![]() ![]() Army published “ Field Manual 100-6 ,” which spoke of “an expanding information domain termed the Global Information Environment” that contains “information processes and systems that are beyond the direct influence of the military.” Military commanders needed to understand that “information dominance” in the “GIE” would henceforth be a crucial element for “operating effectively.” In 1996, just as the Internet was becoming part of daily life in America, the U.S. In this view, “spammy” ads, “junk” news, and the sharing of work from “ disinformation agents ” like Jones aren’t inevitable features of a free Internet, but sorties in a new form of conflict called “hybrid warfare.” While the civilian population only in recent years began haggling over “de-platforming” incidents involving figures like Alex Jones and Milo Yiannopoulos, government agencies had already long been advancing a new theory of international conflict, in which the informational landscape is more importantly understood as a battlefield than a forum for exchanging ideas. Now, however, we’ve unfortunately found cause to reconsider Eisenhower’s warning. ![]() After sixty-plus years, most of America – including most of the American left, which traditionally focused the most on this issue – has lost its fear that our arms industry might conquer democracy from within. This was the direst of warnings, but the address has tended in the popular press to be ignored. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes… Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. This “conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience,” he said, adding: Now it did, and this new sector, Eisenhower said, was building up around itself a cultural, financial, and political support system accruing enormous power. Until World War II, America had no permanent arms manufacturing industry. Kennedy, he warned the country it was now at the mercy of a power even he could not overcome. Nonetheless, as he prepared to vacate the Oval Office for handsome young John F. Eisenhower for eight years had been a popular president, whose appeal drew upon a reputation as a person of great personal fortitude, who’d guided the United States to victory in an existential fight for survival in World War II. Eisenhower gave one of the most consequential speeches in American history. Those who look closely will see something else: that the NSA, while stating that Tucker “has never been an intelligence target,” does not categorically deny having his electronic communications.On January 17, 1961, outgoing President and former Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. The press will run this as a wholesale denial, and many in America will agree. Here the NSA is using vague language is used to mislead the public. Or is it that the NSA will try to take Tucker’s show “off the air” Is it that the NSA “is planning to leak” Tucker’s communications? Is it that the NSA has been “monitoring electronic communications”? To this we ask a key question: which “allegation” is untrue? This is a carefully drafted denial by the NSA (likely coordinated by NSA leadership), as there are three separate “allegations” within Tucker’s quote. Tucker Carlson alleged that the National Security Agency has been “monitoring our electronic communications and is planning to leak them in an attempt to take this show off the air.” This allegation is untrue. Tonight, the NSA responded to Tucker Carlson’s allegations. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |