Frienemies...

Here's the deal:

A large number of Iraq governmental pooh-bahs - the people for whom US military personnel have forfeited their lives, their able bodies, their lifestyles as they once knew them with their friends and families - are close pals with the folks in Iran whom President Bush proclaims are the *real* enemy.

It's no accident there is such Iranian influence in the nation that is supposed to be our "ally." It's been there since the getgo.

Only we haven't been told about it. Well, I should say that CNN is just recently starting to catch on to this story.

What does that mean?

It means that the Bush administration has known about this influence and *tolerated* it until now, when he is threatening to invade Iran unless they back off.

And what does *that* mean?

It means that Bush has what he considers the political clout to invade Iran.

Yes, really.

He claims Iran is doing horrible stuff in Iraq against the US and Iraqis.

Even though our "ally" Iraqi pooh-bahs have been taking and wasting billions of US tax dollars as well as US military protection from the *civil war* that has been flaring in their country without doing their work to make any substantial strides toward gaining peaceful negotiations between the three fighting factions in Iraq.

In short, though the Iraqi pooh-bahs claim to be our ally - even as they have been hob nobbing with their close Iranian pals from the getgo, Bush says Iran should be taught a lesson.

Oh, yes.

Telling Iranians they better leave our/their Iraqi pooh-bah pals alone, or they'll be sorry. They'll risk US invasion.

Of course such an invasion would completely crush our military and economic resources - both of which are stressed to the limit as it is.

But Bush doesn't seem to understand or care about these matters.

And there do not seem to be any leaders in the USA who can sound the alarm about this fraud and take action to get American soldiers, Marines, sailors, airmen and civilians out of harm's way there before Bush makes any more ignorant, deceitful and deadly decisions that don't cost him, personally, a cent - or a night's sleep for that matter.

Now, you may find a lack of evidence to back my assertions here. It's done for a reason. I'm hoping people will start caring enough to find out the truth for themselves.

Please do not take my word for this.

Find out the truth for yourself. Start with CNN's reports on our Iraqi 'friends' and their relationship to Iranian leaders.

Then be a detective. Go to the links, check out the backgrounds, the facts and the truth.

You'll discover that many Saudis - another "frienemy" of the US and neighbor of Iraq - have been paying for and actually supplying forces fighting the US in Iraq.

Finding facts has been extremely difficult because of the outright lies, misinformation, propaganda and cover-ups of the Bush administration.

But there is hope to find out what's really going on now because so many people who have known the truth are starting to emerge.

It's important that more and more people dig up the truth for themselves. And pass it on.

A desperate, deceitful president talks at us

Last night George Bush misrepresented the state of the horrific military battles he foisted on our patriotic soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen six years ago in Iraq.

He has lied to us from the beginning about our reason to be there and continues to lie about the state of the "war." A war never declared by congress, so it has to be Bush's War.

Fighting "terrorists" in Iraq has only emboldened them to spread their hateful destruction in more nations and in more and more cunning ways. Why should they stay in Iraq when the Iraqis are fighting the US there?

Young Muslim adults have been radicalized in the US, Europe, the UK and other nations because of the US policies in Iraq.

To "convince" Sunnis to flip on Al Qaeda wasn't difficult - it's already been happening for months because Sunnis don't like Al Qaeda. With Al Qaeda it's "my way or the highway," and the majority of tribes and populations don't like being pushed around like that. They use Al Qaeda to help them fight an enemy then tell them to beat it.

The fact that the US also gave considerable amounts of money to Sunnis to hasten their separation from Al Qaeda helped. But all that "progress" we heard about the Sunnis making in Iraq sort of flew in the face of those who had been bragging about it when one of their pro-US leaders was blown to bits in front of his own home - which had a tank and other extreme protective measures to assure his "safety."

The Bush administration's hand-picking Shiite leaders to "head" the faux Iraq "government" only made things worse (the reason the Sunnis withdrew from the faux Iraq "government" - um, they don't get along with Shiites in case you haven't heard).

The only real cheerleaders in this mess are the folks at Haliburton who are making more money than you and I can imagine, trying to sort of re-build at least some of what has been destroyed -- only to have it blown up again and again.

But they cry all the way to the offshore banks counting US tax money they're paid because they use FOREIGN workers from Indonesia and other nations who work on the very cheap - cheating Iraqis out of jobs. But hey, what does Haliburton care? People? Who gives a damn. Profits - oh, yeah.

Not to mention the billions of US dollars spent for private armies like Blackwater to fight in Iraq on our behalf, mercenaries who are being paid many times over what our soldiers receive for the same job.

Did you hear that there is now a *bullet shortage* in the US for law enforcement agencies because of the need for so many in Iraq?

And don't forget all our US tax-paid for weapons that were stolen by the terrorists to the tune of 6-8 billion US tax dollars - meaning our own weapons are killing our soldiers because of yet another inept, incompetent move by the US.

It boggles the mind when I see politicians actually saying they believe that fighting the terrorists in Iraq makes for a safer world. Seriously, are they on crack?

Fighting in Iraq from the first day of our incursion and subsequent occupation makes for an increasingly destabilized world, costing more good American and ally lives, striking not just in the Middle East but in other nations as well.

I heard recently that West Point cadets are leaving the academy in numbers unheard of because they don't want any part of a military that is forced to do what George Bush orders them to do.

The bottom line in this God-awful bloody mess is that George Bush has no strategy. He does not know how to gain peace or pull our soldiers out of harm's way or solve this horrific problem given his supposed religious fervor and fantasy about "freeing" Iraqis who must settle scores among themselves they have been fighting for eons. More innocent lives? What does he care as long as he gets his way. My way or the highway is his creed.

Split the country into three areas? Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis? It's at least leaning toward a discussion of a solution. George Bush won't hear of it.

There is not, and there never has been in the history of humankind, a victory over "insurgent" enemies. Because they are not identifiable. They are not cohesive. They are not uniformed. They are not trained to fight like our soldiers - they make up their own rules. They are not a government. They are not an army. And they don't rely on one leader like Osama bin Laden or George Bush for their marching orders.

They are motivated by fear and hatred of their identifiable, uniformed enemies and become incredibly resourceful and resilient in their goal to destroy them.

Remember this is the way George Washington and the revolutionary war was won against the British and mercenaries.

Here's what I shake my head at - and hinted at in a recent blog.

The terrorists have already defeated George Bush. Their goal was to incite fear - which the President used to his advantage year after year to get congress to provide more money for his "war" that has only turned out to be a failed idea and bloodbath and the world knows it.

Terrorists seek to destabilize economies. George Bush has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. Not only has he borrowed massive billions of dollars from China and sunk us into extraordinary debt to get his way, but the Iraq oil that he claimed would pay for the war isn't - and won't ... until the US "controls" the country and has easy access to it. That is not going to happen because the enemies of the US there keep messing up the oil output with destructive attacks.

All this as the Iraqis who were going to greet us as heroes and saviors (remember?) hate our crummy guts because they have no jobs, water, electricity, sewage, education, infrastructures and the slightest degree of safety. Independent poll after poll report that the Iraqis want the US to LEAVE.

More, many Iraqi "police" and "soldiers" supposedly supporting the US turn out to .. well, NOT support the US when they turn on us and kill more US soldiers. These acts can't be predicted because they're wearing uniforms we provide them to identify them as allies.

This is a little disjointed, but good grief. There is so much more information from reliable sources that report factually George Bush did not have the slightest concern for understanding the culture, politics, economy, tribal feuds, religions or people of Iraq before he invaded.

And now he does not want to take responsibility for solving the problem he got us into. Like any un-recovered addict, he wants to blame others, have others take care of him and bail him out of trouble. If he can keep "playing this" (Dead Certain) war until the new president takes over and figures how to clean up his mess, he will be happy and consider himself successful.

More, in Robert Draper's book, Bush says he plans to hit the speaking circuit and make a lot of cash from his "leadership experiences" after he leaves his throne.

Any trained soldier will tell you: the *first* plan of an attack ... is how to exit that attack. Shame on our military leaders for not insisting on that to begin with.

I do believe that George Bush will be - and should be - tried in the international court for breaking the Nuremberg Principles of crimes against humanity. The torture of prisoners (when other techniques have been found to be so much more effective), invading a sovereign nation which was in fact never a threat to the US, its borders or people (United Nations inspectors reported this before the invasion), the horrific outcomes of invading Iraq that were predicted not only by critics but by our own National Intelligence Estimates that he cavalierly ignored, the bogus reasons he has had for "staying the course" costing not only American lives but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives and US taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

The personal devastation to families suffering from Bush's ego-driven war is monumental.

And by extension, he is responsible for the lives of hundreds who have died in the US over the past several years because of Bush's failed and incompetent priorities. Money intended to shore up the levees in New Orleans went to Iraq, for example.

I pray for those people who continue to support this guy - and for his soul, because he has so much blood on his hands, he is swimming in it.

I'd prefer to stop writing about this in my blogs - I have so many good things happening in my life and so much inspiration and "how to's" to share.

But until those in Bush's incestuous administration stop lying to us, manipulating us to believe that what we see with our own eyes is not real ("Brownie's doing a heck of a job!"), I feel I must. I hope it makes a difference for you.

It's even heartbreaking to have so many weak people in our government who cannot seem to have the spine, wit or knowledge to stop this guy. He's already wrecked the Judicial and Executive Branches of our government as well as paralyzed the Legislative Branch.

There are no more checks and balances .. it's just us, paying for the checks he keeps signing without a shred of knowledge about what he is doing or humanity; without caring for our form of government or citizens, or even understanding the hell he has created.

Perhaps the most important question here is why did the rest of the world seem to know that this is what George Bush would do and all those people who voted for him did not? I guess the combination of an unquestioning and propagandizing media, a shell-shocked nation from 9-11 and a good dose of ignorant citizens who would rather focus on non-governmental non-issues like gay marriage would have to be the answer.

A lie does not equal one side of a story

I was asked to clarify something to which I referred in an earlier blog about journalism. Namely the lack of fair and thorough reporting in the US, especially when it comes to the Bush administration.

Here's how it works:

US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tells a lie. He tells congress - officially - that there were no accounts of any reports of civil liberties being denied or abused because of the Patriot Act, which gives the government lots of leeway to track down real and imagined "terrorists" within the US.

This lie is reported as "one side" of a story, instead of questioned, which puts the "other side" of the story (that's a lie) on the defensive.

First, if anyone had investigated, they would have found that his statement - apparently one of the few things he could remember - was not true. Several complaints had in fact already been registered to the FBI, all of which went to his office.

Result: misinformation put out to the public.

Generally, it was reported this way: "US Attorney General Gonzales says that, despite concerns about the Patriot Act, no civil liberties have been reported to be denied or abused."

Do you remember that story? I do because I didn't believe it.

So the "other side" of the story is defensive, saying that there have been civil liberties abuses.

Those who are certain there have been abuses - or even those who have actually filed abuse complaints - sound like weak whiners. Or bitter liberals. Or just plain liberals who "hate the Bush administration."

Eeeeeeeeeew.

To those "critics," the response is simple: those people don't like Bush. They do not bother to even try to find or tell us the truth. It is simply their way or the fairway.

The fact that there were complaints of civil rights abuses and complaints before Gonzales' testimony for congress was later reported, but not in a way that would challenge his dishonesty.

Except on Keith Olbermann's MSNBC program, which was reported long after Gonzales testified.

The only way a lie should be considered a story is when something is reported to be a lie.

For example, the story *should* read, "US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lied to congress today when he assured them there had been no complaints of civil liberties abuses due to the aggressive enforcement of the Patriot Act. In fact, before his first appearance before congress, six were confirmed by the FBI and forwarded to his office..."

This would put the liar on the defensive, rather than the truth tellers.

But thanks to so much misinformation and outright lies told by the memory-challenged Gonzales, the judicial branch of government has been hijacked; it is the first domino to fall in the long line of tumbling judicial domino's that are disabling the branch.

It starts at the top.

If the folks at the top, like Bush, don't respect the rule of law - ignoring it, snubbing their nose at it or not care about breaking the law because they know they won't be held accountable - how do they expect any of us folks down the food chain to respect it?

If government leaders tolerate or even perpetuate lies rather than facts; if media news chiefs don't make certain their reporters question sources - especially those known to misrepresent information or outright lie, the voting public remains ignorant and misinformed. Which keeps the abusers in power.

To get the truth, reporters need to make certain they do their research - or have time to do it before they're expected to tell the listening, reading or viewing public.

If news organizations are understaffed or staffed with too many inexperienced reporters, little research gets done so the "other side" of the lie is not reported. I remember one major national story that wasn't even recognized as a major national story because none of the inexperienced reporters (cheaper labor) was old enough to remember the initial event that made it such a huge deal.

Without the necessary knowledge or research, the "story" only goes out as the same old BS "he said," "he said," news, rather than reporting the actual facts - like the truth - or include any perspective.

If "we report ... he said x and she said y ... you decide." That is not journalism or reporting. It's transcribing what people say, whether it's a lie or the truth.

Meanwhile, speaking of the judicial branch: I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby had his 30 month prison sentence commuted by President Bush because Bush said Libby's family had suffered enough.

This is a boon to defense lawyers everywhere! Because according to the law, judges are never to consider family and other extraneous personal matters when determining the sentence of a convicted criminal.

Since the president himself has done it, watch for defense attorneys to ask judges to consider these personal matters when the judges before whom they appear determine the sentence for their clients.

There is still a year and a half of the Bush administration to go, and I cannot even imagine the amount of destruction to the government and the nation this guy and his henchmen will generate.

Sadly, Democrats come across as weak, powerless and incapable to do anything about these extraordinary abuses. They complain about the horrors of the administration, but then do little or nothing to stop or even curb them.

They can't stop this administration's hubris, arrogance and outright criminal destruction caused by an ignorant, incompetent, spiteful administration that chooses to live in denial of the wrath it has created in its own nation and the world - leaving in it's wake the bodies of thousands upon thousands of innocent victims and courageous military service people killed from Louisiana to Iraq.

Disinformation - part deux

OK, from yesterday's blog, we've established that disinformation is deliberately putting out false information to mislead people in an attempt to manipulate their behavior, beliefs, emotions, vote, money or all the above.

Wikipedia also describes disinformation as taking the form of forged documents and manuscripts, photographs, the propagation of malicious rumours and fabricated "intelligence."

For espionage or military intelligence, it means deliberately spreading false information to mislead an enemy as to one's position or course of action. It also distorts true information in such a way as to render it useless by the competitor (as in corporate espionage) or enemy.

Commerce and government also use disinformation to undermine a competitor or opposition (nation or political party) in a way always intended to manipulate its receiver.

Again, disinformation is outright deception and the blatant use of false statements to convince specific people that the disinformative lie is the truth in order to manipulate the behavior, beliefs, emotions, vote and/or money of the target audience.

Disinformation differs from propaganda. Disinformation's source can be amorphous - that is, feel like it comes from "on high," or an "authoritative source." Such as "an anonymous source in the Bush administration." "Scientific experts reveal..." "Democratic party sources..." "Medical authorities report..." Disinformation can also sound downright intelligent, even if it isn't true.

Propaganda is pretty blatant about its origin, and it's goal is to make you take some sort of action desired by its creator. "Christianity is the only true religion." "If you are not Muslim you are a 'non-believer.' and should die." "Anyone who doesn't believe in Jesus is going to hell." "If you don't care about what's good for the country? Vote against the immigration bill."

That's propaganda.

Propaganda can be well received by an uneducated audience, but can be considered insulting to informed people who read it because it's so biased and distorted and assumes a great deal of ignorance about its subject. Propaganda is a more in-your-face attempt to manipulate your behavior than disinformation - sometimes even encouraging you to take clandestine, cloak and dagger action, such as attend a meeting that might be against the law, seen as disloyal to an institution (educational, religious) or against a company's rules.

The Big Lie is an irrational story intended to hit you emotionally, counting on your strong negative (even knee-jerk) reaction to the subject of the Big Lie without any disinformation. Lots of statements passed off as "facts" pertaining to "September 11th" were in fact part of a Big Lie campaign to manipulate your point of view about Iraq and "the war on terrorism."

Because many Americans already have a negative attitude toward specific groups, such as gays and lesbians, it's easy to initiate many shocking, irrational Big Lie campaigns against them that by definition are totally untrue, such as gay and lesbian parents are somehow not as good as their heterosexual counterparts. Truth is, as verified by The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1999) there is no difference between gay and lesbian parents and their counterparts. In fact, it's noted that because gay and lesbian parents must be so carefully and intensely screened before they are allowed to adopt, there is evidence they even excel at their child rearing skills.

Hitler and the Nazi's conducted dozens of Big Lie campaigns against Jews, gays and other groups during World War II because so many were already negatively disposed toward them. It was easy to capitalize on the bigotry that already existed.

The world-wide Big Lie campaign underway now intends to convince you that The Holocaust never happened. Despite the overwhelming legal, photographic and eyewitness evidence, Big Lie tellers want to erase from our history books the fact that more than nine million people were killed by the Nazi's during WWII in concentration camps - most of them killed in gas chambers.

Along with six million Jews, three million gays, Catholics, Gypsies and those opposed to the Nazi party were murdered by Nazi's in concentration camps, following orders from German dictator Adolf Hitler.

Censorship is used to prevent information from being released - usually blocking just one side of an argument or anything that is seen as critical of the group or individual doing the censoring. Normally, censorship is accompanied with disinformation about the group or individual being censored so there is a complete disdain for the group or individual being censored and about whom intentionally untrue information is spread.

The intention of those censoring and disinforming is to make themselves appear to be the good guys; their opponents - people to be shunned, denied everything from jobs to service, or even that their numbers are so small that they barely exist.

A censorship/disinformation campaign usually makes general populations believe that there is little, if any threat from those being censored, no matter how large their actual numbers or how strongly dissidence is factually experienced in a nation, company, institution (military, relgious).

So much for intentional lies, distortions and irrational messages.

Now we deal with unintentional untruths that can have the same result: misinformation.

This is misinformation forwarded which is believed to be true. Media help pass on misinformation on a mass basis when they don't research their stories or question the facts or sources.

Misinformation becomes disinformation when "news personalities" get hold of the misinformation and pass it on in a faux factual manner that suits their biases. In the first draft of this blog I named names on the right and left who do this, but I'll leave it up to you to fill them in because you know who they are and you are smart enough to detect their inaccurate reading of factual information.

Understanding the use of disinformation is crucial when dealing with people who believe there are only two types of people: good and evil. Whether it's George Bush or Osama Bin Laden, whoever is on the speaking end of the conversation, they believe they are the "good" part of that equation and that it's OK for their side to use it because it's only advancing their good cause.

The definition of maturity is to hold two opposing points simultaneously, understanding that they can exist at once, and deal with both in a way that is constructive. Such as: while the US is considered the greatest nation in the world, it has done some horrible things in its history. It tolerated slavery, dropped two atom bombs on a warring nation when one alone was overkill with massive collateral damage, and intentionally killed thousands of American Indians by giving them blankets infested with smallpox as they were forced to move from their reservation, walking along what came to be known The Trail of Tears - and more.

America, according to its constitution, is not a nation of good and evil, nor is it intended to view the world that way; it is supposed to be a nation of justice. There's a difference. Without justice, we don't learn from our mistakes. Without justice we turn a blind eye to scurrilous acts taken against our own citizens (i.e., the McCarthy Era) and others (imprisoning unindicted foreign national and US citizens for whom there is no evidence of wrongdoing indefinitely at Guantanamo).

Refusing to learn from our mistakes? That would, indeed, assure the unconstitutional continuation of evil deeds committed by the US government not accidently, but on purpose.

Disinformation

The Bush administration has used disinformation masterfully over the past eight years. Karl Rove is normally the creator of the self-serving fabrications spread to party loyalists, conservative groups, media, churches and others who will spread false information without question until the lie is believed to be the truth.

What exactly is "disinformation?"

It's the deliberate pronouncement of fraudulent statements passed off as "facts."

For example, many Americans still believe that Saddam Hussein, the executed leader of Iraq, was in some way responsible for the attack on the New York City World Trade Center September 11, 2001.

That false statement was made by Bush administration spokespeople so often, many Americans believed the lie when it was initially released, and astonishingly continue to believe it, even though it has been proved a hundred times over to be outrightly and completely false.

If it's possible, Saddam Hussein and Iraq had less than nothing to do with the attack.

Iraq was terrorist-free under Hussein because he was the ultimate dictator - paranoid about outsiders stirring up his carefully controlled population, which he ruled with a near- sadistic hand. He knew if any of the dozens of warring tribal factions in Iraq were armed or felt free to fight again (tribal wars have been going on for centuries, including the conflict between the Sunnis and Shiites), he would lose control of the people and "his" country.

It was not until the US attacked Iraq that terrorists, including al qaeda, found the opening they sought to not only move into the country, but use the deadly debacle created by the US in Iraq to recruit new members because now they had concrete evidence that the US is an aggressor; that it wants to occupy Middle Eastern nations.

Interestingly, the number of terrorists actually needed in Iraq is very few because now so many Iraqis themselves are furious at the US - whom they blame for devastating their country and being the cause of the violent deaths of some 600,000 innocent Iraqis. Their anti-US feelings have fomented them into taking arms against our soldiers in harms way there.

American intelligence sources report that approximately 4% of fighters in Iraq are associated with al qaeda. If that sounds like it's good news, it's not. It only means all the terrorist cells and individuals not fighting in Iraq are free to ply their trades in other nations.

Al Gore's #1 NYT best selling book The Assault on Reason just arrived here; I'll read it this week and review it next week here. I have a feeling these sorts of issues will be discussed there because often, if we're accurately informed about a subject, we can discern truth from lie by using simple reason.

Like, if you knew about how Saddam ran his country - ruling by making people terrified of him while keeping it terrorist-free, never wanting anyone to challenge his autocratic authoritarianism; that he would never tolerate tribal in-fighting because it would detract from his iron-fisted control - you would understand that anyone claiming that terrorists were allowed in Iraq or that Saddam had anything to do with them is simply and outright unreasonable.

Because the US Senate Intelligence Committee's Report on Prewar Intelligence Assessment about Postwar Iraq outlined these and many other facts, it predicted the horrors we face today if Saddam were not only unseated but the nation itself attacked to allow US-backed individuals to take over.

Unfortunately, many US Senators and Representatives believed this misinformation put out by the Bush administration instead of reading the report gathered by some 81 separate intelligence agencies, and voted to give George Bush the authority to invade Iraq - including US Senator Hilary Clinton.

It all comes back to the need for an educated, informed nation to effectively run a democratic republic like the United States.

But between outright disinformation disseminated freely by people who know the truth because they want to manipulate you, and an unquestioning media - that can be hard to come by through "normal" media outlets. US media tend to reproduce whatever they are told by "authoritative" sources without question or perspective - and those "authoritative sources" tend to be the very people who disseminate disinformation these days.

Think of the glib government disinformation on its response to Katrina - that "Brownie's doing a heck of a job," while we saw the massive destruction with our own eyes. The meteorologist who gave President Bush and the US Federal Government the grave warning of the oncoming disaster himself days before the hurricane struck. The response: "We had no idea this would happen."

Disinformers *love* this; they also love how frightened US media are when they are accused of being "unfair" or "one-sided" about their coverage.

Here's how that works:

Mr. X, an authoritative spokesperson, says "10."

US media pass it on, uncensored, unquestioned, unexamined.

Then Mr. C, an authoritative spokesperson who knows that "10" is an outright lie, says, "10 is not true! In fact, here's evidence it's an outright fabrication and harmful to our nation!" And there's the proof that you can see with your own eyes (Iraq's astonishing devastation, Katrina reconstruction is NOT happening as promised, etc.)

Mr. X responds, "There the 'liberal media' goes again - unfairly showing only ONE SIDE of the story!"

The media, terrified of being called "unfair," steps up the quotes by Mr. X and his cohorts, so we keep hearing "10," over and over again, and seldom see Mr. C and the actual evidence of Mr. X's fraudulent statement.

After awhile, "10" sounds like it *should* be true. Thereby becoming part of Stephen Colbert's genius term, "truthiness;" which means something that feels like it should be true.

By the way, I hope you understand that disinformers believe *you* are not only ignorant, but stupid. Stupid enough to buy whatever they sell. They particularly need their own followers to be ignorant of facts and stupid. Who else would believe such overtly ignorant statements and disinformation but people who want to believe them because they are their leaders and trust them blindly.

That's why "believers" whose information is challenged become so emotionally charged and outraged when others tell them anything that disagrees with what they've been told by their leaders. Because if the truth-tellers make those leaders wrong, then they -- the believers -- have to realize how stupid they were to believe them in the first place.

And no one likes to think of themselves as being duped. It's embarrassing. So they fight harder to "prove" the disinformation given them by their leaders.

This happens all the time in extremist religious circles who disperse disinformation, whether it's extreme fundamentalist Muslims or extreme fundamentalist Christians.

Here are more ways Wikipedia finds disinformation (intentional misinformation, lies, misrepresentation) are used: forged documents, manuscripts, photographs; propagation of malicious rumors and fabricated intelligence.

More, "In the context of espionage or military intelligence, it is the deliberate spreading of false information to mislead an enemy as to one's position or course of action. It also includes the distortion of true information in such a way as to render it useless.

"Disinformation techniques may also be found in commerce and government, used by one group to try to undermine the position of a competitor. It in fact is the act of deception and blatant false statements to convince someone of an untruth."

Tomorrow, I'll discuss how disinformation differs from propaganda, misinformation, The Big Lie, and other ways people with specific agendas not only try, but succeed to control your behavior, votes and money with misleading and outright untruthful statements.