War Propaganda. “Planting Stories” in the News Chain
This article was first published in January 2003, two
months before the invasion of Iraq. It was subsequently integrated into
my book entitled America’s “War on Terrorism”, Global Research 2005.
The buzzwords of media
disinformation at the time of writing were “Osama bin Laden” and
“Weapons of Mass Destruction”. The central buzzwords of war propaganda
have shifted since the “official death” of Osama bin Laden in 2011.
Today the media buzzwords are the Islamic State, ISIS, ISIL, jihad,
Islamic terrorists.
Michel Chossudovsky, May 23, 2015
Military planners in the Pentagon are acutely
aware of the central role of war propaganda. Waged from the Pentagon,
the State Department and the CIA, a fear and disinformation campaign
(FDC) has been launched. The blatant distortion of the truth and the
systematic manipulation of all sources of information is an integral
part of war planning. In the wake of 9/11, Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld created to the Office of Strategic Influence (OSI), or “Office
of Disinformation” as it was labeled by its critics:
“The Department of Defense said they needed to do this, and they were going to actually plant stories that were false in foreign countries — as an effort to influence public opinion across the world.1
And, all of a sudden, the OSI was formally disbanded following political pressures and “troublesome” media stories that “its purpose was to deliberately lie to advance American interests.”2 “Rumsfeld backed off and said this is embarrassing.”3
Yet despite this apparent about-turn, the Pentagon’s Orwellian
disinformation campaign remains functionally intact: “[T]he secretary of
defense is not being particularly candid here. Disinformation in military propaganda is
part of war.”4
part of war.”4
Rumsfeld later confirmed in a press interview that
while the OSI no longer exists in name, the “Office’s intended functions
are being carried out” 5 (Rumsfeld’s precise words can be consulted at http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/11/dod111802.html ).
A number of government agencies and intelligence
units –with links to the Pentagon– are involved in various components of
the propaganda campaign. Realities are turned upside down. Acts of war
are heralded as “humanitarian interventions” geared towards “regime
change” and “the restoration of democracy”. Military occupation and the
killing of civilians are presented as “peace-keeping”. The derogation of
civil liberties –in the context of the so-called “anti-terrorist
legislation”– is portrayed as a means to providing “domestic security”
and upholding civil liberties. And underlying these manipulated
realties, “Osama bin Laden” and “Weapons of Mass Destruction”
statements, which circulate profusely in the news chain, are upheld as
the basis for an understanding of World events.
In
the critical “planning stages” leading up to an invasion of Iraq, the
twisting of public opinion at home and around the World, is an integral
part of the War agenda, War propaganda is pursued at all stages:before, during the
military operation as well as in its cruel aftermath. War propaganda
serves to drown the real causes and consequences of war.
A few months after the OSI was disbanded amidst
controversy (February 2002), The New York Times confirmed that the
disinformation campaign was running strong and that the Pentagon was:
“…considering issuing a secret directive to American military to conduct covert operations aimed at influencing public opinion and policymakers in friendly and neutral nations …The proposal has ignited a fierce battle throughout the Bush administration over whether the military should carry out secret propaganda missions in friendly nations like Germany… The fight, one Pentagon official said, is over ‘the strategic communications for our nation, the message we want to send for long-term influence, and how we do it….’We have the assets and the capabilities and the training to go into friendly and neutral nations to influence public opinion. We could do it and get away with it. That doesn’t mean we should.’6
Fabricating the Truth
To sustain the war agenda, these “fabricated
realities”, funneled on a day to day basis into the news chain must
become indelible truths, which form part of a broad political and media
consensus. In this regard, the corporate media –although acting
independently of the military-intelligence apparatus, is an instrument
of this evolving totalitarian system.
In close liaison with the Pentagon and the CIA, the
State Department has also set up its own “soft-sell” (civilian)
propaganda unit, headed by Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy
and Public Affairs Charlotte Beers, a powerful figure in the advertising
industry. Working in liaison with the Pentagon, Beers was appointed to
head the State Department’s propaganda unit in the immediate wake of
9/11. Her mandate is “to counteract anti-Americanism abroad.”7 Her
office at the State department is to:
“ensure that public diplomacy (engaging, informing, and influencing key international audiences) is practiced in harmony with public affairs (outreach to Americans) and traditional diplomacy to advance U.S. interests and security and to provide the moral basis for U.S. leadership in the world.” (http://www.state.gov/r/ )
The Role of the CIA
The most powerful component of the Fear and
Disinformation Campaign (FDI) rests with the CIA, which, secretly
subsidizes authors, journalists and media critics, through a web of
private foundations and CIA sponsored front organizations. The CIA also
influences the scope and direction of many Hollywood productions. Since
9/11, one third of Hollywood productions are war movies. “Hollywood
stars and scriptwriters are rushing to bolster the new message of
patriotism, conferring with the CIA and brainstorming with the military
about possible real-life terrorist attacks.”8 “The Sum of All Fears”
directed by Phil Alden Robinson, which depicts the scenario of a nuclear
war, received the endorsement and support of both the Pentagon and the
CIA.9
Disinformation is routinely “planted” by CIA
operatives in the newsroom of major dailies, magazines and TV channels.
Outside public relations firms are often used to create “fake stories”
Carefully documented by Chaim Kupferberg in relation to the events of
September 11: “A relatively few well-connected correspondents provide
the scoops, that get the coverage in the relatively few mainstream news
sources, where the parameters of debate are set and the “official
reality” is consecrated for the bottom feeders in the news chain.”10
Covert disinformation initiatives under CIA auspices
are also funneled through various intelligence proxies in other
countries. Since 9/11, they have resulted in the day-to-day
dissemination of false information concerning alleged “terrorist
attacks”. In virtually all of the reported cases (Britain, France,
Indonesia, India, Philippines, etc.) the « alleged terrorist groups» are
said to have «links to Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda», without of course
acknowledging the fact (amply documented by intelligence reports and
official documents) that Al Qaeda is a creation of CIA.
The Doctrine of “Self Defense”
At this critical juncture, in the month(s) leading up
to the announced invasion of Iraq, the propaganda campaign is geared
towards sustaining the illusion that “America is under attack”. Relayed
not only through the mainstream media but also through a number of
alternative internet media sites, these “fabricated realities” portray
the war as a bona fide act of self-defense, while carefully concealing
the broad strategic and economic objectives of the war.
In turn, the propaganda campaign develops a casus belli,
“a justification”, a political legitimacy for waging war. The “official
reality” (conveyed profusely in George W’s speeches) rests on the broad
“humanitarian” premise of a so-called “preemptive”, namely “defensive
war”, “a war to protect freedom”:
« We’re under attack because we love freedom… And as long as we love freedom and love liberty and value every human life, they’re going to try to hurt us.» 11
Spelled out in the National Security Strategy (NSS),
the preemptive “defensive war” doctrine and the “war on terrorism”
against Al Qaeda constitute the two essential building blocks of the
Pentagon’s propaganda campaign. The objective is to present “preemptive
military action” –meaning war as an act of “self-defense” against two
categories of enemies, “rogue States” and “Islamic terrorists”:
“The war against terrorists of global reach is a global enterprise of uncertain duration. …America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed.…Rogue states and terrorists do not seek to attack us using conventional means. They know such attacks would fail. Instead, they rely on acts of terror and, potentially, the use of weapons of mass destruction (…)The targets of these attacks are our military forces and our civilian population, in direct violation of one of the principal norms of the law of warfare. As was demonstrated by the losses on September 11, 2001, mass civilian casualties is the specific objective of terrorists and these losses would be exponentially more severe if terrorists acquired and used weapons of mass destruction.The United States has long maintained the option of preemptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security. The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction— and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, (…). To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively.”12 (National Security Strategy, White House, 2002, http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html )
Feeding Disinformation into the News Chain
How is war propaganda carried out? Two sets of “eye
popping” “statements” emanating from a variety of sources (including
official National Security statements, media, Washington-based think
tanks, etc.) are fed on a daily basis into the news chain. Some of the
events (including news regarding presumed terrorists) are blatantly
fabricated by the intelligence agencies. These statements are supported
by simple and catchy “buzzwords”, which set the stage for fabricating
the news:
Buzzword no. 1. ”Osama bin Laden’s
Al Qaeda” (Osama) is behind most news stories regarding the “war on
terrorism” including “alleged”, “future” “presumed”, and “actual”
terrorist attacks. What is rarely mentioned is that this outside enemy
Al Qaeda is a CIA “intelligence asset”, used in covert operations.
Buzzword no. 2. The “Weapons of Mass
Destruction (WMD)” statement is used to justify the “pre-emptive war”
against the “State sponsors of terror”, –i.e. countries such as Iraq,
Iran and North Korea which allegedly possess WMD. Amply documented in
the case of Iraq, a large body of news on WMD and biological attacks,
are fabricated.
The “WMD” and “Osama bin Laden” statements become
part of day to day debate, embodied in routine conversations between
citizens. Repeated ad nauseam, they penetrate the inner consciousness of
ordinary people molding their individual perceptions on current events.
Through deception and manipulation, this shaping of the minds of entire
populations, sets the stage –under the façade of a functioning
democracy—for the installation of a de facto police State. Needless to
say, war propaganda weakens the antiwar movement.
In turn, the disinformation regarding alleged
“terrorist attacks” or “weapons of mass destruction” instils an
atmosphere of fear, which mobilizes unswerving patriotism and support
for the State, and its main political and military actors.
Repeated in virtually every national news report,
this stigmatic focus on WMD-Al Qaeda essentially serves as a dogma, to
blind people on the causes and consequences of America’s war of
conquest, while providing a simple, unquestioned and authoritative
justification for “self defense.”
More recently, both in speeches by President Bush and
Prime Minister Blair, as well as in the news, WMD statements are now
carefully blended into Osama statements. UK Defense Minister Jack Straw
warned in early January “that ‘rogue regimes’ such as Iraq were the most
likely source of WMD technology for groups like al-Qaeda.”13 Also, in
January, a presumed al Qaeda cell “with links to Iraq” was discovered in
Edinburgh, allegedly involved in the use of biological weapons against
people in the UK. The hidden agenda of “the links to Iraq” statement is
blatantly obvious. The objective is to discredit Iraq in the months
leading up to the war: the so-called “State sponsors of terror” are said
to support Osama bin Laden, Conversely, Osama is said to collaborate
with Iraq in the use of weapons of mass destruction.
In recent months, several thousand news reports have woven “WMD-Osama stories” of which a couple of excerpts are provided below:
“Skeptics will argue that the inconsistencies don’t prove the Iraqis have continued developing weapons of mass destruction. It also leaves Washington casting about for other damning material and charges, including the midweek claim, again unproved, that Islamic extremists affiliated with al-Qaeda took possession of a chemical weapon in Iraq last November or late October.”14
North Korea has admitted it lied about that and is
brazenly cranking up its nuclear program again. Iraq has almost
certainly lied about it, but won’t admit it. Meanwhile Al Qaeda,
although dispersed, remains a shadowy, threatening force, and along with
other terrorist groups, a potential recipient of the deadly weaponry
that could emerge from Iraq and North Korea.15
Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair listed Iraq,
North Korea, the Middle East and al-Qaeda among “difficult and
dangerous” problems Britain faced in the coming year.16
The WMD-Osama statements are used profusely by the
mainstream media. In the wake of 9/11, these stylized statements have
also become an integral part of day to day political discourse. They
have also permeated the workings of international diplomacy and the
functioning of the United Nations.
Notes
1. Interview with Steve Adubato, Fox News, 26 December 2002.
2. Air Force Magazine, January 2003, italics added..
3. Adubato, op. cit. italics added
4. Ibid, italics added.
5. Quoted in Federation of American Scientists (FAS) Secrecy News, http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/2002/11/112702.html , Rumsfeld’s press interview can be consulted at:
6. New York Times, 16 December 2002.
7. Sunday Times, London 5 January 2003.
8. Ros Davidson, Stars earn their Stripes, The Sunday Herald (Scotland), 11 November 2001).
9. See Samuel Blumenfeld, Le Pentagone et la CIA enrôlent Hollywood, Le Monde, 24 July 2002, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BLU207A.html .
10. Chaim Kupferberg, The Propaganda Preparation for 9/11, Global Outlook, No. 3, 2003, p. 19, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP206A.html .
11.
Remarks by President Bush in Trenton, New Jersey, «Welcome Army
National Guard Aviation Support Facility, Trenton, New Jersey », 23
September 2002.
12. National Security Strategy, White House, 2002, http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html
13. Agence France Presse (AFP), 7 January 2003.
14. Insight on the News, 20 January 2003.
15. Christian Science Monitor, 8 January 2003
16. Agence France Presse (AFP), 1 January 2003
America’s “War on Terrorism”
Michel Chossudovsky
ORDER DIRECTLY FROM GLOBAL RESEARCH$17.00
According to Chossudovsky,
the “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion
that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American
intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest.
Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by
Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.
September 11, 2001 provides
a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington’s
agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to
facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within
America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.
No comments:
Post a Comment