text: Fundamentals
  normally associated with a specific activity or event (the required observable). From those activities, the
  planner analyzes which of those associated activities the target would normally collect against and use as a
  significant indicator of usual or consistent friendly behavior. The activities must be fully compatible with all
  elements of the deception story and carefully sequenced with other observables to have their desired effects.
  1-20. Within military deception, a competing observable is any observable that contradicts the deception
  story, casts doubt on, or diminishes the impact of one or more required or supporting observables (JP 3-13.4).
  To minimize the impact of competing observables on enemy analysis, they must be mitigated as part of the
  deception plan. Examples of mitigation for competing observables include protection with OPSEC, including
  DISO; neutralization of the enemy conduit to which competing observables are likely to be exposed; or
  assumption of risk based on detailed analysis of minimal impact to the operation. The availability of resources
  and time are often limiting factors in preparing such supporting measures, but they can be extremely valuable
  in raising the credibility and verifiability of the deception story and the probability of deception success.
  1-21. Patterns are multiple-repetitive indicators that give the enemy an operational profile. Enemies use their
  intelligence collection assets to analyze patterns to identify the unit and predict its mission. Changes in pattern
  can affect how an enemy perceives friendly actions.
  1-22. The deception story is a scenario that outlines the friendly actions that will be portrayed to cause the
  deception target to adopt the desired perception (JP 3-13.4). It is a succinct statement or narrative of exactly
  what the MDO wants the target to believe to be the true situation, then decide and act on that basis. It is
  usually made up of the deception observables and the deception desired perceptions in a specific sequence to
  create deception events. MDOs write the deception story from the perspective of the enemy so it reads like
  the enemy’s intelligence estimate about friendly forces’ actions and intentions.
  PRINCIPLES OF DECEPTION
  1-23. Just as the principles of war provide general guidance for the conduct of military operations, the six
  principles of deception provide guidance to plan deception. The principles of deception are—
  * Focus.
  * Objective.
  * Centralized planning and control.
  * Security.
  * Timing.
  * Integration.
  FOCUS
  1-24. The deception plan should focus on the thought process of the threat decision maker who has the
  authority and capability of causing the desired actions. The enemy’s intelligence, surveillance, and
  reconnaissance is normally not the target; rather, it is a primary conduit used in the deception plan to convey
  selected information to the decision maker. Planners must clearly understand the difference between
  intermediate conduits and the intended target. Focused deception must cause an action or inaction of the
  enemy force. In order to do this, there must be existing conduits to the deception target or a reasonable
  expectation that conduits can establish.
  OBJECTIVE
  1-25. Deception plans focus actions and resources that motivate an enemy to decide to take (or not to take)
  specific desired actions. The plan cannot focus solely on motivating the target to believe certain things; it
  must lead to the target making a specific decision to act or not act.
  CENTRALIZED PLANNING AND CONTROL
  1-26. A centralized approach is necessary to avoid confusion and to ensure various elements portray the
  same story and do not conflict with other operational objectives or evolving conditions in an operational
  environment. Execution of the deception may, however, be decentralized as long as all participating