Top U.S. Government Administration
Important Part Of Industry Attack
July 7, 2008
It is not just one or two individuals to be selected for this covert mission, but according to the document, hundreds will be chosen to work on spinning the industry under the glow of a rose colored light.
When government officials and those on the pubic payroll, such as the U.S. Coast Guard, are covertly working as advertisers for a single industry, this is tax dollars abuse. We do not pay the U.S. Coast Guard to work as an arm of the CLIA advertising machine. We pay them to protect our coast line and to protect our citizens, as well as those who visit our waters.
Since the U.S. Coast Guard is suppose to be working to ensure, in part, ocean polluters are caught, how can they also be an agent of the cruise industry, carrying the "cruise industry messages"? Remember, that this conflict of interest advice, word for word, in the image above, is from a representative of John Adams Associates.
All of this is suppose to be monitored with an organizational staff, which is proposed to be located in the CLIA building. This would explain why the document specifies one other particular major lobby group, the AARP as a target of the "Ambassadors". Apparently, they are to send the industry message to "non-traditional" allies, naming the AARP so they can work their members on the great contribution the cruise industry has made to the environment.
Nowhere in the document I received were any of these alleged environmental contributions listed.
But, it does outline a target list of private companies as well as public companies the Ambassadors will target within their mission to spin the industry, gain government influence and befuddle the general public. That list includes, specifically, Miami Herald, South Florida Sun Sentinel, Seattle Times, Chicago Tribune, Boston Globe, Fortune, Forbes, Business Week, USA Today, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, Business Week, Time, Newsweek, Christian Science Monitor, Web MD, Mayo Clinic and the CDC.
The advertising strategy is also outlined in the John Adams Associates document to CLIA. The plan includes the use of "Advertorials".
Wikipedia discusses what an "advertorial" is. You may not be familiar with the term, so I have copied the description from the Wikipedia site for your reference. From their website:
"An advertorial is an advertisement written in the form of an objective opinion editorial, and presented in a printed publication — usually designed to look like a legitimate and independent news story."
This is an admission, that trickery is part of the plan. Target the public with an ad, that looks like an independent news story. In this manner, CLIA could manipulate the public into thinking that the print being read is objective fact, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Trickery, is the heart of the plan. While the industry and CLIA as it's mouth piece are generally rejected when it comes to claims of their goody-two-shoe corporate image, covertly using others not already labeled as industry insiders and lobbyists, who are also not officially on the payroll, is an attempt to infiltrate government and business with what is suppose to look like objective citizen reaction to an industry with a shining halo.
All of this is no doubt, an attempt to derail the current pending legislation for cruise industry regulation on capital hill while working to "Manage" the industry "Reputation". If the industry indeed had a squeaky clean reputation when it came to the environment and crime aboard their ships, their reputation wouldn't need to be "managed".
The real agenda is to manipulate the citizens, business, organizations and government of the U.S. by infiltrating each at the very highest levels, in a plot that is so well orchestrated, it rivals known CIA disinformation campaigns in foreign lands.
The final note to this stunning revelation, is a question. Why would the industry go to such great lengths to make people think they are not decimating the environment, polluting coastal waters, killing commercial fishing fields, and ruining a water supply that may soon have to be desalinated to sustain coastal cities? You will find that answer within a lawsuit filed in Alaska.
With the ocean ranger billed passed in Alaska, ocean rangers assumed that the ships would permit them to inspect the discharges and processing of discharges aboard ships. That was not the case. The ocean rangers were preventing from doing their jobs aboard Princess Cruises and Holland America Line vessels operating in Alaskan waters. Alaskans are asking why the ocean rangers were blocked, if the ships had nothing to hide.
That question is now the center of a lawsuit filed on July 1, 2008, by Responsible Cruising in Alaska and Campaign to Safeguard America's Water. The groups filed a 45-day notice of intent to sue.
The two groups cited a June 23, 2008 report by Paul Johnson, Ocean Ranger manager for the state's contractor, Crowley Marine Service. In the report, Johnson writes that Holland America and Princess Cruises appear to have adopted internal guidelines on how to restrict and control inspectors' observations.
The Johnson report outlined the fact that 10 of the 28 ships operating in Alaska were not providing sufficient access to equipment and ship personnel. Nine were Holland America or Princess ships.
Only a couple days after the California Ocean Ranger bill was killed in committee, and three days after the Johnson report came out, John Adams Associates penned this strategic CLIA defense with an offensive plan of attack, AND it was the same day Senator Kerry introduced his bill in the U. S Senate. This is no coincidence.
If you have wondered why no legislation with teeth has been passed to regulate the cruise industry, you now have your answer.
You also know why private attorneys are needed to fight a battle that is so enormous, the average citizen doesn't stand a chance going it alone against a cruise line.
Page: 1 2
While it is carefully worded, the real intent is not hidden by the smoke and mirrors. There is only ONE reason for "Ambassadors" to dine with Top Administration Officials and Senators, specifically, the Senator Kerry Bill, The Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act of 2008, (S. 3204) introduced on June 26, 2008, the same date on the John Adams Associates plan of action for CLIA.
Gifts, meals and cruises are part of the ample "perks" for the "Ambassador". But, why on earth would a travel agent AKA "Ambassador" in the course of a "perk" get to meet and dine with "Top Administration" officials, unless of course there is more here than meets the eye? But, it doesn't end there. Also on the target list is the U.S. Military directly, specifically the U.S.Coast Guard.
