...the gift that keeps on giving! Mind you, before I'm allowed to brief a 2 star or equivalent, my brief will have been examined and defended (by me) at least four different times. And that's not talklng about what happens for a public release outside of my little slice of bureaucracy.
One can't help but believe that DHS has a similar process. One hopes anyway. Yet the evidence at times suggests otherwise.
The DHS I&A has released a lexicon. That's a good idea, as the purpose of a published lexicon is to establish a common language and agreed-upon definitions, in order to keep the damage done by assumptions about meanings to a minimum. Nothing wrong with having a lexicon. I use two different ones in my work, and one of the things I have to defend in my briefings are my usages. And boy, does it matter -because in my current business, misuse the terms, or use them fast and loose, and someone in the audience is going to unload a rhetorical 10 gauge on you and if they're senior enough, they may choose to dismiss your work. Which means someone else has to repackage and represent, which wastes time, money and effort and doesn't help your job security, either. And picayune as it seems, it will be your fault.
So, DHS has issued a Domestic Extremism Lexicon, available by clicking that link. I know, I'm late to this. Because I wanted to wait until I really read the whole thing, rather than the snippets people are posting. Which, perhaps, more people should have done.
Here's what I like about it, because it seems to mean we're really pretty safe. Hey, this is an official government document, so it must be true and accurate, right? After all, government knows best in all things. I know, a politician told me so once, and we have a whole crowd of them who are suggesting that they, collectively, know how to manage banks and investment houses, the auto industry, the energy industry and seem poised to take over health care, too. So, they must be right, lookit all the stuff they're good at! According to the lexicon, there is *no* muslim extremism in the United States. None whatsover. If there was, a definition would be in the lexicon, after all. Right?
Bueller? Bueller?
No, really. Take a look!
There's all sorts of definitions for white racist extremism, from Aryan Nations through Nordic Peoples, to the Phineas Priesthood. There are several definitions for black extremism, though of course, that can't be termed racist, because only whites can be called racist. Sovereign citizens, Mexican separatists, Cubans, anti-abortion, environmental, ethnic-based, Greenies, hacktivists, Jews, leftwing, rightwing, neo-Nazis, patriot movement, skinheads, Puerto Ricans, anti-taxers, a virtual smorgasbord.
But nothing about radical Islamism, not even hiding in the the areas where you might expect to find Mr. Farrakhan and crowd hanging out.
Some of the categories are pretty broadly defined, but interestingly enough, 2nd Amendment gun nuts didn't earn a direct call-out, though we got a hand-wave in the definition of the militia movement.
We bloggers did earn a mention though.
Except there's an "Oops" in all the drama. I've seen some finger-pointing and breast- beating elsewhere about this - but you have to read the whole thing. Well, at least the first paragraph, anyway. The one in bold on the first page. Buried in the administrivia of the first paragraph in the document is this important caveat:
One can't help but believe that DHS has a similar process. One hopes anyway. Yet the evidence at times suggests otherwise.
The DHS I&A has released a lexicon. That's a good idea, as the purpose of a published lexicon is to establish a common language and agreed-upon definitions, in order to keep the damage done by assumptions about meanings to a minimum. Nothing wrong with having a lexicon. I use two different ones in my work, and one of the things I have to defend in my briefings are my usages. And boy, does it matter -because in my current business, misuse the terms, or use them fast and loose, and someone in the audience is going to unload a rhetorical 10 gauge on you and if they're senior enough, they may choose to dismiss your work. Which means someone else has to repackage and represent, which wastes time, money and effort and doesn't help your job security, either. And picayune as it seems, it will be your fault.
So, DHS has issued a Domestic Extremism Lexicon, available by clicking that link. I know, I'm late to this. Because I wanted to wait until I really read the whole thing, rather than the snippets people are posting. Which, perhaps, more people should have done.
Here's what I like about it, because it seems to mean we're really pretty safe. Hey, this is an official government document, so it must be true and accurate, right? After all, government knows best in all things. I know, a politician told me so once, and we have a whole crowd of them who are suggesting that they, collectively, know how to manage banks and investment houses, the auto industry, the energy industry and seem poised to take over health care, too. So, they must be right, lookit all the stuff they're good at! According to the lexicon, there is *no* muslim extremism in the United States. None whatsover. If there was, a definition would be in the lexicon, after all. Right?
Bueller? Bueller?
No, really. Take a look!
There's all sorts of definitions for white racist extremism, from Aryan Nations through Nordic Peoples, to the Phineas Priesthood. There are several definitions for black extremism, though of course, that can't be termed racist, because only whites can be called racist. Sovereign citizens, Mexican separatists, Cubans, anti-abortion, environmental, ethnic-based, Greenies, hacktivists, Jews, leftwing, rightwing, neo-Nazis, patriot movement, skinheads, Puerto Ricans, anti-taxers, a virtual smorgasbord.
But nothing about radical Islamism, not even hiding in the the areas where you might expect to find Mr. Farrakhan and crowd hanging out.
Some of the categories are pretty broadly defined, but interestingly enough, 2nd Amendment gun nuts didn't earn a direct call-out, though we got a hand-wave in the definition of the militia movement.
We bloggers did earn a mention though.
alternative media: A term used to describe various information sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and outlets.
Except there's an "Oops" in all the drama. I've seen some finger-pointing and breast- beating elsewhere about this - but you have to read the whole thing. Well, at least the first paragraph, anyway. The one in bold on the first page. Buried in the administrivia of the first paragraph in the document is this important caveat:
Emphasis mine. Could it be that domestic, Islamic extremism merits its very own lexicon? One waits for the sieve that is the LEO intel community to release that one into the wild. One can only squirm in breathless anticipation of how CAIR, et.al., will react.This product is one in a series of reference aids designed to provide operational and intelligence advice and assistance to other elements of DHS, as well as state, local, and regional fusions centers. DHS/I&A intends this background information to assist federal, state, local, and tribal homeland security and law enforcement officials in conducting analytic activities. This product provides definitions for key terms and phrases that often appear in DHS analysis that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States. Definitions were derived from a variety of open source materials and unclassified information, then further developed during facilitated workshops with DHS intelligence analysts knowledgeable about domestic, non-Islamic extremism in the United States.
The fact that the Obama administration feels more threatened by "right-wing" groups tells us just how "left-wing" they are.
While their report on Left Wing extremism was pretty mild, I'll reserve full judgement until we get a chance to see the reports of domestic Islamic extremism before I make a full assessment.
And that, of course, will rely on them to continue to have people who will defy the security markings.
in fact, I wouldn't be shocked to find that some of the more sensitive ones get someting other than FOUO to make them less likely to get released into the wild.
There are plenty of those wannabe-censors in the Obama Administration (reference: the Swine Flu name change). I guess that the only question yet to answer is just how high a censor will pick up on this Lexicon.
The good thing about the lexicon being out there is that it does give everybody a point of departure to discuss the HLD view of the domestic scene that the lexicon lays out. And I also believe most of these documents were under preparation or would have been produced under the previous administration, too.
The bad side is... it's just a dictionary. Far more important are the other documents that we've seen.
I think the documents that we've seen thus far have been essentially executive summaries, and that the real documents, which hopefully give greater detail and better context, are under higher levels of classification.
Of course, the problem with that is that many, if not most, "Joe Average" LEOs are only going to read the exec summaries, and won't get the data with higher classifications which might do a much better job of providing context.
But without a window into that, we can't say. And, of course, the Catch 22 for me would apply - were I to get access to that data (and I might be able to legitimately do so) then my confidentiality agreements would forbid me from talking about it, even if it was to the advantage of the government to talk about them.
And I would honor those agreements. But that's just bravado, since I do not have, nor am I looking to obtain, the classified documents.
If someone has them, please don't send them to me, as I don't have the legitimate need to know and would be compelled to report the reciept of the documents, and you'd get my computer confiscated and wiped, too. That would *really* tick me off.
The paranoid side of me, though, tends to bristle just a tad at some of the generalizations, particularly in the "Right Wing" report. While, for example, people supporting Third Party candidates or displaying the Live Free Or Die emblems can indeed be more prone to commit criminal acts, there are probably ten times as many who would never even consider it. There just seemed to be, in that one at least, a degree or two of demonizing the political opposition.
Some of the critics of the RW DHS report noted the timing of the release, and apparent rush to get it out, suggesting it was done so to coincide with the Tea Parties. While I don't know one way or the other about that, if some saw that, and may have decided "hmm, maybe I better NOT show up after work on Tuesday, sounds like there might be trouble." If that was the motivation, I would wonder how much it may have suppressed turnout; 10%? 25%? 50%? In any case, the lower the turnout of just 'regular' folks would bring more emphasis to the 'nuts' that DID attend, thereby making it easier to dismiss the whole operation.
As I asked a friend the other evening over BBQ and beers, at what point am I NOT sounding like a survivalist freak and seeing a genuine threat to our way of life? Not an easy line to determine, and will likely be at different points for everyone.
So, in that it differs radically by presenting *both* sides of most political issues (and stories), Fox News is now officially "alternative media"?
I've seen Fox News listed as alternative media, yes. For political reasons, as best I can tell.
JamesLee-
The only reason I don't have a tattoo at the moment is because when I was in the middle of researching exactly what I'd want to have permanently on my body, my workspace got a USN directive with pictures that basically made anything obviously Catholic or Celtic be considered "hate" related, and thus not allowed.
Apparently related to MS-13 and neo-Norse skin heads using the symbols.
When I couldn't use Celtic knotwork, crucifixes, eye motifs or Latin inscriptions, I was pretty much out of anything I'm confident in keeping my entire life.
The borderline-psychotic search for "indicators" of unacceptable stuff isn't anything new.
Yikes! That IS a bit scary. I don't recall anything like that done when I was in. Of course, I think about the only tattoo I could ever bring myself to get would be the crossed cannons on my left arm. Never went through with it.
Oh .... and the fact that I was 30 DM's short. LOL
"And, this thread is officially dead."
Huzzah! And for once, I'm not responsible or being blamed for its demise!
Because they won't work in the future either. :-<>