.

Secret Intelligence Service

Room No. 15

The Role of Imagination in Psychological Operations

.

The Owl is in Harrogate

.

COVERT WAR

.

Secret Intelligence Service

(C-I) (C-III) (C-V)

.

The Owl is acutely aware in both hostile and friendly environments, can understand everything, has coordination skills second to none, is determined and in clandestine manner engages all requisite offensive action skills. The Owl is the most beautiful, and the exemplary foe.

Very basically, a psychological operation is a planned, ‘culturally sensitive’ activity directed at a target audience so to influence behavior and attitude. Psychological operations will normally be truthful and attributable in order to achieve political and military objectives.

Deception involves incorporating deliberate measures so to manipulate the perceptions, emotions and so (ideally) to condition the behavior of an opponent, in order to achieve and exploit an advantage. The aim of deception is to persuade an opponent to adopt a course of action that disadvantages her/him.

.

Imagination is creative ability, resourcefulness, the ingredient of creative visualization, positive thinking and affirmation. Imagination is the act or power of forming mental (often idealized) images not present to the senses or never before wholly perceived in reality.

Imagination sustains human society in forward motion. Thereby, imagination is priceless.

(C-I)

.

So let’s work around this and say something different.We can fill in the blanks later.

The fundamental question is; to what extent do we understand who we are directing at (target/under scrutiny)? Given what is assumed, what exactly is the core constituent of that assuming?

Simply because what is defined as being the most favorable outcome from our point of view is going to be understood from a very unique set of constructs that we own and in whatever approximation to reason, the target does not.

You can imagine favorable outcomes as a mere blanket, unless incorporating much more.

This is obvious really and too general, but it leads in to a question I have no answer to, which is; (a group of questions, actually):

As I said, the delineation/simplification of a prospective task (whatever the task is), produces an envisaged outcome based upon the initial view/s formed. I mean, we begin with and end with our core constructs.

The initial goals are based upon the makeup of our own world view as I also said; but neither is it a collective world view. I refer not only to the multifaceted national character as it is perceived by us to be, but to practically all who, close and involved in operations, though they engage in a search for a consensus view (the understanding of a target audience), they never reach that stage.

There are implications for this, because often people go along with what they do not agree with.

Therefore a consensus process should root out the uncommitted.

Given that a target/s is rightly to be regarded as infinitely complex, infinitely deep, and thus, often altogether different than are we, in their (and our) entirety.

This is not to suggest that what is a desired outcome depends wholly on an understanding of the target’s deeper hidden meaning, but the question; what can be employed as a psychological weapon, can be approached via initial creative and sensitive tactics and the effects of these being noted, ** because the effects will, in all likelihood necessitate modifications (equally sensitive) in approach.

**Remember how important is being in control, being aware of responses and equally, to resistance. How this is managed is a further consideration for discussion. What tells us basically, that there is an element of success and indicates the nature of that success?

Too simple, yes. To put it another way, the tentative touching of another when the other is not aware is a good strategy, the manipulative ploy becoming more pronounced (modified) as perceived effects emerge. This is different than is dumping something on a target’s lap and because of the bold assumption we got it right to begin with.

Just a few ideas to discuss. But what I wanted to talk about really, is imagination and its subduing capacity for perceptions being molded.

Much of what is produced in this respect is for commercial gain, certain of the tactics are obnoxious, I think, but it doesn’t matter to the perpetrators because the bottom line is profit.

In psyop and as I want to introduce here, because I want this to be a trifle different, har, har, there are enduring characteristics which we can , if we understand what they are, their nature and importantly their content, meld targets to us.

I’m not referring to how strategies are developed and so on from a theoretical point of view and documented. These documents essential as they be, remain where they are, because they are not the actual operation. The actual operation is not the directive, the theoretical perspective and so on.

The creating of an essentially emotional trauma and our holding this trauma, nurturing it, watching for indicators which are counter to where we want to take them.

(interruption)

I was wondering if ‘nurturing’ was an expression only you would use and why? It is not a military term.

In addition, stated geopolitical positions are often better deemed inappropriate because certain whom are informed they are ‘enemies’ (and our targets) at the outset, consequently and remarkably understand and accept that position because we’ve told them, this makes the task fraught with problems. I can go further and suggest that publicizing the details of the whole thing, even to the extent of showing photographs of the rooms that one is to be operating from, telling (bragging) of numbers of personnel, that more are to be recruited and the whole thing run in tandem with the rest of the military machinery – this could only serve to foster other outcomes and which it suggested is the reason anyway.

An ‘enemy’ is so defined, also influences those whose task it is to construct useful strategies. The concept of enemy is not always a useful one.

I mean, that holding the hand of someone is better than spitting in their face, because what comes after will be colored by this. We should be a sufficiently potent force in a sensitively constructed frame, thus we should be able to begin and continue the process of influencing perceptions more easily, the chances of success much greater.

There is much more to this obviously. It is not so easy to act in a manner deemed ‘inappropriate’, for reasoning well entrenched. This is because the going against the social order can be construed by the social order as ‘selling out’ and will attract a response in kind from them. Though they are unaware of the reasoning. You know the kind of thing, jumping to conclusions, throwing out accusations and the whole thing becomes disarray.

Who we are referring to has much significance in this respect and certain, would (and do) respond with cynicism and hostility at attempts made to influence them, whereas others are more susceptible, for the socioeconomic reasons we know.

This is what prompted me to suggest that (theoretically) imagination can play a vital role in enabling others, the most powerful opponents as defined, in this respect. Imagination is not structural, is not process, is not of the routine and expected, while combined within the ‘activity set’.

What is it that very effectively cuts across issues of class, gender, culture, religion, nationhood? We should consider this question in the context of using what is viewed as threat (conventional), because such a hard approach can be met with more of same (because they have more) and leading nowhere but increased conflict. Then and again, depending on who the target actually is.

It is not unusual to see cultural values finding their own way across boundaries many of which one would assume were impervious.

So let’s discuss imagination.

.

Creativity is intelligence having fun. Then it depends what is fun to us.”

Albert Einstein (1879 – 1955)

.

“One’s outer life passes in a solitude heated by the masks of others.

One’s inner life passes in a solitude heated by the masks of oneself.

Those who cannot see beyond their masks ensure their own self-annihilation.”

Eugene O’Neill (1888 – 1953)

.

There are lots and lots of things. First is a realization that with us is the fabulous and the fantastic potential, the product of creative genius, but so by virtue of the protection we almost take for granted. To put it another way, might the protection be caused to adjust itself? Of course, as has been the case through necessity, so to keep watch more and more. This is not the intrusion spelt, that seized by the few who would seize anything to make their abusive shout heard. It is all part of the emergence of the collective bound with conflict, bound in this, our new poetic.
(C-I) London. I left it in a packet with *** ******, the owl.

THE OWL IS SILENT

.

COVERT WAR

.

The Owl is in Harrogate

.

Extract (C-I)

…….It picks up hoot hoot hoot hoot hoot the owl is on one foot, obvious… Yes. There are issues and I acknowledge your statement. In stepping away from the.@ There is recourse to the philosophy that takes this into account and a word ‘verstehen’. I tend to think much that is actually considered primary source could do well to be thought of as containing much of the observer/writer/interpreter’s personality, inclination and era.@ Here is a broader definition I like, so will include it:@ ‘Verstehen; is entering into the shoes of the other, and adopting this research stance requires treating the actor as a subject, rather than an object of.

@the owl has returned not obvious it was a delightful hotel and Even despite the geographical/cultural/linguistic constraints, as you did point out, I think in our data constructions we can be aware that there might still be something more and it be worthy of the att…. Again….Happy life be these; The quiet mind. The equal friend. No grudge, nor strife. Wisdom joined with simplicity. The night discharged of all care… Sir Henry Howard (1517-1547) ‘Means to Attain a Happy Life.‘ (a denied contemporary of Elizabeth Tudor.) 6frdddes22323232THE OWL IS WATCHING

.

(C-V) I know some would respond by pointing to the fact that fostering curiosity and desire is one thing – once the prerequisites are in place, so to do – like you said, but there are those who react to what they perceive as being assaults upon their culture, core beliefs, social norms (which is what they are) – by strengthening what it is we are focusing on. However you dress it, it would only be a provocation and the response negative, as for as the intention was concerned.

But I know what you are getting at. By employing certain highly seductive and meaningful – neutral- forms, then the function as pertains to us, does same to them. We should discuss what these forms consist of, what is value – more or less universally accepted as such.

But still bearing in mind with regard to some, there is little to nothing we have that would penetrate, let alone they be seduced by its ‘magic’ if that’s the right word.

(C-III) She said it depends on who the target group is. Maybe we should name a few for who we deem a positive outcome? It might help.

(C-V) I liked what you said about displaying the whole thing up front in intricate detail and stating who it’s intended for and why – the enemy. In a global stage where in this respect psychological characteristics are the issue, a response in kind is envisaged, simply because of their capacity so to do.

(C-I) Imagination is creative ability, resourcefulness, the ingredient of creative visualization, positive thinking and affirmation. Imagination is the act or power of forming mental (often idealized) images not present to the senses or never before wholly perceived in reality.

(C-III) Are you confusing imagination with creativity? The power of one’s creativity to be universally seductive, to endure?

(C-I) You are just talking semantics, the issue is that we are creative, yes, but also understanding of its nature in the task at hand and further, that often an empathetic merging of cultural facets (ours and whoever else’s) – tentative at first – can effect an outcome that is positive.

Creativity is the compulsion to generate or recognize ideas, alternatives, or possibilities which may be useful in solving problems and communicating with others.

Generally speaking, in being creative, we are able to perceive in new ways or from different perspectives. We are able to generate new possibilities or new alternatives. A measure of creativity indicates the number of alternatives we can generate and also their uniqueness. Creativity is bound with qualities of thinking, such as flexibility, tolerance of ambiguity or unpredictability, and not to forget the enjoyment of things previously unknown.

(C-III) I’m not sure I agree with your premise that what we create, can work in the way you say – re;  “…an empathetic merging of facets”. This differs somewhat from what you’ve said before while talking about generating instability, insecurity, and this status acting as the beginning point. Unless by clever ploy you can build in the means to overpower, once in motion. The objective is to make/enable other parties to think and behave as we desire, not to get married.

(laughter)

(C-V) She’s referring to augmenting portions of reality and wherein because of the allure, because of the immersing capacity, other actors are influenced via the control we own.

(C-I) Was I? Gee whiz. You know, the most effective psychological operations, currently, contain elements of what you just said and they are called CGTN and RT, as you are aware. How on earth are we supposed to compete? We do not have the resources to cast across such a global spectrum of intellectual, creative insight and endeavor. No one does. No one can compete. They, by virtue of being the Leonardo da Vinci of IT (psyop), can expose, very easily submerge and turn back on us, what are much more narrow, though determined efforts – ours. My suggestion that we examine imagination (creativity) was, because what we are adept at, even though made within much narrower confines, can incorporate what captivates and seduces.

(C-V) Because defense and national security issues are the same thing, or have a place within same.

(C-I) Yes. Being all of one mind-set or thereabouts is the perfect base to project from, a place where the population inherently and collectively characterize the culture, values, history and desires. Do we?

.

Addendum

“There, as threescore and ten years later he told the tale, rose in his mind a scheme which, through all the turns of his eventful career, was never abandoned. He would recover the estate which had belonged to his fathers. He would be Hastings of Daylesford. This purpose, formed in infancy and poverty, grew stronger as his intellect expanded and as his fortune rose. He pursued his plan with that calm but indomitable force of will which was the most striking peculiarity of his character. When, under a tropical sun, he ruled fifty millions of Asiatics, his hopes, amidst all the cares of war, finance, and legislation, still pointed to Daylesford. And when his long public life, so singularly chequered with good and evil, with glory and obloquy, had at length closed for ever, it was to Daylesford that he retired to die.”

Memoirs of the Life of Warren Hastings (Dec. 6th 1732 – Aug. 22nd 1818). First Governor-General of Bengal. Compiled from Original Papers. London: 1841

 

.

In order to be creative, we need to be able to view established things in new ways or from a different perspective. We need to be able to generate new possibilities or new alternatives based on what we know already. Tests of creativity measure not only the number of alternatives that people can generate, but the uniqueness of those alternatives. In addition, the ability to generate alternatives or to see things uniquely does not occur by change; it is linked to other, more fundamental qualities of our thinking, such as flexibility, tolerance of ambiguity or unpredictability, and the enjoyment of things heretofore known and unknown.

(C-I)

.

The yonder war upon the Arts. Society pays for this war and the cost is devastating.

>> A society that loses the capacity for introspective thought ultimately extinguishes itself. <<

>> A corporate war upon our history –  a war which includes the impoverishment and marginalization of the artist, the imaginative genius, the creative thinker, severs from the forces that hold up a mirror to the very essence of our self-hood.<<

>> That these creative forces delineate in a way that any society entranced by fantasy fails to understand the difference between reality and illusion, between who and what the society really is, always has been, and who and what the society is caused to think it is. <<

>> We have to understand the failure to grasp the reality of what it means with regard those myriad whom are trapped in illusions which should be to us, empty and ugly. <<

We must recognize, consider and act accordingly.

(C-I)

 

.

If You Want My Freedom, Fight Me For It  (C-I)

The Owl is in Harrogate – Covert Hybrid War

.

time out

.

(C-IV) It is the case that humans devote 30 – 40 per cent of speech output solely on informing others of their own subjective experiences. This is a relevant factor to commandeer because of the interactive – expressively encouraging mediums provided so to do. So, do we understand what fires this propensity for disclosure? One can test recent theories that individuals place high subjective value on opportunities to communicate their thoughts and feelings to others and that doing so engages neural and cognitive mechanisms associated with reward. Five recent studies did provide support for this hypothesis. Self-disclosure was strongly associated with increased activation in brain regions that form the meso-limbic dopamine system, including the nucleus accumbens and ventral tegmental area. Moreover, individuals were willing to sacrifice all payment to disclose about themselves. Two additional studies demonstrated that these effects stemmed from the independent value that individuals place on self-referential thought, and on simply sharing information with others. Together, these findings appear to suggest that the human tendency to convey information regarding personal experience may arise from the intrinsic value associated with self-disclosure.

.

Self Referential Thought

.

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

Bertrand Arthur William Russell. OM. FRS  (1872 – 1970)

.

Diary Extract (C-I). ‘Useful Considerations of an Interpersonal Nature’

.

Note :

To be a credible PSYOP challenge it is imperative that we evaluate rationally and then propose a rational alternative which is conceptually and demonstrably superior. To respond only with an indignant denunciation of something else is merely to indulge ourselves in the equivalent of emotional name-calling, which may be satisfying and reassuring too, but does not necessarily adjust matters towards the solution of an international/intercultural problem.

‘Psychological Operations’ (PSYOP) includes psychological warfare and, in addition, encompasses those political, military, economic, and ideological actions planned and conducted to create in neutral or friendly foreign groups the emotions, attitudes, or behaviour to support the achievement of national objectives.

‘Psychological Warfare’ is the planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behaviour of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives.

.

“Knowledge is easy, becoming quickly of little to no value, whereas imagination remains priceless.”

.

(C-IV)

To be immersed in information constructed from bias by the sender – constituting knowledge content in 3D form which cannot be held up to reality for evaluation because in the receiver’s mind it is reality.

The extent of the receiver’s ability to question at all is an issue because why need there be the ability?

When ‘something’ enters and consequently provokes a reevaluation process via necessity, might there be as a result what can be described as ‘authentic thought’, or just the same old thing dressed differently? Can stepping beyond this ever happen and if so because of what condition, to what extent, and for who?

To ask, for example, why is everyone not an astronomer if not in mere cursory fashion, is unhelpful in the observation of global collective state, simply because the global collective state exists in the propensity for limitation, a shared expectation of ‘things’ being understood in the ways they are, that ‘things’ are the only way they can ever become, are enlightened in the ways that are ‘perpetual’, and so on.

This presupposes that understanding and knowledge is valid, what it makes in shared mind is meaningful in ways beyond construct, that it is a priori. Whereas in truth and simply, it is not, it is made to appear so – a posteriori.

What significance is there tending this observation, while people go about their daily lives in the made sameness which endures?

What extent is the construction one made on behalf of the global collective NOT indicative of a morphing, not a developmental / emerging sequence via application of shifting trends, but is rather > a biased / rehashed nonsense frame useful only because it can, for the majority to whom it applies, maintain order / predictability / ignorance / stupidity / perpetual infancy – this, the dictate wherein almost all dwell. <

There is no meaning or point to the marking of time, and to assume there is any significance, or point to what is essentially invention attired otherwise, is the prevailing condition. Moving from what, into what? A further display, a new ritual attired with information relevant only in that it secures certainty, because uncertainty is intolerable. To have no certainty is not an opportunity, but a cause to fight against, for fear of losing precious identity, to sever ‘connection’, thereby being defenders of a reality which is in effect, nothing. How can reality be nothing when we have all of this? The question is; all of what? A human comedy mostly, only amusing for the duration it lasts.

.

(C-I)

Perhaps what you say above, though being true, is a trifle academic? I think the appeal to such questioning is, not surprisingly, altogether absent, in the face of where within most live – what is a taken for granted state. But what else can it be? When the sun sets and darkness fills the void, who actually wonders why? Human beings are sacrosanct upon a planet they know little to nothing about, yet is owned, fought over for constructs which are human in their entirety.

Rather than wonder, there is the rush to perform in the context of threat, which as you say, in the context of meaning and time, is pointless. One can therefore look at pointlessness as it is attired, for example; we have a global society normalized to war, we have the suggested innocence of the protagonists of atrocity, we have the masses of civilians who consequently are not killed (murdered), but ‘died’, we have those who orchestrate strife and in so doing attribute virtue to themselves, thereby there is justification, suggested innocence, we have the nefarious cover up, and so on….These are what characterize the marking of time and to posit the pointless and the stupid which it is would be an attack upon the already programmed state of the human collective.

In any useful Mind War, therefore, I think one has to be conscious of what the underlying intention must be, and which is; to keep people from wanting to and succeeding in killing both us and each other (ideally, though impossible), replacing the latter with ‘something else,’ and to foster an awareness of the consequences of an all out conflict, which is thermonuclear war. Regarding the latter, it is useful to consider that time, as is taken for granted, the lights come on at six and the store is open 24/7, the route there obvious – as is bound in predictable ignorant state, would become altogether different – a wiping clean of the slate and replacing it with no meaning at all. The predicating circumstances, though they took place, would not exist, nor would those who caused them.

As you say, this is not the modus-operandi, it is something else, instinct (inclination /predisposition) running amok, one might suggest? And further, what power over the collective psyche is a Mind War likely to have in this respect (regarding asymmetry / bi lateral relations as preferable to ‘conventional’ war, as is planned / hypothesized / suggested /desired?)

The warrior mentality is endemic in much more powerfully felt ways. For example, the computer games in which the user becomes a drone pilot and kills in the same way that any military operative is trained to do. I have a problem envisaging a strategy to over ride this mind set / life world once set in motion, once entrenched / the hurt for the real thing. What is the difference within the human psyche of committing atrocity on a computer and doing it for real? The same gratification is being fed, either way.

.

Extract from Mental Diary (II) – ‘Affect’ (C-I)

Shame is central to identity development and the reflexivity of the self. Psychoanalyst Francis Broucek wrote that; ‘‘Shame is to self psychology what anxiety is to ego psychology – the keystone of affect’’. Shame is the sense of disturbance and defeat activated and felt within the self. Tomkins (1963) states;

>> If distress is the affect of suffering, shame is the affect of indignity, of defeat, of transgression and of alienation. Though terror speaks to life and death and distress makes of the world a vale of tears, yet shame strikes deepest into the heart of man and woman.<<

While terror and distress hurt, they are wounds inflicted from outside which penetrate the smooth surface of the ego; but shame is felt as an inner torment, a sickness of the soul. It does not matter whether the humiliated . . . (*deleted)

Restarting from shameful place

>>> One has been shamed by derisive laughter or whether she mocks herself. In either event she feels herself naked, defeated, alienated, lacking in dignity or worth. <<<

Therefore the question of human suffering often points the problem outward to locate the objects of pain and distress, as if we feel distressed because the objects we encounter have an essential property of distress, and our body merely reacts to that. Here, Tomkins’ emphasis on the experience of shame offers a humanistic lens, which draws attention to the necessity of dignity in the capacity to experience suffering at all. Indeed, Tomkins’ affect theory makes a provocative argument that  >> affect, rather than biological drive, is the ‘primary motivational system’. <<

Imagination therefore, is central in psychological operations because affect can be teased by appeal to creative ways, and affect is the primary motivational system

.

Without memory of our past in its entirety, there is no limit to the presence and form of the machines that will, if we allow them, run rampant throughout the present time. Without memory of our past in its entirety, we are in danger of becoming little more than automata, nothing more than creatures devoid of creative capacity, incapable of introspection, less, to know beauty and thus, to project it.”

S. Wyndham – Lewis

.

.

A discussion of the above statement by Wyndham-Lewis

.

Above and below photographs : The Owl is in Harrogate. (C-I)

.

   The Owl is in Harrogate – go to

.

in process – continued

Secret Intelligence Service

MMXVII

.

.

Copyright (c) 2017. All rights reserved

.

Return to Room No.15. London

Contact Unit

.

.

Secret Intelligence Service

Room No.15

Adversitate. Custodi. Per Verum

.

.

.

COVERT WAR

.

SEMPER OCCULTUS

MMXVII

.