...more effective than diplomacy

I heard this story on NPR, Working In Shadows: Best U.S. Policy Toward Iran? At the heart of it was the debate of are covert actions better than declaring or entering a state of war? The story goes on to say that yes these covert actions are better, I find this interesting. It cites "involving cyberattacks, assassinations and bombings, and defections — has proved more effective than diplomacy." Now it really has my attention.

What I find really interesting about this article is why does it exist? A story of this nature most likely came from some people wanting to make an impression or change the way the public would view these types of activities - covert action against Iran. Then I came across this article: One Last Battle: Spinning Bin Laden's Legacy. This article was about "the work of telling the story of the operation in such a way as to advance U.S. interests." It was about "strategic communication: putting out news that furthers your cause." It used examples of how they released false information about bin Laden using a woman as a human shield. It later mentioned that "Propaganda and spin are generally seen as efforts to manipulate or even deceive people." In the same article it is talking about strategic communication and propaganda. Why not entitle the article, how to lie to the public. Keep in mind, this article is about how the news is reported.

It goes back to my earlier post regarding Osama bin Laden and not really feeling that I can trust what I read or see in the media. If you think about it, the PR agencies that are creating the positioning for these types of stories are experts. They have a very specific agenda that they are quantifying constantly. They are well funded with our tax dollars. It is no accident that the stories change, that the information is true, then false, then it is a mistake. There are resources looking at each response from the public and making decisions based on that to continue the positioning of the stories moving forward. Remember where I started on this - reading about how we can justify an assassination if it fits our cause/agenda. My observations are without contribution - I have multiple cars, I am buying all sorts of things that use oil in one form or another as part of my buying behaviors. For the most part, I do not pay attention or care about the majority of all of these types of things. Just every once in a while I am shocked to see stories like these. It is like the buzz in my brain is saying "hey zombie, pause ESPN, they are publicly testing to see if you are awake. If you can process anything outside of the NFL. They are mixing terms like diplomacy and assassination in foreign policy - do you care?" Then I say to myself, well there are no tanks in my neighborhood, gas is expensive but it is still a rounding error, and my life for the most part is really good. I am crazy? I checked all my friends on Facebook and they are not talking about any of this - it is mostly where they have been recently, what they have bought, and pictures of their families. Reminds me of the movie The Matrix - the perception of the my world looks pretty good, should I care that it is not real?