US Strategy of Chaos: Trump Card

U.S. Strategy of Chaos: Trump Card

Digest intro:
Much documented information in this issue is essential for understanding the current geopolitical situation and the crisis of US finance capitalism driving its desperate transition from liberal to openly fascist mode
to salvage its post WW2 global hegemonic order.
The Trump card ‘anti-establishment’, 'rogue' 'madman' act allows US white supremacy to break its liberal facade while making its standard american exceptionalist electoral parties look like 'anti-fascists'.
After the US conquered world domination via WW2 and established its "international community" of organizations from NATO to the UN, the WHO etc it started its non-stop "wars" to expand its 'empire' maintain and strengthen its hegemony. March 8, 1992 the New York Times 'paper of record', published it declared absolute world power, no "rivals or equivalents permitted" which was publishe Marrh 8, 1992 Pentagon
and periodThe "GWOT" bears \
USNATO Post WW2 counter-revolutionary OPERATION GLADIO again deployed in WW3 (aka ‘GWOT’), powered by US information war, Pentagon’s DARPA now HQ’d with its partners in Silicon Valley. The following stunning Brzezinski revelation of how long this strategic plan has been in the works.

digest note:Brzezinski’s ‘TECHNETRONIC’ in 1970 describes today’s last grasp for the post WW2 US world order
This unprecedented capitalist crisis has led to unprecedented degrees of desperation — and geopolitical chaos and world war to restructure the world and finance capital is old history. Every war capital wages, whatever it;s named, is against genuine revolutionary communism, its only existential.
What’s new now is the “Technetronic’ advantage. Redploying USNATO in high-tech GLADIO postWW2 ‘cold war’ counter intelligence operation ”to “defend against Soviet invasion”, and later in terror attacks against the rising labor struggle and communist movements in Europe and the USA..
Today AI intelligence is restructure the human mind: The massive:Obama Brain Initiative is part 2
of The Human Genome Project praised by Adolph Hitler in his autobiography Mein Kampf for its great gift, its eugenics program".

CIA helped terrorists to stop rise of communism in Italy
Philip Willan in Milan Sunday 25 March 2001 20.15 EST
US intelligence services instigated and abetted rightwing terrorism in Italy during the 1970s, alleged General Gianadelio Maletti, head of military counter-intelligence 1971 to 1975, last week at the trial of rightwing extremists charged with killing 16 people in the 1969 bombing of a Milan bank that inaugurated the "strategy of tension" bombings to shift the country's political centre of gravity to the right....
In a posthumous memoir published last year, the wartime resistance hero Count Edgardo Sogno wrote “when I visited the CIA to ask the station chief in Rome what the attitude of the American government would be, he answered what I already knew: the United States would support any initiative to keep communists out of government."

digest note: U.S. FALSE FLAG operations pretexts for aggressive state political, social, psychological and military intervention have been non-stop since 911 here in ‘the homeland’ and its post WW2 “order” For extensive coverage of these please use burbank digest search engine.

“General Sir Anthony Farrar-Hockley, former NATO commander-in-chief of in northern Europe said…a covert intelligence service was set up in Italy with the help of British agents and the CIA which also partly funded it. The Italian branch of the network was known as Operation Gladio.”
– Richard Norton Taylor, Guardian, 15/11/90 and 16/11/90

Digest note: After 911 green lighted the long-planned US world terror war — aka WW3 ---armed 24/7 “strategic communications/public diplomacy” {weaponized news} propaganda. Even world destroying chaos, terror and death, engineered by US terror armies (al qaeda, and its countless iterations, including ISIS), producing almost unimaginable destruction, displacement and depopulation, cannot salvage the post WW2 imperialist world order. Excerpts from US ‘corporate CIA’, Stratfor intelligence puts this US global national security agenda in context:

U.S. GEOPOLITICS: Part 1: The Inevitable Empire
The two world wars of the early 20th century constituted a watershed in human history for a number of reasons. For the United States the wars' effects can be summed up with this simple statement: They cleared away the competition.
Global history from 1500 to 1945 is a lengthy treatise of increasing contact and conflict among a series of great regional powers. Some of these powers achieved supra-regional empires, with the Spanish, French and English being the most obvious. Several regional powers — Austria, Germany, Ottoman Turkey and Japan — also succeeded in extending their writ over huge tracts of territory during parts of this period. And several secondary powers — the Netherlands, Poland, China and Portugal — had periods of relative strength. Yet the two world wars massively devastated all of these powers. No battles were fought in the mainland United States. Not a single American factory was ever bombed. Alone among the world's powers in 1945, the United States was not only functional but thriving.
The United States immediately set to work consolidating its newfound power, creating a global architecture to entrench its position...
Over the next few years the undisputed US naval supremacy allowed the Americans to impose changes In the international system.

The formation of NATO in 1949 placed all the surviving world naval assets under American strategic direction.
The inclusion of the UK, Italy, Iceland and Norway in NATO granted the US military basing rights it needed to utterly dominate the North Atlantic and the Mediterranean — the two bodies of water required for any theoretical European resurgence. The one meaningful European attempt to challenge the new reality — the Anglo-French Sinai campaign of 1956 — cemented the downfall of the European navies. Both London and Paris discovered they now lacked the power to hold naval policies independent of Washington.
The seizure of Japan's Pacific empire granted the Americans Pacific basing access sufficient for complete US naval dominance of the north and central portions of that ocean. A formal alliance with Australia and New Zealand extended American naval hegemony to the southern Pacific in 1951.
A 1952 security treaty placed a rehabilitated Japan — and its navy — firmly under the American security umbrella.
Shorn of both independent economic vitality at home and strong independent naval presences beyond their home waters, all the European empires quickly collapsed.
There is another secret to American success — both in controlling the oceans and taking advantage of European failures — that lies in an often-misunderstood economic structure called Bretton Woods. Even before World War II ended, the US had leveraged its position as the largest economy and military to convince all Western allies — most of whose governments were in exile at the time — to sign the Bretton Woods accords...thus committed to the formation of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to assist with the expected post-War reconstruction. Considering the general destitution of Western Europe, this, in essence, was a U.S. commitment to finance if not outright fund the reconstruction, thus the U.S. dollar was the obvious and only choice as the global currency.
But Bretton Woods ... deeper purpose lay in two other features often overlooked. The US would open its markets to participating states' exports not requiring reciprocal access for its own. In exchange, participating states would grant deference to the US security policy. NATO quickly emerged as the organization through which this was pursued....
By the mid-1950s, Bretton Woods had expanded to the defeated Axis powers as well as South Korea and Taiwan. It soon became the basis of the global trading network...soon transformed into the World Trade the US not only had fused economic and military agendas into a single robust system but also firmly established that US dominance of the seas and the global economic system would be in the interest of all major states with the exception of the Soviet Union.
Prevent any Potential Challengers from Rising
From a functional point of view the United States controls North America because it holds nearly all of the pieces that are worth holding. With the possible exception of Cuba or some select sections of southern Canada, the rest of the landmass is more trouble than it is worth. Additionally, the security relationship it has developed with Canada and Mexico means that neither poses an existential threat to American dominance. Any threat to the United States would have to come from beyond North America. And the only type of country that could possibly dislodge the United States would be another state whose power is also continental in scope....productive enough to support a power projection agenda and accessible enough to encourage integration into a larger whole
As of 2011, there are no such states in the international system. Neither are there any such powers whose rise is imminent. Most of the world is simply too geographically hostile to integration to pose significant threats. The presence of jungles, deserts and mountains and the lack of navigable rivers in Africa does more than make Africa capital poor; it also absolutely prevents unification, thus eliminating Africa as a potential seedbed for a mega-state. As for Australia, most of it is not habitable. It is essentially eight loosely connected cities spread around the edges of a largely arid landmass. Any claims to Australia being a "continental" power would be literal, not functional.

In fact, there are only two portions of the planet that could possibly generate a rival to the United States. One is South America...
The other part of the world that could produce a rival to the United States is Eurasia...a region of extremely varied geography, it is the most likely birthplace of an American competitor continental in scope. Geography, however, makes it extremely difficult for such a power (or a coalition of such powers) to arise. In fact, the southern sub-regions of Eurasia cannot contribute to such formation. The Ganges River Basin is the most agriculturally productive in the world, but the Ganges is not navigable. The combination of fertile lands and non-navigable waterways makes the region crushingly overpopulated and poor.
That leaves only the lands of northern Eurasia — Europe, the former Soviet Union and China — as candidates for an anti-American coalition of substance....Among the three northern Eurasian regions is the capital, labor and leadership required to forge a continental juggernaut. Unsurprisingly, Russian foreign policy for the better part of the past two centuries has been about dominating or allying with either China or major European powers to form precisely this sort of megapower.

And so the final imperative of the dominant power of North America is to ensure that this never happens — to keep Eurasia divided among as many different (preferably mutually hostile) powers as possible.

The United States does this in two ways. First, the US grants benefits to as many states as possible for not joining a system or alliance structure hostile to US power. Bretton Woods (as discussed above under the fourth imperative) is the economic side of this effort. With it the United States has largely blunted any desire on the part of South Korea, Japan and most of the European states from siding against the United States in any meaningful way.

The military side of this policy is equally important. The United States engages in bilateral military relationships in order to protect states that would normally be swallowed up by larger powers. NATO served this purpose against the Soviets, while within NATO the US has much closer cooperation with states such as the United Kingdom, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania, which feel too exposed to extra-NATO foes (most notably Russia) or even intra-NATO allies (most notably Germany).

The United States has similar favored relationships with a broad host of non-European states as well, each of which feels physically threatened by local powers. These non-European states include Pakistan (concerned about India), Taiwan (China), South Korea (North Korea, China and Japan), Mongolia (China and Russia), Thailand (China, Myanmar and Vietnam), Singapore (Malaysia and Indonesia), Indonesia (China), Australia (China and Indonesia), Georgia (Russia), the United Arab Emirates and Qatar (Saudi Arabia and Iran), Saudi Arabia (Iran), Israel (the entire Muslim world), Jordan (Israel, Syria and Iraq) and Kuwait (Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia).

The second broad strategy for keeping Eurasia divided is direct intervention via the United States expeditionary military.... With military dominance of the seas the United States has the ability to intervene anywhere on the planet. The repeated US interventions in Eurasia have been designed to establish or preserve a balance of power or, to put it bluntly, to prevent any process on Eurasia from resulting in a singular dominating power...The US
occupied Western Europe during the Cold War to prevent Russian dominance. Similarly, the primary rationale for involvement in Korea and Vietnam was to limit Russian power. Even the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq should be viewed in this light....

But engaging in such Eurasian interventions — whether World War II or the Iraq War — the United States finds itself at a significant disadvantage. Despite controlling some of the world's richest and most productive land, Americans account for a very small minority of the global population, roughly 5 percent, and at no time has more than a few percent of that population been in uniform (the record high was 8.6 percent during World War II). While an expeditionary military based on maritime transport allows the US to intervene nearly anywhere in the world in force in a relatively short time frame, the need to move troops across oceans means those troops will always be at the end of a very long supply chain and operating at a stark numerical disadvantage when they arrive.

This prods the United States to work with — ideally, through — its allies whenever possible, reserving US military force as a rarely used trump card. Note that in World Wars I and II the United States was not an early participant, only becoming involved three years into each conflict when it appeared one of the European powers would emerge victorious over the others and unify Europe under its control. Washington could not allow any country to emerge dominant. In the Cold War the United States maintained front-line forces in Western Europe and South Korea in case of hostilities, but only under the rubric of an alliance structure that placed its allies directly in harm's way, giving those allies as much — if not more — reason to stand against US foes. In many ways it enabled reapplication of the US strategy in the world wars: allowing both sides to exhaust each other, then join the conflict and collect the winnings with (by comparison) minimal casualties.

The strategy of using its allies as bulwarks has granted the United States such success that post-Cold War Washington has been able to reduce the possibility of regional hegemons emerging. Examples include the backing of the Kosovar Albanians and Bosniacs against Serbia in the 1990s Yugoslav wars and Operation Desert Storm in 1991. Ongoing efforts to hamstring Russia — Ukraine's 2004-2005 Orange Revolution, for example — should also be viewed in this light.

Next: The Geopolitics of the United States, Part 2: American Identity and the Threats of Tomorrow
Reprinting or republication of this report on websites is authorized by prominently displaying the following sentence, including the hyperlink to Stratfor, at the beginning or end of the report."The Geopolitics of the United States, Part 1: The Inevitable Empire is republished with permission of Stratfor."

NATO's Secret Armies: Operation GLADIO and Terrorism in Western Europe (Paperback) book cover)
By Ganser Daniele,
This fascinating new study shows how the CIA and the British secret service, in collaboration with the NATO military alliance and European military secret services, set up a network of clandestine anti-communist armies in Western Europe after World War II. These secret soldiers were trained on remote islands in the Mediterranean and in unorthodox warfare centres in England and the United States by the Green Berets and SAS Special Forces. The network was armed with explosives, machine guns, high-tech communication equipment hidden in underground bunkers and secret arms caches in forests and mountain meadows. In some countries the secret army linked up with right-wing terrorist in secret war engaged in political manipulation, harrassement of left wing parties, massacres, coup d'états and torture.
Codenamed 'Gladio' ('the sword'), the Italian secret army was exposed in 1990 by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti to the Italian Senate, whereupon the press spoke of "The best kept, and most damaging, political-military secret since World War II" (Observer, 18. November 1990) and observed "The story seems straight from the pages of a political thriller." (The Times, November 19, 1990).
Ever since, so-called NATO 'stay-behind' armies have been discovered in France, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Austria, Greece and Turkey. Internationally coordinated by the Pentagon and NATO with their last known 1990 meeting in the NATO-linked Allied Clandestine Committee (ACC), in Brussels

NATO's Ordinary Future By Robert D. Kaplan: "Even during the Cold War, NATO was wholly dominated by the U.S”
Allied Command Operations (ACO) is responsible for planning and execution of all Alliance operations. The Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR) assumes overall command of strategic level operations from NATO Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE}.
2015 GENERAL PHILIP BREEDLOVE, NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)

NATO Operation Allied Force - US Department of Defense Breedlove Assumes Command of NATO and U.S. Eucom Breedlove. Commands U.S. Air Forces in Europe, U.S. Air Forces Africa and Allied Air Command, ,and is Director of Joint Air Power Competence Center.

NATO's Core Function is to Advance US Global Interests and Foreign Policy Goals.
By Dr. Kate Hudson, former chair UK-based Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

U.S. Mission NATO...command structure reached 78 headquarters - National Defense University

US NATO Commando War in 120 Countries: August 04, 2011
The Postmodern Military: Armed Forces after the Cold War.
By Charles C. Moskos, John Allen Williams, David R. Segal, Oxford University Press

US-NATO link to Milan Bank Bombing

“Constant Conflict” Through a Glass Darkly
MAJOR RALPH PETERS, PARAMETERS US Army War College Quarterly Summer 1997, Vol. XXVII, No. 2
The next century will indeed be American, but it will also be troubled. We will find ourselves in constant conflict, much of it violent. There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing.” ( for bio and more)

"Army Special Operations Forces Unconventional Warfare"
U.S. Army Field Manual FM 3-05.130, September 30, 2008:
The unclassified manual has not been approved for public release. But a copy was obtained by FederationAmericanScientists (FAS) Secrecy News.
Unconventional warfare (UW) defined as "Operations conducted by, with, or through irregular forces in support of a resistance movement, an insurgency, or conventional military operations.. reflects two essential criteria: UW must be conducted by, with, or through surrogates; and such surrogates must be irregular forces." Thus, 1980s U.S. support of the Contras in Nicaragua constituted unconventional warfare, as did U.S. support of anti-Soviet mujahideen in Afghanistan in 1979-80s.
"The United States has considerable experience in conducting UW," the new manual observes. "The best known U.S. UW campaigns include OSS activities iEurope and the Pacific (1942-45), Philippines (1941-44), Guatemala (1950),Cuba (1960-61), North Vietnam (1964-72), South Vietnam (1967-72), Iraq (1991-96), Operation Enduring Freedom (2001-02), and Operation Iraqi Freedom(2002-03)."
The 248-page manual presents updated policy and doctrine governing unconventional warfare, examines its "three main component disciplines":special forces operations, psychological operations, and civil affair operations. Appendices include an historical survey of unconventional warfare as well as an extensive bibliography.

Hillary Clinton Freedom of the Internet
“The US is losing the global information war”, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared before a congressional committee to ask for extra funds to spread US propaganda through new media. “During the Cold War we did a great job getting America’s message out. After the Berlin Wall fell we said, ‘Okay, fine, enough of that, we are done,’ and unfortunately we are paying a big price for it. Our private media cannot fill that gap. We are in an information war and we are losing that war....

Excerpts from the Atlantic portrayal of high tech information weaponization.
The digest omits the Atlantic Council’s predictable cause and conclusion that the US, its major player, is the ultimate target!
To see why, and beyond, search burbank digest ‘information war’

War Goes Viral – How Social Media is Being Weaponized Across the World
In 1993 two Rand Corporation defense analysts began to think seriously about how conflict might be shaped by the nascent internet. In their groundbreaking article “Cyberwar Is Coming!,” scarcely two years after the first website was created, John Arquilla and David Ronfeldt predicted a future of military operations in which software code would be used as a means of attack... Just as militaries clash in cyberspace, they argued, entire societies would collide in a phenomenon they called “netwar.” In this sort of conflict, reality itself would be up for grabs. Netwar, they wrote, “means trying to disrupt, damage, or modify what a target population ‘knows’ or thinks it knows.” Information could be fashioned into a dangerous weapon.
Today, netwar is a daily reality...Thanks to social media, this same sort of propaganda effort can be conducted cheaply and almost invisibly. Even the most trivial sign of a political fissure—a few hundred angry users in an internet forum—represents a potential opportunity to sow discord and chaos in a rival nation....These questions already seem intractable, but what of something not seen since the internet came into existence: a war between great powers? Most of us did not associate Twitter with terrorism until the Islamic State stormed into Mosul. We have given similarly scant thought to what might happen if the wondrous tools of the 21st century are ever paired with the scale and intensity of the conflicts that defined the 20th...
With its user base of 1.7 billion, Facebook, for instance, can affect the tone and tenor of national debates with even tiny tweaks to the algorithms that govern its News Feed....Could the United States government, under great duress in some future conflict or catastrophe, censor or nationalize the social-media industry? Extreme as it may sound, there is ample [American] precedent
Social media has empowered ISIS recruiting, helping the group draw at least 30,000 foreign fighters, from some 100 countries, to the battlefields of Syria and Iraq. It has aided the seeding of new franchises in places ranging from Libya and Afghanistan to Nigeria and Bangladesh. It was the vehicle used to declare isis war on the United States...and inspired acts of terror on five continents....A study of 1,300 isis propaganda videos by Javier Lesaca, a visiting scholar at George Washington University’s School of Media and Public Affairs, found 20 percent directly inspired by Western entertainment: Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, American Sniper— ISIS that sprang from al-Qaeda in Iraq copies shots from a Clint Eastwood film about an American serviceman who won glory fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq. So intertwined are ISIS online propaganda and real-life operations one can hardly be separated from the other...J. M. Berger, a fellow with George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, counted as many as 40,000 tweets originating from the ISIS app in a single day... Islamic State’s careful audiovisual engineering hints at a future of war propaganda that will lean almost entirely on evocative and shareable images—everything from doctored photographs to video screenshots to infographics.ISIS militants discovered, as marketing experts have long known, that compelling imagery matters far more than accompanying text in determining whether or not something goes viral....
Islamic State’s online information war has unquestionably been effective. The past three years have seen a marked increase in local acts of terrorism “inspired”—but not directed—by IS and other entities...
According to Gallup public-opinion research, over the past two years, American fears of terrorism have risen to a height not seen since the aftermath of 9/11. Even when violence is isolated and sporadic, social media ensures that it is never far from people’s minds. That in turn encourages ugly stereotyping and harmful overreactions by citizens, media, and politicians. The result is a widening of divisions and the spread of anger and fear—an ecosystem in which isis thrives. Other extremist groups are already using elements of the Islamic State playbook to win converts and attention—and seem to be succeeding. A recent paper by J. M. Berger, the expert on extremism at George Washington University, tracked the coordinated use of social media by American white-nationalist groups, whose ranks on Twitter have increased by 600 percent since 2012....
Media reports saturated with news of the latest ISIS victory or atrocity, helprd fuel a sense of Islamic State momentum. There was no time to distinguish false stories from real the words of Jared Cohen, former State Department staffer, now director of Jigsaw (internal Google think tank it), it was “the first terrorist group to hold both physical and digital territory.”...

Google to help Syrian rebels bring down Assad regime, leaked Hillary Clinton emails
Subject: Syria
From: Jared Cohen [mailto Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 1:21 PM
To: Burns, William J; Sullivan, Jacob J; alec.ross
Deputy Secretary Burns, Jake, Alec,
Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool on Sunday that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from. Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition. Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria. I’ve attached a few visuals that show what the tool will look like. Please keep this very close hold and let me know if there is anything eke you think we need to account for or think about before we launch. We believe this can have an important impact.
Thanks, Jared

Sullivan forwarded the email to Clinton, “This is a pretty cool idea.” Clinton sent it to an assistant with instructions for the email to be printed.
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 06:20 PM To: H Subject: FVV: Syria FYI — this is a pretty cool idea.

CV: Jared Cohen
Before graduating college, Cohen pursued interests in government and in mass media. He was an intern at the U.S. State Department. In 2004, he was a miscellaneous member of the crew for one episode of a PBS Frontline documentary "Ghosts of Rwanda" on the 10-year anniversary of the Rwandan genocide.[13][16]
U.S. State Department
Following his internship and graduation, Cohen served as a member of the Secretary of State's Policy Planning Staff from 2006 to 2010. He was 24 years of age. His service began after his internship under former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice,[17] during the Bush Administration.
In her book No Higher Honor, Condoleezza Rice writes of Cohen:
“ When he [Stephen Krasner] came to the State Department, Steve brought together a terrific staff of 'young guns' to push new ideas. One of his most inspired appointments came in 2006, when he hired the twenty-something Jared Cohen, a student at Stanford who took a four-month sojourn on his own in Iran. He would use his position at Policy Planning to begin to integrate social media into our diplomatic tool kit. That would pay off handsomely some years later, when Twitter and Facebook became accelerants of democratic change in the Middle East.[18]

Jared Cohen, President of Jigsaw[1] (previously Google Ideas[2]), an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.[3] Previously a member of the Secretary of State's Policy Planning Staff and advisor to Condoleezza Rice and later Hillary Clinton.[4] ...stayed under Hillary Clinton later referenced in article entitled "Tweeting While Tehran Burns".[5]... focused on counter-terrorism, counter-radicalization, Middle East/South Asia, Internet freedom, and fostering opposition in repressive countries.[6] According to The New York Times Magazine right before his departure Cohen was an architect in 2010 "21st century statecraft" with Richard Boly and several foreign service officers in the Department of State's Office of eDiplomacy [7][8][9] In 2013, Cohen was named by Time Magazine as one of its 100 most influential people.[10]...
While on the Policy Planning Staff, Cohen became an advisor to Richard Holbrooke, the first Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. He took several trips with Holbrooke to Afghanistan, where he helped develop some early strategic communications strategies.[20]

Cohen left the State Department Policy Planning staff 2 September 2010.[22] 7 September 2010, he became adjunct senior fellow at The Council on Foreign Relations focused on counter-radicalization.[22] Hired as director of Google Ideas, a new branch within Google in mid-October 2010.[23]
Cohen and Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt co-authored The New Digital Age: Re-shaping the Future of People, Nations and Business,[24] a New York Times bestseller.[25] considers the geopolitical future when 5 billion additional people come online, and presumed terrorism, war, identity theft, conflict and altered relations between nations the authors say will result. The book grew out of an article, "The Digital Disruption",[26] published in Foreign Affairs magazine in November 2010. Cohen and Schmidt suggest technology will rewrite the relationship between states and their citizens in the 21st century.[27]

The Tangled Web of U.S. Internet Freedom
The U.S. State Department’s Internet Freedom agenda extends well beyond rhetoric to the provision of circumvention and other anti-censorship and digital security tools to Internet users around the world. This provision is hardly neutral: The State Department also provides training to foreign citizens in more repressive Internet environments, particularly to activists (over 7,500 undefined ‘activists’ had received such training as of March 2012), and works with American tech companies to leverage Internet tools for foreign policy goals. For example, it partners with Google, YouTube, Facebook, and others in funding the Alliance for Youth Movements (rebranded as, a networking group for youth activist groups. The U.S. State Department also sponsors “Tech Camps” that train activists and civil society groups in the use of online tools for organizing and protest. Given the multiplicity of ways the U.S. government utilizes the Internet in the service of foreign policy goals, the insistence that Internet Freedom policy as distinct and removed from the world of realpolitik is a deceit that precludes serious debate.

21st Century Statecraft: Meet The Private-Public Partnership Supporting #ArabSpring & #OccupyWallSt
Nearly a year ago, when the Tunisian uprising sparked the beginning of what would later be dubbed the Arab Spring, many in the Western World were transfixed by the seemingly spontaneous popular uprisings. However, what many have viewed as the impromptu uprisings of the oppressed appear to be more the result of a quietly-conducted campaign called 21st Century Statecraft that was birthed and nurtured by the U.S. State Department, some of America’s most well-known corporations, the U.S. labor movement and global Left.
Now, as the American Autumn unfolds, combined with the #OccupyTogether movement taking root in cities around the world, it appears the engineers behind Arab Spring are deploying their 21st Century Statecraft model in the United States.

Jared Cohen, still at Department of State emailed Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to delay scheduled maintenance to assist the aborted 2009 uprising in Iran.

CLINTON on Libya: " smart power at its best...”

CSIS Commission Report on Smart Power
November 6, 2007
America's image and influence are in decline around the world. To maintain a leading role in global affairs, the United States must move from eliciting fear and anger to inspiring optimism and hope.

We take misinformation seriously...We've been working on this problem for a long time..made significant progress, but there is more work to be done.”
— Mark Zuckerberg explains the steps that Facebook is taking to overcome its fake news issues...the social network is developing a number of different approaches, from easy reporting to third-party verification to ease the problem.

Mark Zuckerberg confesses
November 18 at 9:15pm
A lot of you have asked what we're doing about misinformation, so I wanted to give an update. The bottom line is: we take misinformation seriously. Our goal is to connect people with the stories they find most meaningful, and we know people want accurate information. We've been working on this problem for a long time and we take this responsibility seriously. We've made significant progress, but there is more work to be done....

21st Century Statecraft: Forging U.S. Digital Diplomacy
01/26/12 U.S. Department of State Deputy Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs for Digital Strategy, Victoria Eser
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has made 21st Century Statecraft, using digital networks to advance America’s interests around the world, a key part of our foreign policy approach. …As the secretary rightfully acknowledged, there are many other networks in the world, but the Internet is a network that magnifies all others — and we believe its users should be assured certain basic freedoms. The U.S. International Strategy for Cyberspace guided our efforts in this arena, affirming the United States’ commitment to work internationally to promote an open, interoperable, secure, and reliable information and communications infrastructure that supports international trade and commerce, strengthens international security, and fosters free expression and innovation.

Trump -- Clinton cozy past
Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton may some day be competitors, but the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates have enjoyed financial and personal ties over the years. Trump has given between $100,0001 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to the nonprofit's records. On four separate occasions, Trump donated to Hillary Clinton, in 2002, 2005, 2006 and in 2007 Trump also gave to Clinton's Senate campaign indirectly via a $125,000 donation from Trump to the Democratic Campaign Committee of New York. When asked about his donations to the Clinton Foundation, Trump replied "I give donations to hundreds of different groups and hundreds of different foundations,"
Bill and Hillary attended Trump's wedding to Melania Knauss in 2005. A photo shows the two couples arm in arm, laughing and gesturing. Trump and Hillary look especially cordial...Trump’s and Clinton's daughters, Ivanka and Chelsea, reportedly friends, are often seen together in New York City... Ivanka is vice president of her father's Business Empire, and Chelsea, is head of Clinton Foundation...

‘Democracy is the best shell for capitalism' Marx
'Fascism is capitalism in crisis’ Lenin