It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pentagon Propaganda Documents Go Online! But Will The Media Ever Report Them?

page: 2
39
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticOverlord
 


I'm downloading now. I'd say the best work-flow would be to convert these .pdf's in Photoshop to a format an OCR can use. It would be easy to create and action in PS and let the computer do the work. Then the hard part which would be comparing to correct the errors from the OCR and inserting the letterheads etc. in the documents to recreate the original. Then it could all be put together as one .pdf with an index and to advantage the search capabilities.

I have all the necessary software on all my computers. Let me know if you want any help with it. I have some free time Friday to Sunday.




posted on May, 8 2008 @ 02:09 PM
link   
I just realized that Acrobat Pro has a built in OCR, so no problem. I'm going to test a few pages and see how it does.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock



Anyone want to perhaps offer suggestions as to what the highlighted material means?

Suggestive....also, could someone perhaps go through this document to the part where Rumsfeld is discussing "Embedding"? I have no idea what that means and would like some help figuring that one out...2007 Rumsfeld Interview




And this is what I am talking about...documented source showing a General advising the media to discuss an out of context conflict (Syria) when referencing the War on Terror in terms of public presentation.

The military and media have lied. Period and end of story. Are we going to let it slide by?


The one where Rumsfeld mentions the word "expendable" sounds a whole lot like Rumsfeld was off the "mike" or microphone, meaning the the interviewer probably took notes, when Rumsfeld thought he wasn't being listened to. Great find by the way, DD.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Documents 6638-6672 Link

This is interesting...an exchange between Eric Ruff...



The Department of Defense announced that Eric Ruff assumed the duties of press secretary today in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs.

Press Release From May 2006

...advising someone to skirt a question. Seems quite nonchalant and cursory as well....as if standard operating procedure.

I wonder if there is a way to find out who he was advising? Seems that would be just as relevant, if not more so. Any ideas on how to go about that one?



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 06:00 PM
link   
This is a very interesting thread my friend!!
I'm in the process of downloading most of the pdf files right now.
If there is a specific thread covering analysis of these files,I'd be happy to take part.
Perhaps certain files can be allocated to those who are interested via U2U.
Starred and flagged!



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by citizen truth
This is a very interesting thread my friend!!
I'm in the process of downloading most of the pdf files right now.
If there is a specific thread covering analysis of these files,I'd be happy to take part.
Perhaps certain files can be allocated to those who are interested via U2U.
Starred and flagged!


You will definitely be kept in mind....


This is a very interesting thread indeed!



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by MemoryShock
 


Hey,thanks!
I enjoy sifting through data.I'm somewhat of a details junky.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I just downloaded every file as well

I don't think they can just pretend these don't exist.

Well, hope to keep an eye on this and see what people do... Anything I can offer, let me know. I can get domains, host whatever needs hosting, SEO, whatever



posted on May, 11 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Found another write-up today related to some of the documents...Some of this stuff seems like it is straight out of an Orwellian nightmare scenario...

How the "Military Analyst" Program "Controlled News Coverage"


So the Pentagon would maintain a team of "military analysts" who reliably "carry their water" -- yet who were presented as independent analysts by the television and cable networks. By feeding only those pro-Government sources key information and giving them access -- even before responding to the press -- only those handpicked analysts would be valuable to the networks, and that, in turn, would ensure that only pro-Government sources were heard from. Meanwhile, the "less reliably friendly" ones -- frozen out by the Pentagon -- would be "weeded out" by the networks. The pro-Government military analysts would do what they were told because the Pentagon was "their bread and butter." These Pentagon-controlled analysts were used by the networks not only to comment on military matters -- and to do so almost always unchallenged -- but also even to shape and mold the networks' coverage choices.


So in other words, very BLATANT brain-washing being carried out to help steer public opinion into their sickening views...


Even a casual review of the DoD's documents leaves no doubt that this is exactly how the program worked. The military analysts most commonly used by MSNBC, CNN, Fox, ABC, CBS and NBC routinely received instructions about what to say in their appearances from the Pentagon. As but one extreme though illustrative example, Dan Senor -- Fox News analyst and husband of CNN's Campbell Brown -- would literally ask Di Rita before his television appearances what he should say (7900, 7920-21), and submitted articles to him, such as one he wrote for The Weekly Standard about how great the war effort was going, and Di Rita would give him editing directions, which he obediently followed.


Full Article:
www.salon.com...



posted on May, 11 2008 @ 04:50 PM
link   
This belongs in this thread as well....while not media specific, it is a glaring example of international propaganda...



The famed dossier presented by British Prime Minister Tony Blair to his Parliament was plagiarized from two articles and a September 2002 research paper submitted by a graduate student. Worse, the Iraq described by the graduate student is not the Iraq of 2003 but the Iraq of 1991. So glaring was the theft of intellectual property that the official British document even cut and pasted whole verbatim segments of the research paper, including grammatical errors, and presented the findings as the result of intense work by British intelligence services.
Britain's Intelligence Dossier on Iraq was Plagiarized from a Grad Student

Edit to fix url tag

[edit on 11-5-2008 by MemoryShock]



posted on May, 12 2008 @ 07:56 PM
link   
intsead of using this website for everyone to research and put their words in for this, create your own website dedicated to bringing it down



posted on May, 12 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by onesockon
 


What do you mean?

We're already here and this is what this website is about....


Thanks for the reminder though...



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Think progress has dug up another doc exposing these dishonest crooks...It's unreal the shadiness and sneakiness of these liars...Here they're chosen folks with "vested interests" (to say the least) to speak up about supposed treatment of Gitmo detainees!



How The Pentagon Propaganda Machine Worked: ‘are you telling me to tell a lie???? surely not!


The Pentagon document dump on its propaganda program reveals this interesting insight as to how the Defense Department worked with conservative allies to manipulate the media.

In a Feb. 16, 2006 email exchange, Pentagon media staffers discussed coordinating with the Heritage Foundation to identify someone to speak about detainee treatment at Gitmo. An anonymous employee suggested retired Army Sergeant Major Steve Short because “he seems to be on message and very articulate.”


Full story:
thinkprogress.org...



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I posted that same document earlier on this page...they were a bit more thorough with it....Thanks for the link...



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MemoryShock
 


You rock man! Let's just keep adding to this as we see new ones uncovered! I can't believe how crooked these bastards are!




posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Thank you for posting this, DD! There is huge potential with this information. Lets hope we can make something of it!


Originally posted by MemoryShock
So here we are...with an oppurtunity to take advantage of the huge member resource we have and just released proof of the DoD actively conspiring on how to best present information to the public in an effort to gain public support, if not just dissuade popular derision.


Count me in! This is too good to pass up. This is fresh information and we have the chance to make something of it, not only before anyone else, but for our own benefit and the benefit of those we inform of what we learn.

I have downloaded all of the .pdf's as well, except for a few that are being stubborn for some reason. These are the ones I'm having trouble with:

28 Dec 07 E-mail Release (Barstow)
Tara Jones E-mails 200-699
Tara Jones E-mails 700-1199
Tara Jones E-mails 1200-1700

I'll keep trying, but as long as someone else has them, its not a big deal.

For everyone else, lets make something of this. We spend hours bickering about topics that have long since come and gone, and a lot of times, topics we have long since already bickered about! Why not dedicate those hours to learning and constructing this wealth of information to benefit ATS members as well as our friends and family whom we could educate?

We may not have the reach of mainstream media, but with 140,000 members, and thousands more guests, if each of us informed even 10 people in our lives about what is going on with our government, that is nearly 1.5 MILLION people! Then what if they told people they knew?

There are 140,000+ of us, all with an interest in assuring peace and freedom in our various parts of the world, all with an interest in seeing criminals put to justice, all with our own unique perspectives, motivations and talents, and all with our own individuals drives that brought us to ATS in the first place. Why not pool those resources and make something of this information?

These people can commit these crimes and oppress us all they want, but they can't kill a thought or an idea. No one can. Our ideas and our methods of putting this information to good use just may change something for the better. It would be a shame to waste the opportunity, and waste such a valuable resource like the Internet, and ATS especially, and sit on our asses, complaining, but not doing.

As I said, count me in!



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Come on, people. Lets get some more volunteers! This is too important to let slip away.

This post is really just to bump the topic up.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Right on...


What if we were to to start a Thread in the Research Forum?

This way, we can accumulate sourcing and background data for the named names and as well give each document it's own look. It would take an insane amount of time, but perhaps the gems we find in the onset will serve as motivation and as well, perhaps, spur others to join.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
What if we were to to start a Thread in the Research Forum?


That will work. It would also be best because this thread can just be used for commentary about the news article, and that thread could have the research project as the central focus.

I'd make the thread but I'm not a scholar. If someone else could do it and post the link here, that would be great!



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join