Forum

profile |  register |  members |  groups |  faq |  search  login

How emotional shock cripples critical thinking

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Media Lens Forum Index -> off-topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
marc



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 491

Post Post subject: How emotional shock cripples critical thinking Reply with quote

** Shock & Awe is part of US military doctrine, developed out of the National Defense University, USA.

Shock and Awe, Manhattan 2001:

Extracts from "Shock and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance" by Harlan K Ullman:

[i]Shock and Awe = use of visually impressive military son et lumiere firepower to gain rapid psychological dominion over cowed populations: 'Focused use of visually impressive firepower to gain rapid psychological dominion'; "spectacular displays of force".. "to paralyse perceptions" , "induce a state of helplessness" and "destroy the will". "Precise amount of tightly focused force to achieve maximum leverage" and "gain compliance and capitulation" 'within hours or days". "Renders opposition impotent" and "by extension, impresses wider world population". "Deception and disinformation" are part of the tactic and "both society and the military are targets".



Shock And Awe, Baghdad 2003:

"Spectacular display of power"; 'rapid dominion over public opinion'.
"Shock & Awe are actions that create fears, dangers, and destruction that are incomprehensible to the people at large." Fear-filled people lose critical thinking skills and are vulnerable to official, authoritative pronouncements. The military strategy of Shock & Awe is simple: Use displays of rapid, overwhelming dominance to demoralize and fast-track compliance.

[/i] - Shock and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance - Harlan K Ullman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Military Doctrine of Rapid Dominance: Shock & Awe
'A brilliant strategy that ensures capitulation through fear.'


Rapid Dominance (Harlan and Wade) is "a means to overload an adversary's perceptions and understanding of events" so that they capitulate, feeling "incapable of resistance at tactical and strategic levels... The effect is to induce a state of helplessness and lack of will. Selective denial of information and dissemination of disinformation is part of it. "




Shock and Awe: Much More Than Bombs - Chicago Tribune
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0303240208mar24,0,518453.story

Shock & Awe - SourceWatch
http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?title=Shock_and_awe

Casus Belli- Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casus_belli


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Homegrown Terror Threat “Manufactured”: NYU Study

October 11, 2011 ICH -- The threat of homegrown terror in America has been “manufactured” by entrapping Muslim men into crimes ... a recent study from the New York University School of Law has concluded.
The study, Targeted and Entrapped: Manufactuing the “Homegrown Terror Threat” in the United States, focuses on three recent convictions of Muslim-Americans who attempted to commit acts of terror on US soil. [...] The study, published by the law school’s Centre for Human Rights and Global Justice and the school’s International Human Rights Clinic, shows that government informants egged on the Muslims to try to commit the acts of terror.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29360.htm

911 Hijackers Lived With FBI Informant

CBS/Sept 2002 --- Two of the Sept. 11 hijackers who lived in San Diego in 2000 rented a room from a man who reportedly worked as an undercover FBI informant [...] Newsweek magazine reports that Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi lived with a "tested" undercover "asset" who had been working closely with the FBI office in San Diego.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/09/attack/main521223.shtml

Sting operations: Terrorists for the FBI
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/08/fbi-terrorist-informants

Maximising Psychological Impact
http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/analysis/psychology.html


Last edited by marc on Sat Nov 30, 2013 8:25 am; edited 6 times in total
Mon Nov 25, 2013 10:33 am
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marc



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 491

Post Post subject: Reply with quote

The Meaning of Shock-and-Awe

By Bernard Chazelle

REMEMBER the heady days of Shock-and-Awe? TV networks wheeled in their experts to tell us what a sweet show it was going to be. Every MSM outlet was giddy with anticipation.

I felt utter disgust.

The days of Shock-and-Awe will be remembered as the worst episode of the Bush era; worse than Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, rendition, Patriot Act, Katrina, etc.

It was when Americans became "Bush's Willing Executioners" and admitted it.

The phrase "Shock-and-Awe" is semantically indistinguishable from the word "terrorism." You could say "Fright-and-Terror" instead. Not quite as euphonic but essentially synonymous. Terrorists usually don't refer to themselves by that name. With Shock-and-Awe, Americans did precisely that.

The point of this post is not that attacking Iraq was bad (though it was); it is not that Shock-and-Awe was terrorism (though it was).

It is that Bush, for once, did not lie.

He asked us with utter clarity and no ambiguity whatsoever: do you want to be a terrorist?

And America said yes.

The question "Shall we do Shock-and-Awe?" does not mean "Do you want to avenge 9/11?" or "Do you want to liberate Iraqis?" or "Do you want to remove a WMD threat?" If it did, it would be phrased differently. There is no need to invoke terror for any of these purposes. But Shock-and-Awe explicitly appeals to the intention of terrorizing. "Do you want to do Shock-and-Awe?" means "Do you want to be a terrorist?"

For this one time, the US government told the truth and called its own terrorism by its name. America understood, and America cheered.

My point is not that Bush is bin Laden. By using the phrase "Shock-and-Awe" Bush was asking us: "Hey, I am going to be a terrorist in Iraq. Do you want to be a terrorist, too?" And Americans, by a huge majority, said "Yes."

Please don't agree with me too quickly. In fact, do me a favoUr and dismiss this as hyperbole. But before you do so, please rebut the argument I will now make.

When you plan a bombing attack on a major city and you call it Shock-and-Awe, you quite clearly intend to cause horrendous fear in the population. That would be the standard interpretation of anyone with minimum fluency in the English language: shock, awe, bombs. What else could it mean?

But perhaps the standard interpretation won't do. Shock-and-Awe was not coined by journalists or bloggers. It is a technical military term which might mean something entirely different. Perhaps it refers to a plan to terrorize only officers into surrendering while sparing civilians. If so, my point collapses. So let's check the facts.

Shock-and-Awe is explained in great detail in a 1996 book written by its two architects, Ullman and Wade. The authors explain in it that the goal is to control "means of communication, transportation, food production, water supply, and other aspects of infrastructure." The objective is to cause


'the threat and fear of action that may shut down all or part of the
adversary's society.'



One seeks to shut down, not the military infrastructure, but the adversary's society. Am I putting too much emphasis on just one unfortunate choice of words? Let's hear Ullman elaborate on the subject:

"You're sitting in Baghdad and all of a sudden you're the general
and 30 of your division headquarters have been wiped out. You also
take the city down. By that I mean you get rid of their power,
water. In 2,3,4,5 days they are physically, emotionally and
psychologically exhausted."


It's unambiguous. The goal is to use violence to inspire fear in a way that will shut down all or part of society. The objective is the same as that of 9/11: bring a society to its knees by using terror.

(The Ullman-Wade book even mentions Hiroshima approvingly as an example of Shock-and-Awe.)

Shock-and-awe is factually, conceptually, and morally equivalent to or worse than 9/11.

Factually: Iraq Body Count estimated the death toll at more than 6,000, which is twice 9/11.

Conceptually: The means are terrorism, ie, the goal is to achieve political ends through violence and fear against innocent people.

Morally: this was not self-defense or even retaliation; it was premeditated murder of thousands of innocent civilians (including many more children than on 9/11).

When you hear that "9/11 changed everything," make sure to ask: "Did Shock-and-Awe change everything?"

When people tell you Americans can't understand "Islamofascist terrorists," tell them that Americans, in fact, are uniquely qualified to understand bin Laden.

In March 2003, Americans were asked if they wanted to be terrorists. A large majority said "Yes." The word terrorism was already taken, so they went for the closest synonym they could find: Shock-and-Awe.

It's not anti-Americans and pacifists who called Americans terrorists. It is, in fact, Americans themselves. At least they were honest about it.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Comment by Chazelle:
"John Burns calls Shock and Awe an "air show." 9/11 was quite an air show, wasn't it? ... And yet, who's called 9/11 an air show? Ever?"
http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/002327.html
Mon Nov 25, 2013 4:32 pm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marc



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 491

Post Post subject: Reply with quote

Shock and Awe - Nothing New Under The Sun

Boss class shenanigans - Deception and Trickery.

The story of Lobengula, the Matabele chief who sat on gold-rich lands coveted by the Cecil J Rhodes' British Southern African Company (BSAC).

The British Empire was keen to get their hands on even more gold. They tried for years to cajole and pressurise the king of Matabeleland, Lobengula, to open his doors to 'business with Queen Victoria'. The Rudd Concession was a document pre-emptively prepared by Rhodes & Co ahead of time, waiting only for a definitive, catalysing event to facilitate the move. In the end, the BSAC went for deception and trickery. They staged a false flag (an ostensibly friendly, but Trojan Horse visit).

They made use of state-of-the-art high-tech weaponry (Maxim Machine Guns, never before seen in southern Africa) that shocked and awed old Lobengula and his men to such an extent they capitulated with immediate effect.

(BSAC company lost four men, Matabele suffered around 1,500 fatalities).

A new Company-run HQ and Green Zone was built atop the ruins of King Lobengula's former residence. The rest is history.

Maxim: The Shock of New Military Technology


Maxim Gun - a revolutionary new engine of terrible destruction which fired 770 shots a minute. British government was the first to recognise its merits and purchase from Maxim, Germany. Its rapid mechanism induced huge fear to Africans in the mid 19th C.
Thu Jan 09, 2014 8:32 pm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Media Lens Forum Index -> off-topic All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2005 phpBB Group
    printer friendly
eXTReMe Tracker