PENTAGON'S WAR ON THE WEB!

[Norsemaiden]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11901.htm

"The Pentagon has developed a comprehensive strategy for taking over the internet and controlling the free flow of information. The plan appears in a recently declassified document, 'The Information Operations Roadmap' which was provided under the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) and revealed in an article by the BBC."

BBC article "US plans to 'fight the net' revealed". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655196.stm

Also see article from The Sunday Herald http://www.sundayherald.com/54975
"Imagine a world where wars are fought over the internet; where TV broadcasts and newspaper reports are designed by the military to confuse the population; and where a foreign armed power can shut down your computer, phone, radio or TV at will." "In 2006 we are just about to enter such a world."

 

[Norsemaiden]

I am so please that this thread posted! Because there is a paragraph I wanted to post and it keeps telling me that either I am forbidden from accessing this forum or simply sticking and not posting. I would like others to try and post this paragraph to see what happens when they do. I will have to put it in some kind of code for you to do this. I will try writing the paragraph in reverse and backwards with an irrelevant word (sock)between each word that should be in the paragraph.

 

[Alwin]

you can send it to my email addy and I'll try

 

[Norsemaiden]

evitarransockslaiciffosockseht socksretnuocsock yamsocktahtsockbewsock ehtsocknosocksraeppasock thtsocknoitamrofnisockfosock tibtotsockynasock egnellahcsockotsocksi sockevitcejbosockeht sockyratnemmocsocklarotidesock otsocksetisbewsocktsitfelsock morfsock smoorsocktahcsockot socksgolbsock morfsocktenretnisockeht sockfosockaerasockyrevesockotnisockflestisock tresnisockotsockgninnalp socksisocktpedsockrawsockehtsock

 

[Norsemaiden]

you can send it to my email addy and I'll try

Thanks for the offer, but this is all getting me a bit paranoid so could you just try and decipher the code. I tried to post it again with the message that I'm forbidden.

 

[Alwin]

yes it is strange - I deciphered the message and tried to post it, but got the same "forbidden" screen

 

[Norsemaiden]

yes it is strange - I deciphered the message and tried to post it, but got the same "forbidden" screen

How obvious does the Pentagon want to be?!

 

[zengaja]

Well thats interesting. you can post the paragraph if you take away the word "itself". posting the word alone is also possible. only when it is in a certain context i get the "no permission" screen. Weird
Not shure, why one would censor such a word. its an interesting bug though

"the war dept is planning to insertitselfinto every area of the internet form blogs to chat rooms form leftist websites
to editoral commentary the objective is to challenge any totbit information that appears on the web that may counter the official
narrative"

 

[Norsemaiden]

Look, get of your god damn drugs and remove your tinfoil hats. This is a known bug with the forum software. Some non-printable control characters (I reckon) in some text will cause the posting mechanism to fail. Paste it to a PLAIN TEXT editor and then re-paste it into the box and it might work better.

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4631038&postcount=2

What do you mean by "non-printable control characters"? I hope you are right that is all that was causing the problem!

Message to CIA: there is no reason to think I am a dangerous dissident. I only observe what anyone with a little curiosity about current affairs can easily find out on the web.

The main point of this thread is not the reason why I can't post that paragraph. This is much more than your average so called "conspiracy theory". It is an established fact that the pentagon have these plans. The BBC don't just come up with these reports out of thin air.

 

[infoterror]

What do you mean by "non-printable control characters"?

Characters on the computer are numbers; normal US-English letters are under 128, but then there's a number of expanded alphabets and "control characters" which don't print out but have special meanings. These cause problems in translation.

This sort of issue is very, very old. I remember in 1984 a sysop forgot to disable the MCI control codes on his forum software, including the key for "print"... he was probably dismayed when he came home to several hundred pages of printed out crap on his floor -- the sessions of every user after the one who hit the control character.

Of course, it was easy to find out who it was...

 

[Anvil]

Anyways back on topic, no matter how much the US tries to 'take over' the Internet, it won't happen. If they were to take over the internet, another internet would spawn. And as for being capable to destroy any form of electronic software, such technology does not exist.

 

[Norsemaiden]

Anyways back on topic, no matter how much the US tries to 'take over' the Internet, it won't happen. If they were to take over the internet, another internet would spawn. And as for being capable to destroy any form of electronic software, such technology does not exist.

So what are we to make of this "Information Operations Roadmap" written by Ronald Rumsfeld and company? They are talking about new technology and it sounds (although this is not mentioned in the articles) as if this technology, if perfected, could also interfere with things like aircraft navigation and set off nuclear weapons in other countries or cause nuclear "accidents" by sending interfering signals to nuclear power stations. This would really cause an international crisis.

There is obviously an intention to censor freedom of information in the ways described, as the document exists. This is going to make the US government even more unpopular than ever, both internationally and in the US itself.

 

[Horus]

I wouldn't call it an attempt to censor society, so much as a mission to control public opinion, by controling the media. This Operation is the most unconstitutional thing I've ever seen in my entire life! But hey, what the hell kind of power does the U.S. Constitution have in this day and age? This whole thing with Rupert Murdoch is a way of redefining freedom of speech, as "You can say whatever you want, as long as you say what I tel you to say." Thats what I make of this whole thing. I'd probably be removed from my 2 forums (UM and Kamelot) because they involve contact outside of the United States. For all I know, the government could've been reading this post 5 minutes before I ever even wrote it. Thats how good they are with monitoring. "Big Brother is watching you."

Also, the U.S. Government is already unpopular, since Bush entered office 5 years ago. Since then, so much shit has happened. But I think this is all a result of the fucking Patriot Act. Every time I make a statement about the Patriot Act, people always say to me "But the government doesn't want to make the same mistake they made on September 11th." Fuck that. The internet serves only 2 purposes: Worldwide Communication and free pornography, only one of which I enjoy o its extent. This "Internet 2" as Norsemaiden said in the "Myspace Trojan Horse" thread is yet another way of saying to Americans "Talk to yourselves, but nobody else." It's things like this that make me feel ashamed to be an American.

In conclusion, we have 3 simple Math Equations:

1. Americans + Non-Americans + Communication + Technology + First Amendment + Free Pornography = Internet 1 = Happy

2. Rupert Murdoch + CIA + Communication + Americans + Technology - Non-Americans - Freedom = Internet 2 = WTF??

3. Internet 1 > Internet 2

 

[Hubster]

I don't know if it's possible to become even less popular than they already are! Many of America's citizens hate the Bush Administration, and consider Donny to be the most evil one in the Administration.

The Operations Roadmap could be a little over exaggerated, but I don't doubt that the US would think of doing something like that.

Their apparent "War on Terror" is their cash cow - it's like a long running American sitcom and they need to keep it going in order to keep their citizens under control.

Seriously - at work we have cable, and during business hours we are only allowed to have the news on as business clients visit our centre. Sometimes for days running, CNN is on, and I swear, every day, there is a segment on War On Terror

Thus, I'd say the Operations Roadmap is simply a script for an "offshoot series".

 

[Horus]

I'm surprised the C.I.A. hasn't "taken us on vacation" yet, for being so honest about our opinions on this matter.... Does this make us terrorists? roflmao

 

[Silver Incubus]

911 was an obvious set up. They wanted more control of the american people. If they tried to pass the patriot act without 911 it would never have gotten through. If you create the problem, you can then offer the solution, less freedom for security. Then the people demand security from the 'terrorists' and they passed the patriot act.

Most people have been manipulated into believing it was terrorist because every news station kept repeating terror, terrorist, bin laden. At a certian point it sinks deep into the pulbic opinion as the truth even though there is no evidence of any of the evidence they claim. Does anyone else find it odd that bin laden never looked the same in any of the videos when compared to actual photographs of him, and the fact that those videos were found in some guy's house?

 

[Norsemaiden]

Yes, there is no doubt that the "war on terror" is being used as an excuse to take away freedoms from the public. There was even a documentary series on UK television and a book from the series all about this, so it is not a fringe opinion.

I still don't understand why the normal English alphabet, using no unusual keys, and including in the paragraph the word "itself" gets the post rejected, only when the word is in that particular context. It still seems plausible that an attempt to censor could be made by having a computer programme look for that series of letters. It might also alert the CIA to who has quoted it and where or how often. It doesn't sound far fetched that they could write such a programme. It reminds me that there has long been alleged to be a method of processing all phone calls that looks out for key trigger words ("bomb" for eg. or the name of a controversial party/person) and then monitors what is being said. This sounds more difficult than the former idea of intercepting certain combinations of letters when they are posted on the net. There is a lot more monitoring of phone calls than most people realise, but that they still have to choose which individual or phone to monitor.

 

[Anvil]

They are talking about new technology and it sounds (although this is not mentioned in the articles) as if this technology, if perfected, could also interfere with things like aircraft navigation and set off nuclear weapons in other countries or cause nuclear "accidents" by sending interfering signals to nuclear power stations.

You assume too much. Don't read so much into things like that.

And like said by someone earlier, take off your tin-foil hat. Give me ONE good reason why the word, "itself" would be censored. You're a scared American, like the lot of 'em.

(If I seem to be an ass here, Its probably because I've worked 10 hours overtime in the last week... But I still loosely mean what I'm saying, just taking it out on people.)

 

[Norsemaiden]

You assume too much. Don't read so much into things like that.

And like said by someone earlier, take off your tin-foil hat. Give me ONE good reason why the word, "itself" would be censored. You're a scared American, like the lot of 'em.

(If I seem to be an ass here, Its probably because I've worked 10 hours overtime in the last week... But I still loosely mean what I'm saying, just taking it out on people.)

I'm an outraged Brit. I was speculating on how the pentagon might censor so many websites as they have avowed to do starting from this year. It would take up a lot of manpower to have someone track down every post they didn't like, so some sort of automation would be necessary. This would rely on recognising certain words in certain contexts. That is logical.

Do you really think that the BBC is in the habit of pushing wacky conspiracy theories? Do you think it is a lie that the document exists and is being acted on? Do you think that it is best for us to consider ourselves helpless and just swallow any government propaganda without daring to question it or wonder what the purpose of it could be? As a psychologist I would say that this sort of revelation will cause stress for the reason that it bursts the bubble that people like to feel safe in. It shows that action may be needed to be taken which people feel irritated by. They don't want life to be so complicated, with so many demands. They would rather pretend it isn't happening. Blame the messenger.

 

[Norsemaiden]

Just to make sure that the main relevant points are on this thread:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655196.stm
"Information Operations Roadmap". "When it describes plans for electronic warfare, or EW, the document takes on an extraordinary tone. It seems to see the internet as being equivalent to an enemy weapons system."

The document says "Strategy should be based on the premise that the Department will 'fight the net' as it would an enemy weapons system."

"The slogan 'fight the net' appears several times throughout the roadmap."

(We must bear in mind that there is also the fear of the US being attacked itself).

"And in a grand finale, the document recommends that the United States should seek the ability to 'provide maximum control of the entire electromagnetic spectrum'."

"Consider that for a moment.

The US military seeks the capability to knock out every telephone, every networked computer, every radar system on the planet.

Are these the pipe dreams of self-aggrandising bureaucrats? Or are they real?

The fact that the 'Information Operations Roadmap' is approved by the Secretary of Defense suggests that these plans are taken very seriously indeed in the Pentagon."

You can read the document here http://news.bbc.c.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/27_01_06_psyops.pdf
On page 64 "Investment in EW may provide alternative options for protecting and attacking potential targets by costly or unsuitable kinetic capabilities. Examples include the non-kinetic disruption of WMD facilities and disabling/disruption of missiles prior to launch."

Quote from a speech by Emmet Paige Jr., assistant secretary of defense for command, control, communications and intelligence July 1996: "Well over a decade ago, a Soviet general reportedly said something like 'to prevail in the next conflict, one must control the electromagnetic spectrum'.

That statement proved true in the Bacca Valley and on deserts in Iraq. The Department of Defense is committed to ensuring that 'in the next conflict' it is we who will control the spectrum." http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/1996/s19960710-paige.html