligence, surveillance, and rical advantages over any potential not to many military and defense plan- reconnaissance (ISR); and relatively adversary for the next 25 to 50 years. ners—is that IO is precisely the tool set cheap access to commercial and gov- The strategy is so named because there that joint force commanders already have ernment-sponsored space and cyber already were two successful offset strat- to attack our adversaries’ newly found capabilities.2 As a result, in November egies in the 20th century.5 The first was advancements in C2 warfare, ISR, and 2014, then–Secretary of Defense Chuck President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s New precision weapons. Unfortunately, for ex- Hagel announced the Defense Inno- Look Strategy during the 1950s, which ample, the Russians,9 Chinese,10 and the vation Initiative to counter adversary sought to develop advanced nuclear Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant,11 to technical and tactical progress that, if weapons capabilities to offset the Soviet name a few, are now also demonstrating left unchecked, will ultimately hinder Union’s overwhelmingly superior con- advanced forms of information warfare U.S. ability to project power across ventional forces and nascent nuclear that continually undermine U.S. tactical the globe and permanently challenge capabilities. The second strategy was prowess and enable successful antiaccess/ its aims of retaining its coveted status Secretary of Defense Harold Brown’s area-denial (A2/AD) strategies that are as a global hegemon.3 While there Offset Strategy during the 1970s, which the root cause of the problem.12 For are many aspects to this initiative, the was aimed at countering recent Soviet U.S. forces to achieve the Third Offset Third Offset Strategy, as outlined in advances in both numerical and techni- Strategy, the joint force must be able to policy, does not adequately address the cal parity regarding its nuclear arsenal, achieve information superiority at the need for advanced information opera- coupled with sustained numerically time and place of its choosing. To do tions (IO), particularly IO wargaming, superior conventional forces deployed in that, the joint force must develop innova- modeling and simulation (M&S), and Eastern Europe and elsewhere around tive operating concepts for IO, wargame training systems. The purpose of this the globe. Essentially, the U.S. Offset them using a variety of computer-based article is to make the case that increas- Strategy invested in stealth technolo- methods, and then train to the newly ing the investment in joint live, virtual, gies, precision weapons, sophisticated discovered tactics, techniques, and pro- and constructive (LVC) IO wargaming C2 capabilities, and advanced airborne cedures that are absolutely essential for and simulations will generate lasting and space-based ISR that were ulti- 21st-century warfare—a type of warfare asymmetrical advantages for joint force mately revealed to the world during the aimed at breaking the will of the adver- commanders and will significantly con- first Gulf War. sary through control of the IE. tribute to the achievement of the Third As outlined by Secretary Hagel and Currently, IO is often treated as an Offset Strategy. currently being championed by Deputy ad hoc, additive activity during most Secretary of Defense Robert Work, the joint LVC training events; therefore, Military Problem Defense Innovation Initiative emphasizes IO is routinely ignored or underutilized The Defense Innovation Initiative three key areas for sources of innovation: despite being a major component of is aimed at solving the problem of long-range research and development, every real-world joint operation since ensuring that lasting power projection new operating concepts, and reenergiz- Operations Desert Shield and Desert capabilities are available to the U.S. ing wargaming efforts and techniques.6 Storm13 and arguably in other forms, such Currently, most of the discussion re- as psychological warfare and deception, garding this initiative is overly focused throughout all of human history.14 Much on purely technical, materiel solutions, of the reason for this routine omission Lieutenant Colonel James R. McGrath, USMC, is the Information Warfare Department Head for such as unmanned autonomous systems and lack of prominence in major joint Expeditionary Warfare Training Group Atlantic. and sources of new global strike and ISR LVC exercises is that military information JFQ 82, 3rd Quarter 2016 McGrath 17 support operations (MISO, formerly IRC is necessarily required for a particular indispensable to the process of systemati- known as psychological operations), pub- mission.17 In fact, multiple IRCs applied cally unravelling an adversary’s integrated lic affairs, electronic warfare (EW), cyber in a combined arms fashion are a prereq- air and coastal defenses; undermining his warfare, military deception (MILDEC), uisite to achieving success in any one of ballistic and cruise missile standoff weap- special technical operations, and other these critical mission areas. This idea is ons; and blinding his advanced land, sea, information-related capabilities (IRC)15 consistent with the accepted Department air, cyber, and space-based ISR platforms. are difficult to simulate over a relevant of Defense (DOD) IO definition and is Furthermore, there is a defensive aspect exercise time horizon. Even more chal- precisely why they are considered ger- of C2 warfare that requires advanced lenging is the ability to realistically but mane to any serious discussion of future electromagnetic spectrum operations, sufficiently model the physical, technical, IO.18 The following discussion briefly information assurance, and defensive and cognitive complexities of the IE as highlights the need for further develop- cyberspace operations to ensure assured a coherent whole whose sum is greater ment and implementation of these six C2 over friendly forces on a global scale. than its individual parts. If this can be mission areas, as well as their relevance to Without a modern, robust defensive C2 achieved, U.S. joint forces would be able the future joint force. warfare capability, U.S. global power pro- to train in synthetic environments that Generally speaking, psychological jection is nearly impossible. would ultimately enable them to effec- warfare is defined as actions against the Denial and deception operations are tively maneuver within the IE, counter political will of an adversary, his com- a combination of operations security recent adversary military-technological manders, and his troops, and includes and MILDEC activities, supported by a gains and newfound information warfare inform and influence operations directed wide-range of IRCs, to protect critical prowess, and provide the baseline for a at any third party capable of providing information, facilitate surprise, and delib- newly defined technical, military, and sympathy or support to both the adver- erately mislead an adversary to achieve a psychological offset. sary or friendly forces.19
Recommended publications
  • Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J
    STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES 11 Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Center for Strategic Research Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University The Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) is National Defense University’s (NDU’s) dedicated research arm. INSS includes the Center for Strategic Research, Center for Complex Operations, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, Center for Transatlantic Security Studies, and Conflict Records Research Center. The military and civilian analysts and staff who comprise INSS and its subcomponents execute their mission by conducting research and analysis, publishing, and participating in conferences, policy support, and outreach. The mission of INSS is to conduct strategic studies for the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Unified Combatant Commands in support of the academic programs at NDU and to perform outreach to other U.S. Government agencies and the broader national security community. Cover: Kathleen Bailey presents evidence of forgeries to the press corps. Credit: The Washington Times Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference By Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Institute for National Strategic Studies Strategic Perspectives, No. 11 Series Editor: Nicholas Rostow National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. June 2012 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Warfare, International Law, and the Changing Battlefield
    ARTICLE INFORMATION WARFARE, INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THE CHANGING BATTLEFIELD Dr. Waseem Ahmad Qureshi* ABSTRACT The advancement of technology in the contemporary era has facilitated the emergence of information warfare, which includes the deployment of information as a weapon against an adversary. This is done using a numBer of tactics such as the use of media and social media to spread propaganda and disinformation against an adversary as well as the adoption of software hacking techniques to spread viruses and malware into the strategically important computer systems of an adversary either to steal confidential data or to damage the adversary’s security system. Due to the intangible nature of the damage caused By the information warfare operations, it Becomes challenging for international law to regulate the information warfare operations. The unregulated nature of information operations allows information warfare to Be used effectively By states and nonstate actors to gain advantage over their adversaries. Information warfare also enhances the lethality of hyBrid warfare. Therefore, it is the need of the hour to arrange a new convention or devise a new set of rules to regulate the sphere of information warfare to avert the potential damage that it can cause to international peace and security. ABSTRACT ................................................................................................. 901 I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................... 903 II. WHAT IS INFORMATION WARFARE? .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Taming the Trolls: the Need for an International Legal Framework to Regulate State Use of Disinformation on Social Media
    Taming the Trolls: The Need for an International Legal Framework to Regulate State Use of Disinformation on Social Media * ASHLEY C. NICOLAS INTRODUCTION Consider a hypothetical scenario in which hundreds of agents of the Russian GRU arrive in the United States months prior to a presidential election.1 The Russian agents spend the weeks leading up to the election going door to door in vulnerable communities, spreading false stories intended to manipulate the population into electing a candidate with policies favorable to Russian positions. The agents set up television stations, use radio broadcasts, and usurp the resources of local newspapers to expand their reach and propagate falsehoods. The presence of GRU agents on U.S. soil is an incursion into territorial integrity⎯a clear invasion of sovereignty.2 At every step, Russia would be required to expend tremendous resources, overcome traditional media barriers, and risk exposure, making this hypothetical grossly unrealistic. Compare the hypothetical with the actual actions of the Russians during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Sitting behind computers in St. Petersburg, without ever setting foot in the United States, Russian agents were able to manipulate the U.S. population in the most sacred of domestic affairs⎯an election. Russian “trolls” targeted vulnerable populations through social media, reaching millions of users at a minimal cost and without reliance on established media institutions.3 Without using * Georgetown Law, J.D. expected 2019; United States Military Academy, B.S. 2009; Loyola Marymount University M.Ed. 2016. © 2018, Ashley C. Nicolas. The author is a former U.S. Army Intelligence Officer.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyber Counterintelligence - Deception, Distortion, Dishonesty
    #RSAC SESSION ID: CYBER COUNTERINTELLIGENCE - DECEPTION, DISTORTION, DISHONESTY Jeff Bardin Dr. Khatuna Mshvidobadze Chief Intelligence Officer Principal Treadstone 71 Cyberlight Global Associates @Treadstone71LLC [email protected] 5 2 Agenda Taxonomy Types of Denial Deception Dimensions of D&D Tactics Deception Chain (see your handout) and Deception Planning D&D Russian Historical Information Criminals & Kids Notable Events Georgia US Election Background Warfare Dis-information / France – Information Complexity of Formation of cyber Troll Factories Major Players TV5Monde Warfare on Social Outsourcing troops Media Forming public Interagency Socio-Cultural Conclusions - opinion Rivalries Differences Recommendations 3 Denial and Deception - Lifecycle Types of Denial and Deception Resource Diversion Uncertainty Intelligence Proactivity Depletion • Direct an • Waste an • Cause the • Monitor and • Use adversary’s adversary’s adversary to analyze deception attention time and doubt the adversary techniques to from real energy on veracity of a behavior detect assets toward obtaining and discovered during previously bogus ones. analyzing vulnerability intrusion unknown false or stolen attempts to attacks that information. information. inform future other defense defensive efforts. tools may miss. 4 Deception Planning Consideration of all critical components of the operation. Deny, deceive, create propaganda RSA Conference - Bardin and Mshvidobadze Western Dogs Dogs Lie Like Dotards - We will hack their sites and bring them down 5 Dimensions
    [Show full text]
  • Surprise, Deception, Denial and Warning: Strategic Imperatives
    Surprise, Deception, Denial and Warning: Strategic Imperatives by Lani Kass and J. Phillip “Jack” London Lani Kass, Ph.D., is a Corporate Strategic Advisor at CACI International. Kass previously served as a Senior Policy Advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. She was the first woman to serve as Professor of Military Strategy at the National War College. J. Phillip London, Ph.D., is Chairman of the Board of CACI International. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, he spent 24 years on active and reserve duty. London is the recipient of numerous industry awards and serves on several boards, including the U.S. Naval Institute and CAUSE. The views presented here are the authors’ alone. This article is a tribute to the National War College’s distinguished graduates, among them Service Chiefs, Combatant Commanders, and literally hundreds of senior diplomats, warriors and statesmen. Abstract: This article frames the highly complex national security challenges of surprise, denial and deception. These ultimate asymmetric threats exploit vulnerabilities, capitalizing on hubris, complacency and self-delusion. Such actions prevent the full and accurate assessment of opponents’ capabilities and intentions, and hinder appropriate actions. The long and frequent history of surprise, denial and deception suggest that these are essentially psychological phenomena. They are effective because they challenge and exploit perceptions that fill the gap between what is known and unknown. The authors present decision superiority as the fusion of information dominance and decisive action. Technology and intelligence can enhance decision superiority by ameliorating, but not eliminating, the limits of human perception.
    [Show full text]
  • POLITICAL SPEECH, DOUBLESPEAK, and CRITICAL-THINKING SKILLS in AMERICAN EDUCATION by Doris E. Minin-White a Capstone Project
    POLITICAL SPEECH, DOUBLESPEAK, AND CRITICAL-THINKING SKILLS IN AMERICAN EDUCATION by Doris E. Minin-White A capstone project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts in English as a Second Language. Hamline University Saint Paul, Minnesota December, 2017 Capstone Project Trish Harvey Content Expert: Joseph White 2 My Project In this project, I will attempt to identify and analyze common cases of doublespeak in selected samples of political discourse, delivered by the two most recent U. S. presidents: Barack Obama and Donald Trump. The sample will include the transcripts from two speeches and two debates for each of the speakers. The speeches chosen will be their inaugural addresses and their presidential nomination acceptance speeches. The debates will be the first and second debates held, as part of the presidential campaign, in which the selected speakers participated. I chose to include speeches from the presidential inaugural address because they represent, perhaps, the greatest opportunity for presidents to speak with impact to the people they represent and to their fellow lawmakers who are generally present at the inauguration. I also chose the speeches they made when accepting the presidential nominations of their respective parties, because it is their opportunity to outline what their party’s platform is, what they feel are the important issues of the day, and how they intend to pursue those issues. Finally, I chose presidential debates because political discourse in this context is more spontaneous. According to the Commission on Presidential Debates (2017), a non-partisan entity that has organized presidential debates in the United States since 1988, political debates are carefully prepared and organized.
    [Show full text]
  • Indian False Flag Operations
    Center for Global & Strategic Studies Islamabad INDIAN FALSE FLAG OPERATIONS By Mr. Tauqir – Member Advisory Board CGSS Terminology and Genealogy The term false flag has been used symbolically and it denotes the purposeful misrepresentation of an actor’s objectives or associations. The lineage of this term is drawn from maritime affairs where ships raise a false flag to disguise themselves and hide their original identity and intent. In this milieu, the false flag was usually used by pirates to conceal themselves as civilian or merchant ships and to prevent their targets from escaping away or to stall them while preparing for a battle. In other cases, false flags of ships were raised to blame the attack on someone else. A false flag operation can be defined as follows: “A covert operation designed to deceive; the deception creates the appearance of a particular party, group, or nation being responsible for some activity, disguising the actual source of responsibility.” These operations are purposefully carried out to deceive public about the culprits and perpetrators. This phenomenon has become a normal practice in recent years as rulers often opt for this approach to justify their actions. It is also used for fabrication and fraudulently accuse or allege in order to rationalize the aggression. Similarly, it is a tool of coercion which is often used to provoke or justify a war against adversaries. In addition, false flag operations could be a single event or a series of deceptive incidents materializing a long-term strategy. A primary modern case of such operations was accusation on Iraqi President Saddam Hussain for possessing weapons of mass-destruction ‘WMD’, which were not found after NATO forces, waged a war on Iraq.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Watches the Watchmen? the Conflict Between National Security and Freedom of the Press
    WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN WATCHES WHO WHO WATCHES THE WATCHMEN WATCHES WHO I see powerful echoes of what I personally experienced as Director of NSA and CIA. I only wish I had access to this fully developed intellectual framework and the courses of action it suggests while still in government. —General Michael V. Hayden (retired) Former Director of the CIA Director of the NSA e problem of secrecy is double edged and places key institutions and values of our democracy into collision. On the one hand, our country operates under a broad consensus that secrecy is antithetical to democratic rule and can encourage a variety of political deformations. But the obvious pitfalls are not the end of the story. A long list of abuses notwithstanding, secrecy, like openness, remains an essential prerequisite of self-governance. Ross’s study is a welcome and timely addition to the small body of literature examining this important subject. —Gabriel Schoenfeld Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute Author of Necessary Secrets: National Security, the Media, and the Rule of Law (W.W. Norton, May 2010). ? ? The topic of unauthorized disclosures continues to receive significant attention at the highest levels of government. In his book, Mr. Ross does an excellent job identifying the categories of harm to the intelligence community associated NI PRESS ROSS GARY with these disclosures. A detailed framework for addressing the issue is also proposed. This book is a must read for those concerned about the implications of unauthorized disclosures to U.S. national security. —William A. Parquette Foreign Denial and Deception Committee National Intelligence Council Gary Ross has pulled together in this splendid book all the raw material needed to spark a fresh discussion between the government and the media on how to function under our unique system of government in this ever-evolving information-rich environment.
    [Show full text]
  • False Flag Operation
    WWW.TEHRANTIMES.COM I N T E R N A T I O N A L D A I L Y 8 Pages Price 50,000 Rials 1.00 EURO 4.00 AED 43rd year No.14006 Thursday AUGUST 5, 2021 Mordad 14, 1400 Dhul Hijjah 25, 1442 Raisi to be sworn in Tokyo 2020: Iran Energy Ministry unveils Imam Mosque: as Irani president weightlifter Davoudi water, electricity elegant, iconic, and today Page 2 snatches silver Page 3 training system Page 4 visually stunning Page 6 Iran: Reports of maritime incidents Western psywar for new adventurism The Iranian Armed Forces have de- coast of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). nounced recent contradictory reports Citing maritime security sources, the False flag operationSee page 3 of maritime incidents and hijacking in report identified the seized vessel as the the Sea of Oman as a Western “psycho- Panama-flagged asphalt/bitumen tanker logical warfare” meant to set the ground Asphalt Princess. for new adventurism. Meanwhile, The Times of London Brigadier General Abolfazl Shekarchi, newspaper quoted British sources as spokesman of the Armed Forces, made saying that they were “working on the the remarks on Tuesday, after Reuters assumption Iranian military or proxies claimed that “Iran-backed forces” were boarded” the Asphalt Princess. believed to have seized an oil tanker off the Continued on page 2 Loading, unloading of goods up 16% at Shahid Rajaee port TEHRAN- Loading and unloading of goods goes were loaded and unloaded at Shahid rose 16 percent at Shahid Rajaee port, Iran’s Rajaee port in the four-month period.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Cyberwarfare Lessons from the Russia-Georgia War
    Understanding Cyberwarfare Lessons from the Russia-Georgia War Sarah P. White March 20, 2018 Understanding Cyberwarfare: Lessons from the Russia-Georgia War Capt. Sarah P. “Sally” White is a cyberspace operations officer in the US Army. She is currently pursuing her PhD in the Harvard Department of Government, where her research interests include military innovation and comparative cyberspace doctrine. She has served in the 82nd Airborne Division and the 780th Military Intelligence Brigade (Cyber). Following graduate school, she will serve as an instructor in the West Point Department of Social Sciences. Understanding Cyberwarfare: Lessons from the Russia-Georgia War Cyberattacks had become an established tool attacks, with the highest levels of online of statecraft by the time they were used against activity coinciding with the Russian invasion of the Republic of Georgia in the summer of South Ossetia on August 8, 9, and 10.3 Even the 2008, albeit one without a legal framework and National Bank of Georgia had to suspend all 4 whose long-term implications remained poorly electronic services from August 8–19. While 1 understood. Nevertheless, the war between there is strong political and circumstantial Russia and Georgia that took place in August of evidence that the attacks were encouraged by that year was remarkable for its inclusion of a the Russian state, definitive technical series of large-scale, overt cyberspace attacks attribution—and thus definitive legal that were relatively well synchronized with culpability—have remained elusive. conventional military operations. Conducted The cyberattacks had little effect on by an army of patriotic citizen hackers, the conventional forces and were not decisive to 5 cyber campaign consisted of distributed denial the outcome of the conflict, but they of service (DDoS) attacks and website nevertheless offer significant lessons on the defacements that were similar in nature but character of modern warfare for scholars of different in method to what had occurred in conflict and military studies.
    [Show full text]
  • ATP 2-33.4 Intelligence Analysis
    ATP 2-33.4 Intelligence Analysis JANUARY 2020 DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This publication supersedes ATP 2-33.4, dated 18 August 2014. Headquarters, Department of the Army This publication is available at Army Knowledge Online (https://armypubs.army.mil), and the Central Army Registry site (https://atiam.train.army.mil/catalog/dashboard). *ATP 2-33.4 Army Techniques Publication Headquarters No. 2-33.4 Department of the Army Washington, DC, 10 January 2020 Intelligence Analysis Contents Page PREFACE............................................................................................................. vii INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... xi PART ONE FUNDAMENTALS Chapter 1 UNDERSTANDING INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS ............................................. 1-1 Intelligence Analysis Overview ........................................................................... 1-1 Conducting Intelligence Analysis ........................................................................ 1-5 Intelligence Analysis and Collection Management ............................................. 1-8 The All-Source Intelligence Architecture and Analysis Across the Echelons ..... 1-9 Intelligence Analysis During Large-Scale Ground Combat Operations ........... 1-11 Intelligence Analysis During the Army’s Other Strategic Roles ........................ 1-13 Chapter 2 THE INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS PROCESS ..................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Psychological Warfare and the “False
    Psychological Warfare and the “False Flag” Meme By James F. Tracy Region: Middle East & North Africa, USA Global Research, May 01, 2014 Theme: Media Disinformation, Terrorism False flag operations and assassinations are a central component of the elaborate psychological warfare campaign waged on the American public to justify the so-called “global war on terrorism,” and the events of September 11, 2001 are this project’s cornerstone. Major US news outlets turn a blind eye to a wide array of evidence “that Western covert operators were behind” events such as “Bali, Madrid, London 7/7, mosque bombings in Iraq and elsewhere and, of course, 9/11. Because the mainstream media are integral to the Industrial Military Academic Intelligence Media complex,” journalist Barrie Zwicker observes, “the cold-blooded technicians of death face no journalistic scrutiny. Without moral, legal, technical or financial constraints, the black operators range freely, executing the orders of the global oligarchies.”[1] An undeniable effect of the Boston Marathon bombing was that the term “false flag”—meaning a typically illegal act carried out by a government against itself that is often blamed on another entity to justify its own policies—became a recognizable expression among a broader swath of the American public. For example, web-based searches for the phrase spiked in the wake of the April 15 event after a correspondent for the alternative news site Infowars questioned Massachusetts Governor Duval Patrick on the suspicious circumstances surrounding the bombing.[2] Some news outlets predictably moved to condemn any cogitation along these lines as “conspiracy theorizing.”[3] In the United States the citizenry is especially well-indoctrinated through an overwhelming dependence on such corporate media.
    [Show full text]