Posted on 09/08/2015 2:55:11 PM PDT by wtd
AN UNCONSTRAINED ANALYTICS REPORT
Stephen Coughlin
14 August 2015
Graeme Wood’s March 2015 Atlantic article “What ISIS Really Wants” brought back a few bad memories from my days at the Pentagon, where I was mobilized to the Joint Staff Intelligence after 9/11. One such memory was the frequent assertion, beginning around 2003, that “Sistani is a ‘quietist’.” Another was the March 2007 Foreign Affairs article “The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood.”
As both narratives supported strategic distractions, the fact that the two came together in the Atlantic article raised red flags. We have been here before—many times. These flags will be addressed in the following analysis in the context of their associated concerns.
It is argued that the Atlantic article supports narratives that continue to justify the outsourcing of the production of America’s information requirements in support of the counterterror effort to non-U.S. actors, in this case Middle Eastern, in much the way that the Muslim Brotherhood controls the domestic debate through the “countering violent extremism” (CVE) narrative.
[snip]
The shift to a Brotherhood-friendly policy set in motion a series of events beginning with the production of documents in 2008 at DHS and NCTC that placed the language of jihad off limits when analyzing (or even discussing) slamic-based terrorism. This was followed in 2010 by DHS bringing in Brotherhood leaders to help prop up the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) protocols that resulted in DHS institutionalizing the CVE through the production of “CVE Training Guidance & Best Practices” and related policy documents. It is through the CVE process that the purging of work product and personnel continues to this day.
(Excerpt) Read more at unconstrainedanalytics.org ...
Some of you may remember the Atlantic article called, ‘What does ISIS really want?’ that was published some months ago. Many of us, including myself and others who work at this website felt it was a clear indicator that there was a policy or at least public opinion shift in the US amongst the elites and was overall an amazing thing.
US retired Maj. Army Intel. Stephen Coughlin disagreed and wrote a thorough paper on the Atlantic article, what it means, why it was published, and how it seems to attempt to mislead. This is one depressing read but for those who want a thorough understanding its compulsory. Personally I recommend printing this one out and digesting it in sections. But however you choose, this is an excellent paper. Remember that the author is speaking in Montreal on the 16th of this month and Ottawa on the 17th.
“This was followed in 2010 by DHS bringing in Brotherhood leaders.....”
Fox in the henhouse!
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/?fb_ref=Default
It was a scary enough article, this Coughlin piece makes things worse?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.