Page Content (OCR)
John goes on to quote Colonel Richard Szafranski. His considerations for attacking include, "Every means by which an adversary arrives at knowledge or beliefs in that context." "Szafranski carries that argument to a logical conclusion, targeting every element in the epistemology of an adversary. This means attempting to undermine the organization, structure, methods, and validity of knowledge of that adversary. Deprived of valid information, a means to evaluate information properly, or a stable and reliable mechanism for decision-making places the adversary at great risk." John goes on to discuss manipulation of the media, how to do this properly without blowback. I have to ask, is this not exactly what has been going on ever sense the national security apparatus began using deception against its enemies. I believe it is a basic tenet of war that to the degree that the national security state uses deception against the enemy it also correspondingly attacks it's public body incurring a corresponding loss of confidence by the public. One could also state that, to the degree that the national security apparatus uses ethical means and tactics against the enemy’s unethical means and tactics there is a corresponding increase in confidence, trust and support from a better informed and secure public. Fanatical thinking just illustrates a very important point and that is in fighting evil with evil one unknowingly becomes evil oneself. John is an ultimate cold warrior and he reflects the thinking of the national security establishment elite that won the cold war through unethical means against a unethical adversary, thereby transferring the evil without into the evil within. The national security apparatus that was formed to fight the cold war in America is now the threat to true national security and stability everywhere. In fighting one beast with unethical means one has only created an even more powerful beast. Its all based on the lie that the end justifies the means. It's a lie because there is really no separation between past and future, the means and end are one. This is information warfare at its most sophisticated, how do such errors of logic and conception get into our minds? Christians personify the corruption and inversion of the truth as Satan's domain. Did a group of immortals or very long living space beings lose a space (heaven) battle to be confined to earth in underground bases (hell) to haunt mankind to the end times as Christians believe? Are these errors in logic something inherent in mankind or has mankind itself been under a info-war attack for thousands of years? Are people like John Alexander unwitting pawns believing they are doing good but in fact doing just the opposite. John is talking here about mind control. I wonder if it has ever crossed his mind that his own mind and the mind of the national security state itself is in fact conditioned and controlled by powers higher up the autocratic pyramid. Who really occupies the eye in the pyramid? So John, the question is, is there a better enlightened way to deal with a info-war adversary that uses destructive means against us. It's right there in the bible John, in the teachings of Christ. The way to defeat (reform)a unethical adversary is not to use unethical means but to use ethical means. This way one does not become the evil that one wars against! When an adversary uses a lie, then expose that lie with the truth. If one is deceived, then expose that deception. If the media is the weapon then disarm it through information warfare techniques of conceptualization and articulation of context projected into the media and Internet to reintroduce coherence rather than incoherence! 153