A Beautiful Mime…
How disinformation topped the news this week
Elements inside the Department of Homeland Security, in what can only be termed a classic disinformation effort, issued a fraudulent and inflammatory nine-page “Assessment” this week, in what amounts to a senseless effort to drive a blade of alienation through the heart of the American people.
Entitled, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment”, the document was simultaneously sent to law enforcement officials throughout the country and leaked to media insiders who would give maximum impact to the disinformation campaign.
While the exact motive and target of the campaign is as yet, not fully known, speculation points to Janet Napolitano, head of DHS or elements within the Threat Analysis Division, FBI, or other agency related through authorship to the Assessment.
Readers of Five Hundred Words know this column is all about disinformation and rarely are we given the opportunity to review a great example of such work. I have therefore made the entire nine-page document available in PDF format to every reader. You should download the document now by clicking on the cover in the photograph above. You should then read the Assessment or print it out so you can follow along with my analysis of the report, which continues below. I promise you the experience will be enlightening.
Welcome back!
Careful or experienced readers will initially take note of the fact that while the Assessment is crafted to actually say nothing, it casts suspicions and derision upon a large segment of the American people intended to produce a schism within the populace.
This is exactly what political and military disinformation is intended to do. Disinformation misleads readers by making them believe they have read something, which in-fact, they haven’t actually read.
You may have experienced this yourself at a time in the past, when you were certain of facts you previously read. But upon careful rereading, you either could not find the sentence or paragraph that you initially thought was there or you discovered a word or two that changed the entire meaning of what you initially thought you had read. Even though at the time you may have shaken your head and brushed it off to old age setting in or needing eyeglasses or having been tired; the truth is more likely that you were one of the millions of victims ensnared each day by published or viewed disinformation.
Disinformation is a craft, which, in the right hands, can be nurtured into an art form. Disinformation is an effective tool, used to influence and control public opinion. To produce masterful disinformation means one must master the creation of written illusions. Disinformation is the creation of a path for readers, listeners or viewers; which is crafted to produce passion, nurture prejudice, incite response and induce fear. Like all good illusions, the truth is carefully and skillfully hidden from the reader’s perception.
While effective disinformation remains unseen and undetected by the public, once an individual is trained to identify disinformation, often times such work will stand out. In the same way an architect “sees” and identifies various building forms invisible to the general public or someone skilled in art can immediately identify the work of various artists, so too can those skilled in disinformation and propaganda recognize the work coming from one of their own.
Many books have been published about disinformation and about the use of disinformation by American and foreign governments, intelligence agencies, propagandists, revolutionary groups, advertisers, publishers, journalists and commentators. I encourage readers to research on-line and pick up a book or two on the subject.
I’m sure readers are wondering about now, just how this DHS document can be identified and classified as disinformation. I am also sure some readers are skeptical about my declaring that an official federal government document is false and intended for purposes other than what meets the eye.
We will take a quick look at the document and I will try to point out some of the telltale characteristics that identify it for what it truly is – disinformation. I want you to be skeptical or at least, keep an open mind. At the end, there’s a place for comments and you tell me how you feel after reading this column.
Let’s begin, shall we?
Start with page 1, under the paragraph (U) Scope. Note the sentence: “Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying United States Government sponsorship”.
Why in the world would that sentence be included as a major part of the “Scope” of the entire document? The Assessment was FOUO and never intended to reach the hands of the public or the press. Look at the footnotes on the bottom of this first page. You will see the warning that the document is not to be released to the press or the public. So why include this sentence as part of the Scope when the sentence would have no meaning or efficacy unless it actually entered into public hands? Why mention something like “Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion”, unless of course, you intend to send a message to the public – that same public that isn’t supposed to read this document in the first place – that the government actually engages in EFFORTS to INFLUENCE PUBLIC OPINION?
There is of course, a logical explanation. The sentence was inserted to provide legal protection for the authors should the true intent of the Assessment be revealed and there be attempts made to bring them to justice.
Let’s say this whole thing blows up in their face and some enterprising Journalist or Blogger out there discovers this Assessment is actually a work of fiction – raw propaganda – meant to INFLUENCE PUBLIC OPINION and not to inform law enforcement as was publicly stated.
Maybe some allegations get tossed out that it was part of a much broader conspiracy. Or maybe something so big is in the works that the conspirators engaged in this disinformation are truly scared and seek a measure of protection in this little, unobtrusive, disclaimer.
How can the people hold the authors accountable when they clearly warned everyone right at the beginning, in that sentence, right there in the SCOPE, that the intent of this assessment was to influence public opinion?
There cannot be a conspiracy if everyone was warned in the first place now, can there?
Most disinformation issued by governments can be exposed through footnotes and fine print. There isn’t a hell of a lot of art contained in it because the truly talented disinformation artists make a lot more money working outside government.
Read paragraph 1 on page 2 under Key Findings. It states that DHS has not one bit of information indicating there exists any threat against the US from “rightwing terrorists”
Did you read it? What did you think? You are probably thinking that I am going to point out the fact that this paragraph basically says that DHS doesn’t have a shred of facts to back up anything they are getting ready to allege. While that is true, the mainstream press has already hammered DHS for that and it doesn’t really interest us serious truth finders. Look at the words: “rightwing terrorists”. Those simple two, non-capitalized words that the eyes of journalists and bloggers and millions of readers, for the most part, just skated over in their reading of this document thus far.
Now, ask yourself this one little question: What rightwing terrorists?
Clearly, if there were any rightwing terrorists out there, wouldn’t the FBI or DHS have already arrested them? I mean, they’re TERRORISTS right!
Why didn’t the DHS document state that DHS has no information indicating that a rightwing terrorist group exists? Why did the authors of this report feel it necessary to plant in readers heads the assumption that there are indeed rightwing terrorists out there, but they’re just taking a break right
now from their usual terrorist chores?
Look at Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 on the same page two. These paragraphs are so embarrassing to the respective agencies involved in authoring this report, that I can only suspect they were intended to discredit the entire document.
Who in their right mind would attempt to author a serious threat assessment using data over a decade old? We are talking about the United States of America here – the richest, most powerful nation on Earth with unlimited resources expended upon its defense. Does DHS really mean to tell America that the very best they and the FBI can come up with in a domestic threat assessment hinges on experiences and data that is over a decade old?
What motivates the authors of this report to paint a picture of violent danger in the mind of America? Why is it important for the authors to invoke the idea that terrorists are right outside our doors and why the need to paint images of violence directed against police officers?
Clearly, there is no evidence that rightwing terrorists or terror groups exist in America. So why the need to invent some?
There has not been a rightwing domestic terror incident in the country for more than a decade! While it may be prudent to advise law enforcement to remain vigilant, it makes no sense to assert hat violence is imminent or that a threat even exists.
Look at paragraph 4 on page three. Here is the only example provided in the entire document that has a date in this century. It invokes an incident where a lone gunman killed three police officers in Pittsburgh on April 4th of this year. The report states, “The alleged gunman’s reaction reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a Jewish-controlled “one world government”.
Pretty powerful stuff don’t you think? I bet every cop reading this report felt a pang of anxiety at something this recent being told to them by the FBI and DHS. Read that statement and it seems pretty clear that some rightwing extremist hunted down and killed three cops.
The only problem however, is that this FBI/DHS statement is both false and misleading. In fact, the shooter, Richard Poplawski, got into an argument with his mother about a dog peeing in the house. The argument escalated and his mother decided to throw him out and called the cops to come and do it.
When the cops arrived, Poplawski started shooting.
Racism and conspiracy theories had nothing to do with it. It was about a screwed up guy, his screwed up mother and a dog that wasn’t housebroken. And the authors of this report knew that. This is why they used the words “alleged” and “reportedly”. So that when someone questioned them about putting B.S. into a major DHS report, they could shrug their shoulders and say, “ We must have read it somewhere on the Internet”.
Poplawski did keep guns – that’s obvious. And he may have also been a racist and all the other things the Feds claim. But he also had short hair and collected tattoos. So why didn’t DHS and the FBI warn police officers that Poplawski’s “reactions” may have been “influenced” by short hair and tattoos?
It would have made as much sense.
Look at page 5, paragraph 2 which reads, “Over the past 5 years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists…”
Wow, an official DHS/FBI report lumps militias – ALL MILITIAS – into the rightwing extremist category. That’s pretty outrageous don’t you think? After all, the Constitution recognizes militias and even goes out of its way to protect their existence. I looked at some state militia websites and their members and leaders actually seem more moderate and liberal – and apparently more tolerant then the authors of this DHS/FBI report – with their tossing about rhetoric that damns every militia and militia member as an “extremist” and lumps them in with racists and right wing zealots.
I don’t know. I was raised to believe that only hateful people paint others with such a broad brush and that classifying entire groups of diverse people is wrong and evil. I suppose the authors of this document have a reason to do that however. I can’t imagine how else a statement like that could pass through the levels of approval needed before getting published. And while the reason probably isn’t good for the country I want to live in, I imagine it must be an important element of whatever it is their thinking and the country they intend to make me live in.
Look at page 5, paragraph 5, which states, “Open source reporting alleged that those arrested had discussed and conducted surveillance for a machinegun attack on Hispanics”.
That indeed sounds serious! But what do you suppose the authors mean by “open source reporting”? Well, that means that they read it somewhere or saw it somewhere through unofficial channels or communications. So, here we have a comment about six “rightwing, extremist” militia members who were arrested on weapons charges. I suppose there was some sort of investigation by law enforcement. I suppose there was some sort of interrogation by law enforcement. And seeing as how this incident occurred way back in 2007, you would think everyone got to the bottom of this case and the facts would be pretty clear.
Wouldn’t you?
If you like, you can research the incident yourself. It is still available through the Birmingham News and bloggers around the Internet. I researched this and here is what I found:
In April of 2007, the entire membership of an Alabama militia group were arrested. It was comprised of six men. Initially the group called themselves the Naval militia but changed their name to the Alabama Free Militia. They all pled to charges and received sentences ranging up to 3 years. They were caught with homemade “grenades” and around 2,500 rounds of ammunition, which would last about 3 minutes in a serious firefight.
As hard as I tried, I couldn’t find a single word mentioned about any political leanings or deviant ideology held by this group or the individuals in the group other than a reference to a bumper sticker one member had on his pickup that read something about protecting the Second Amendment. At no time did any law enforcement official, prosecuting attorney, judge or anyone else for that matter, ever mention threats made by this group against anyone – including Hispanics.
In fact, the general consensus – even from law enforcement – was that these six good-ole-boys just liked screwing around with firearms and making big ass explosives. They never had a plan or voiced any plan to do anything against anyone.
But here we have a joint FBI/DHS report claiming these boys were out to kill Hispanics. And while the report claims that they got this information from somebody somewhere, they don’t offer a single bit of attribution for the story.
This allegation by the DHS/FBI authors is a complete fabrication. No evidence exists anywhere that there was racist or ethnic intent on the part of these six individuals. You have to ask yourself why the FBI and DHS, who jointly prepared this report, would even include such an accusation when so much evidence to the contrary exists from law enforcement, the news media and on the Internet?
If you and I can find from the Internet that this assertion about killing Hispanics is false, then how come the FBI and DHS, with all their resources and all their taxpayer funds, can’t seem t do the same?
Page 5, Paragraph 6 sites a Wyoming militia
member arrested in February, 2007 after communicating
his desire to go to the Mexican border and kill immigrants.
In researching this statement I found one arrest made of a Wyoming militia member in late 2006. The name of the arrested man was Richard Sarafin aka Havoc on militia blogs and he was one of approximately three members comprising some Wyoming militia group.
He was arrested on a weapons charge and not for having made any threats against anyone or any group. Apparently, he allegedly sold a weapon over the Internet to an undercover ATF agent, which constituted a crime. In a classic example of why prisoners should always keep their mouths shut until they get an attorney, Sarafin apparently told the ATF agent he intended to move to the Arizona border to assist militia groups combating illegal immigration. He never said he intended to harm or kill immigrants. Sarafin spent 18 months behind bars for the illegal weapon sale.
Again, the authors fabricated a key detail. Clearly, if anyone took the time to research this incident, they would find that racism and ideology played no role. It was a weapons violation – plain and simple.
We are seeing a pattern of lies emerge within this report. Ask yourself, why do the authors feel it necessary to lie? At the very beginning I pointed out the sentence in the Scope that stated the intent of the document was to “influence” the American public. To knowingly and willfully lie in order to influence the public is the definition of disinformation.
Page 6, paragraph 1 reads, “On the current front, legislation has been proposed this year requiring mandatory registration of all firearms in the United States…”
That’s ridiculous.
The only legislation I found is H.R. 45 – Blair Holt’s, Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009, reintroduced by Bobby Rush (D.IL). The Bill has been around since the Bush administration. Rush has reintroduced it, hoping that a Democratic Congress might now look favorably upon it.
They won’t.
The Bill hasn’t attracted a single cosponsor and even, if by some stretch of imagination, it did manage to become law, it would not require registration of all firearms in the United States. It would require registration of all handguns and certain rifles, but not all firearms as asserted in the DHS/FBI Assessment.
This Legislation was reintroduced on January 6th, 2009 – over 3 months ago! Since that time how often have you heard anyone crying out about this
Bill? It’s a non-starter and no one anywhere is kicking up much fuss about it.
Page 6, paragraph 2 reads, “Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred rightwing extremists – as well as law-abiding Americans – to make bulk purchases of ammunition.
Oh my, where to start with this jewel?
To begin with, its nice that following a paragraph that suggests it is gun legislation that is causing people to stockpile ammunition we have a sensible explanation offered. I must however, point out the fact that rightwing extremism is not illegal in the United States. Therefore, a statement that juxtaposes rightwing extremists and “law-abiding” Americans is clearly and intentionally inflammatory. Extremism, of any nature, is by and large legal in this country – thus far!
Page 6, last paragraph reads, “Law enforcement in 1996 arrested three rightwing militia members in Battle Creek, Michigan with pipe bombs, automatic weapons, and military ordinance that they planned to use in attacks on nearby military and federal facilities and infrastructure targets”.
I don’t think so.
On March 26, 1997, militia activist Brendon Blasz was arrested in Kalamazoo, Michigan and charged with making pipe bombs and other illegal explosives. Prosecutors say Blasz plotted to bomb the federal building in Battle Creek, the IRS building in Portage, a Kalamazoo television station and federal armories. But they also recommend leniency on his explosives conviction after Blasz promised to turn over a new leaf. He got 3 years in a federal pen.
I couldn’t find any information regarding any other arrest of Michigan militia members in 1995, 1996 or 1997.
Page 7, Paragraph 1 reads, “Rightwing extremist views bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and have recently focused on themes such as the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability to China and India, Russia’s control of energy resources and use of these to pressure other countries, and China’s investment in U.S. real estate and corporations as a part of subversion strategy”.
All I can say about this is that if bemoaning such things makes one a rightwing extremist, there’s a hell of a lot more rightwing extremists in this country than I ever thought!
Page 7, The entire section under “Disgruntled Military Veterans”
It fear I might convey too much dignity to the authors and agencies involved with this report by offering any rebuttal here.
Let’s just sum this section up by saying that everyone involved with the hyperbole and innuendo contained here should feel ashamed. Very, very, ashamed…
Page 8 – All of page 8.
We begin again stuck in the 1990’s hopelessly trying to find relevance in an America that no longer exists. It is so very pathetic.
Of special note is paragraphs five and six, where in paragraph five they cite the declining membership of militia groups throughout the U.S. and then directly contradict that statement in paragraph six, which states militia groups have had a slight increase in growth.
So what is it? Is membership in militia groups declining or increasing? According to DHS and the FBI, they’re doing both. And if you can’t understand how that is possible, remember that this document was never meant for people like you to read in the first place.
All disinformation campaigns have a purpose and I think it’s pretty clear that this document is part of such a campaign. So what’s left is determining whom or what is the target behind this particular campaign.
As stated earlier, the target could be obvious like Napolitano or another manager within DHS or the Bureau. People have knowingly released fabricated documents designed to inflame passions through false and misleading accusations, calculating that when things blow up in the press, the right heads will role.
The target could also be policy or working conditions within the FBI or in DHS. It could be hoped that embarrassment caused by the leaked document draws attention to a failed structure, low morale or dissention amongst various groups working together or in competition with one another.
Evidence supporting such targeting can be found in the speed in which the assessment was leaked to bloggers and journalists. It was in the hands of the media before most law enforcement agencies ever saw it.
It should come as no surprise to anyone who has worked in government or a large corporation that staff in DHS and the FBI has failed to gel into that smooth running, efficient and infallible terrorist watchdog the public was led to believe we created when agencies were combined under DHS. In truth, various groups within DHS despise each other and constantly fight for both funding and autonomy.
Disinformation in this report could be nothing more than a campaign by disgruntled employees trying to upset the public and embarrass their supervisors. And while it’s tempting to stop there and just chalk this up to some nitwits inside DHS occupying pay grades far above their abilities, as an analyst, I simply can’t do that.
Disinformation primes people for a predictable response. Let’s say a crime was committed in your neighborhood. The cops will pick up the most likely suspects and you will accept the most likely outcome. If you have previously been told that drug dealing is occurring nearby or in your neighborhood, you are likely to accept that drugs led to the crime. If you had been told that a wife seemed unhappy in her marriage, you are likely to accept the arrest of the husband should that wife go missing. The more you are primed by information or disinformation, the more likely you are to accept explanations or resolutions.
But what if the information you received about drug dealing in your neighborhood was false or it wasn’t true that a wife was unhappy in her marriage? What if that was all made up and told to you specifically so that you would accept an explanation or resolution that was needed sometime in the future?
Disinformation is used everyday to shape your view, prime your prejudices and make you a very predictable member of society.
The best way to avoid getting caught for commission of a crime is to let someone else take the fall. Cops will invariably round up the most likely suspects when a crime is committed so ideally, you would want to furnish them a likely suspect or two. Maybe you could go so far as to send cops a bulletin or something, telling them to be on the lookout for some bad guys who don’t even exist so they won’t be looking at you when you commit the crime.
Maybe…
Apparently, elements in DHS and the FBI collaborated to create this document and send it off to law enforcement throughout the U.S. They could have mentioned a lot of groups in the document like cyber terrorists and ecoterrorist and even extreme leftwing groups, who actually exist and have been active at the G-20 meetings in Europe and domestically. But for some reason, they chose to narrow their focus solely to rightwing groups. They chose not only to stigmatize certain people and groups, they also purposely leaked the document so that the American public could be taken in by some vast rightwing conspiracy theory. It’s obvious that some in government are keen to prime the public and law enforcement.
If something should occur in the next few months or year, the focus and suspicions of law enforcement and the public at large may be directed to some rightwing lone wolf that gets produced or even to some obscure militia group which suddenly stands accused. Maybe the press won’t feel a need to look further than to the obvious rightwing perpetrators that DHS and the FBI roundup for us.
After all, it won’t come as too much of a surprise to any of us. We were warned as recently as this week about the dangers of these rightwing extremists by a leaked DHS Assessment.
Remember?