Newsgroup: it.politica.pds
Titolo: Come gli USA tentano di condizionare l'opinione pubblica

La propaganda di Donald H. Rumsfeld: Goebels in confronto era un
dilettante...
Si vuole pagare giornalisti stranieri per pubblicare notizie, anche
false.
Il fine è influenzare l'opinione pubblica in paesi alleati, come la
Germania.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/16/international/16MILI.html

> 
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/16/international/16MILI.html
Viene la masvchera di login...... come posso ritrovare la notizia senza
registrarmi?

 > 
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/16/international/16MILI.html

Per chi non risiede negli USA l'iscrizione è libera.
-- 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 Per chi non risiede negli USA l'iscrizione è libera.
OK, grazie.


Non succede niente di male se ci si registra, ad ogni modo ecco il
testo della prima pagina della notizia
Pentagon Debates Propaganda Push in Allied Nations
By THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT
ASHINGTON, Dec. 15 — The Defense Department is considering issuing a
secret directive to the American military to conduct covert operations
aimed at influencing public opinion and policy makers in friendly and
neutral countries, senior Pentagon and administration officials say.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has not yet decided on the
proposal, which has ignited a fierce battle throughout the Bush
administration over whether the military should carry out secret
propaganda missions in friendly nations like Germany, where many of
the Sept. 11 hijackers congregated, or Pakistan, still considered a
haven for Al Qaeda's militants.
Such a program, for example, could include efforts to discredit and
undermine the influence of mosques and religious schools that have
become breeding grounds for Islamic militancy and anti-Americanism
across the Middle East, Asia and Europe. It might even include setting
up schools with secret American financing to teach a moderate Islamic
position laced with sympathetic depictions of how the religion is
practiced in America, officials said.
Many administration officials agree that the government's broad
strategy to counter terrorism must include vigorous and creative
propaganda to change the negative view of America held in many
countries.
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."
As a military officer put 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."
It is not the first time that the debate over how the United States
should marshal its forces to win the hearts and minds of the world has
raised difficult and potentially embarrassing questions at the
Pentagon. A nonclandestine parallel effort at the State Department,
which refers to its role as public diplomacy, has not met with so much
resistance.
In February, Mr. Rumsfeld had to disband the Pentagon's Office of
Strategic Influence, ending a short-lived plan to provide news items,
and possibly false ones, to foreign journalists to influence public
sentiment abroad. Senior Pentagon officials say Mr. Rumsfeld is deeply
frustrated that the United States government has no coherent plan for
molding public opinion worldwide in favor of America in its global
campaign against terrorism and militancy.
Many administration officials agree that there is a role for the
military in carrying out what it calls information operations against
adversaries, especially before and during war, as well as routine
public relations work in friendly nations like Colombia, the
Philippines or Bosnia, whose governments have welcomed American
troops.
In hostile countries like Iraq, such missions are permitted under
policy and typically would include broadcasting from airborne radio
stations or dropping leaflets like those the military has printed to
undermine morale among Iraqi soldiers. In future wars, they might
include technical attacks to disable computer networks, both military
and civilian.
But the idea of ordering the military to take psychological aim at
allies has divided the Pentagon — with civilians and uniformed
officers on both sides of the debate.
Some are troubled by suggestions that the military might pay
journalists to write stories favorable to American policies or hire
outside contractors without obvious ties to the Pentagon to organize
rallies in support of American policies.
The current battlefield for these issues involves amendments to a
classified Department of Defense directive, titled "3600.1:
Information Operations," which would enshrine an overarching Pentagon
policy for years to come.
Current policy holds that aggressive information tactics are "to
affect adversary decision makers" — not those of friendly or even
neutral nations. But proposed revisions to the directive, as quoted by
senior officials, would not make adversaries the only targets for
carrying out military information operations — abbreviated as "I.O."
in the document, which is written in the dense jargon typical of
military doctrine.
Continued
1 | 2 | Next>>

 By THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT
OK, grazie, poi casomai mi registro (è che mi stava fatica....)
Ciao!