UPDATED: 12-18-15 ..CONTINUED SECTION I.
REQUIRED READING PRIOR TO THIS SIM:
Here are the recommended articles to read (as posted in MEDIAWARS):
7. The entire mediawars collection of articles relating to this issue can be found here: http://www.mediawars.co/game/38
Additional research using the internet under GOOGLE and WIKIPEDIA using the keywords: France, ,current events, Immigration, Ethnic conflict, destabilization.
After reading these articles it became clear that the events described were a precursor leading to a potential ‘ETHNIC CLEANSING.’ if not ‘Destabilization.’
It is further evident that the events, as unfolding, were being promoted by a possible third party as a means to achieve wide spread destabilization among citizens and local infrastructure.
With the help of pretenders and INTEL provided by mediawars, it has been determined that a possible third party has initiated a conflict between those of different ethnic origins in order to proliferate a conflict between them.
At this time it has not yet been determined what the ultimate goal of the third party is, but we do know that based on the events so far, if not carefully approached, may actually cause a quicker escalation of the crisis.
The goal of Simulation #15-0920 is to stop, reverse as well as prevent the events that lead to a mass social phenomenon known as ETHNIC CLEANSING (as well as ‘destabilization.’)
Game 38 (Emissary groups declare holy war) at mediawars has completed. Over the next two weeks (Late Oct/Nov 2015) SIM 15-0920 will be posted here in sections…
Section I Nov 17, 2015
The articles at MediaWars (above) present these events as worst case scenarios at their height of conflict.
An analysis explaining the nature of this crisis and its escalation has already been provided. (Contained as responses to the articles at the MediaWars site.) What is being presented here are the necessary PREVENTATIVE measures should another terror attack of this nature occur against the general populace.
Since 911 and the formation of the DHS, the key to success against these kind of attacks has been found by educating as well as involving the active participation of its citizens.
The information contained here serves as a ‘CODE BREAKER’ to the reasoning and nature of these attacks to the average citizen. KNOWING and UNDERSTANDING are key toward preventing the escalation of any crisis.
With active participation and a plan for emergency, citizens have a means to work toward prevention while authorities can remain focused on the root causes.
An analysis of the MediaWars simulation as compared to current events…
The MediaWars INTEL shows a ‘proliferation’ of an ‘old’ and already long standing conflict between different ETHNIC groups that have been further ‘aggravated’ by an outside ‘third party’ enough to escalate the conflict toward destabilization.
This particular MediaWars SIM also shows the fact that there were also two extremist groups found in ‘opposition’ to one another! (Not including the ‘outside’ party that served as a ‘trigger’ against them and the events in general.)
These parties were both active contributors in retaliation toward one another that ultimately helped to proliferate the conflict toward a level of destabilization.
It is interesting to know that though these extremist groups were in opposition, they actually share common ‘extremist’ views as well as ‘agendas’ with regard to ethnicity.
As related to current events, (unlike the SIM) you do not already have a heightened conflict already taking place that can be initiated or further aggravated by a ‘third party’ group. (Though we will take a look at possible mid to long term effects and how to reverse/reduce any potential compounding of any effects should they occur!)
Update: As of Dec 18, 2015 this continues to be the case. This delay in reporting was purposeful not only in proving this point, but to further show the resolve of the French people. (Vive La France!)
(With regard to the capping, reduction and prevention of a potential escalation to a crisis similar in nature to the MW SIM:)
Trail of infection.
1. The escalation of the crisis has been found to promote from extremist groups that originate from ‘outside’ the ‘target population’ (the target population being in this case: ‘the unaffected/assimilated’) with a goal toward destabilization of that target population.
2. These groups, though in opposition, share the same or similar common denominator with regard to their objectives.
3. The indoctrination of additional/secondary viewpoints help promote/proliferate an escalation of the crisis as well as effect each others ‘gain’ potential (in size/to a degree in magnitude directly related to their ‘imbalance.’)
4. The activities of these ‘outer’ associated groups can be found to be operating on a degree of ‘misdirection’ to the actual underlying cause. (extremist agenda/plan.) Which then only requires ‘opposition’ to promote its escalation/proliferation. (successfully ‘masking’ the hidden underlying as well as ‘forwarding’ the ’causes’/agenda)
more detailed analysis:
Factors that promote this trail of infection:
1. The promoting of this conflict outside the window of authoritative control (beyond the controls of public demonstration)
TBC..this SIM will be added to as well as updated to further address more of the specifics as described in the summary.
An in depth analysis of GNN article “Digital Axis of Evil Escalates Efforts Against DIS.”
(Original post:) http://www.mediawars.co/game/42/article/26895
This ‘boycotting’ (in general) only signifies a ‘dissatisfaction’ with regard to this issue and sends the wrong message to what should be considered unacceptable as well as ‘unlawful.’
Putting pressure on another country in order to gain their compliance toward another country’s ownership rights or international law through use of a ‘boycott’ would be feasible if the activities were strictly the result of black market activity. Yet the implication here is a corruption at the government level that condone’s the suspected activities.
Considering this, as well as use of the ‘boycott’ approach, there is also an implication here (from the international community) that these activities may only be ‘suspect’ and as such would most likely result in the scenario above. (As presented in this article.)
To prevent this incident, as well as its escalation, a ‘hard evidence’ followed by ‘sanction’s’ approach should be used.
There are hidden radical agendas cleverly masked under a false ‘guise’ of freedom that seeks, really, to undermine the effectiveness of ‘deterrence.’ (such as authorities protecting Identities and intellectual property online.)
The long term solution to the general problem of piracy itself (on an international level) would not make much improvement considering this method of ‘Attack’ comes (on a diplomatic level) with complete deniability as well as avoidance of the issue itself considering this incident.
What would further add damage to this incident is for a ‘third party’ to lay claim to this incident. This would continue to add toward the ‘suspicion’s’ among all parties overall. Also, another attack in this manner would further heighten the tension among all effected and suspected parties.
Considering this, the best plan of approach to ‘minimize’ the potential effects of further incident (especially if the agencies determine this incident most likely was ‘inflicted’ by a suspected ‘outside’ third party) would be a direct addressing of this incident (full diplomatic channels open) as well as an ‘active’ investigation (in assistance to) and on behalf of the ‘suspected’ parties.
The implication here, considering this scenario, would show that the issue was not already resolvable within a countries borders. This may be issue enough that may only complicate things further down the road when involving others. (And as such gives an opportunity for a third party to further proliferate the issue.) The UN, in order to remain effective in its primary purpose, must deal with issues that can show a direct condition toward effecting that purpose. tbc.
Issues like these must have gotten to be a problem if it reaches a level where one (or a series of countries) bring it to the ‘UN.’ The UN’s primary purpose is to keep open lines of communication between countries for the sake of peace and humanitarian rights. If the UN need to find resolve in this issue a good case among concerned countries would have to involve issues that relate to the UN’s primary purpose.
Current loopholes in intellectual property rights are being taken advantage of (by foreign markets where original ownership cannot be bought and/or is not recognized (especially at the govt levels)) and will require a more pro-active approach at the govt level in the originating country where the authentic and original product resides. And for good reason. Imported ‘copies’ do the most damage to the authentic brand when it returns to compete in its authentic market of origin.
A ‘general’ boycott to potentially effecting (bringing internal pressure to effected countries) what may only represent a ‘minority’ of business overall, would only serve to bring about a quick ‘veto’ from these p-5 members. This would also quickly nullify any efforts in bringing about any UN ‘resolution’ in this matter. (Especially if the UN hasn’t already set an ‘agreed’ upon resolution with these countries with regard to the actual issue behind this boycott!)
Possible responses to these ‘pressures’ (as reported in this article) would be most likely regardless of whether or not the suspect countries ‘issues’ in this matter were a result of black market activity and/or govt level corruption.
Protections on intellectual property rights are unenforceable in countries where the owner fails to ‘pay’ for that right (and in that locale specifically. For ex an international patent could be tens of thousands and it may only apply specifically to a country where that ‘protection’ is paid for.)
Considering this, and the generally accepted idea that intellectual property rights only exist when ‘paid for’ leaves the possibility for others claiming ownership ‘first.’ Even if it was the result was outright theft!
In conclusion: In order to work toward prevention of these scenarios (as listed in these articles) some of the factors that help to contribute to the problem can be avoided/reduced/reversed by reworking intellectual property rights at its initial stages in the ‘originating’ country. The most damaging factor in this scenario occurs when authentic goods are copied (as ‘outsourced’ into a foreign market) and then re-inserted back into the originating country to ‘compete’ against the authentic product. If the copied product came from a country of origin where the authentic product did not pay for ownership rights or have a govt level recognition of ownership, the imported ‘copy’ may (by legal definition) be ‘immune’ from legal action.
Even authorized manufacturing overseas where the product comes ‘back’ to sell in the ‘originating’ country can be just as detrimental in locally competing markets. Also, product ‘labels’ made by ‘outside’ manufacturers to identify themselves as such, may help to keep out ‘unidentified’ competitors but the competition from ‘outside’ trade is still overwhelming to local manufacturers.
It’s only good when the intellectual property rights and ‘economies of scale’ remains intact for the originating country in the global market. Stripping this away and competing a form of ‘pseudo-product’ BACK into the ‘source point of origin’ (originating country) eliminates the ‘real’ products cost effectiveness. This will serve to also effect the value of the real product in the local markets (within the country) driving down market share and value and eventually allowing for other competitors to steer ownership and control away as well. (locally.)
Rights and protections on a global level, (especially outside the originating country) usually means having to ‘buy’ into this protection with each country you wish to seek that protection. And in countries where this doesn’t not already exist, makes for a potential safe haven for intellectual property theft. This is such a problem that it is actually possible for these sellers to distribute back into the originating country (where these so called protections exist) without incident from authorities on either side of the border. Enforcement by international agencies may still be challenged without cooperation from government in each country where this problem resides.
MIDEAST CRISIS SCENARIOS as presented in MEDIAWARS.CO.
UPDATED: December 18, 2015
SIM under development based on MediaWars INTEL and current events:
General Articles and study (based on MediaWars SIMS:)
Here are the recommended articles to read (as posted in MEDIAWARS):
1. Kidnapping of Media Celebrities Spread: http://www.mediawars.co/game/49
Specific article analysis PLAYING THE ENCIRCLING GAME http://www.mediawars.co/game/47/article/29206
A full SIM currently under development #15-1121 (operation ‘Q.’) will be posted soon…
1. Japan Restarts Nuclear Program: http://www.mediawars.co/game/46
General reading on game sim 46: NUCLEAR REACTORS ATTACKED IN JAPAN: http://www.mediawars.co/game/46/article/28306
Specific article analysis on NUCLEAR REACTORS ATTACKED IN JAPAN: (UNDER DEVELOPMENT.)
SIMULATION #15-1030 (OPERATION ‘SHELL GAME.’) UNDER DEVELOPMENT…
2. Assassinating Child Kidnappers: http://www.mediawars.co/game/44
General reading on game sim 44: TIME RUNNING OUT FOR SOCCER KIDS: http://www.mediawars.co/game/44/article/28047
Specific article analysis on TIME RUNNING OUT FOR SOCCER KIDS: (UNDER DEVELOPMENT.)
SIMULATION #15-1102 (OPERATION ‘CODE ADAM.’) UNDER DEVELOPMENT…
3. CYBER ATTACKS THREATEN NET FREEDOM: http://www.mediawars.co/game/42
Specific article analysis on GAME SIM 42 ‘CYBER ATTACKS THREATEN NET FREEDOM.’
A. GNN article analysis: Digital Axis of Evil Escalates Efforts Against DIS.
SIMULATION #15-1026 (Operation ‘DragNet.’) UNDER DEVELOPMENT. (Under development.)
2. EMISSARY GROUPS DECLARE HOLY WAR: http://www.mediawars.co/game/38
THEE ABOVE ARE THE CURRENT TOPICS (AS POSTED IN MEDIAWARS) THAT WILL BE LOOKED INTO IN MORE DETAIL HERE..
It is believed that Social Media, as manipulated by a potential terror network, may be responsible for using this medium to sway opinion whereby controlling or influencing the events and their outcomes. As a countermeasure to prevent this from happening, this SITUATION ROOM was created.
Here we can covertly run SIMULATIONS of these events in order to determine the best courses of actions to resolve the issues terror networks are trying to proliferate.
An in depth analysis based on the article: ‘Emissary Cleric Takes On International Role’
(Original Article Posted at MediaWars: http://www.mediawars.co/game/38/article/25219
This scenario, as presented here, implies a get together that is entirely one sided (as compared to all sides of this conflict in general) among all denominations of what is considered to be ‘the exalted.’
Though this ‘one sided’ event may help to minimize the conflict itself on ‘one side’ of the issue, it may only serve to ‘widen the gap’ to those involved in all sides regardless as a means for achieving at least an ‘appearance’ of peace in the short term.
This ‘gap’ may not further ‘widen’ in the short term, but considering recent events, it will be ‘wider’ than it was nonetheless. With that, it could result in future issues with a potential for a conflict on an even higher scale.
The current conflict was apparently a secondary ‘reaction’ by extremist activists sensitive to the issue of integration (as ‘initiated’ by a possible third party terrorist organization) on both sides of the same issue which can be found actually to have the same extremist common denominator on the issue of ‘integration.’
The geographic location of the source of infection on this issue can be shown to reside in area’s mainly ‘outside’ of the targeted (assimilated) population.
Considering the subject of supposed ‘peace’ BNN has presented the article as one sided and it will take confirmation from another source to determine the facts over a conference of this nature being held without all affected parties.
Though this event may reduce further indoctrinating of those brought into this conflict after-the-fact, the extremists who initiated the conflict will be expected to remain highly suspect as well as capable of reengaging this conflict.
Most likely this conflict may have been sparked by an outside third party terrorist organization. Even with this being the case it will be required to retain focus in containment and reduction of this crisis to reduce the risk of wide spread destabilization which would most likely be the outcome desired by such an organization.
Further it has been determined that all factors required for ‘containment’ of this issue, if not successful would lead to a critical destabilization before anything else (such as resolve of the primary issue.) This should remain the focus and be considered to be the more accurate measure when handling this crisis. (as compared to the factors that contribute to the issues based on integration itself (since the proliferation of this conflict itself is due in part based on misdirection/propaganda)
A final analysis and countermeasure will be completed after the close of this mediawars scenario which will be located on this site under the post SIMULATION #15-0920 ETHNIC CLEANSING (OPERATION CLEAN SLATE.)