It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DHS Emails Expose the Engineering of a Narrative

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:06 PM
link   
On January 25th, the newly sworn in President Donald Trump issued the following executive order:

Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States


Section 1. Purpose. Interior enforcement of our Nation's immigration laws is critically important to the national security and public safety of the United States. Many aliens who illegally enter the United States and those who overstay or otherwise violate the terms of their visas present a significant threat to national security and public safety. This is particularly so for aliens who engage in criminal conduct in the United States.

Sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States. These jurisdictions have caused immeasurable harm to the American people and to the very fabric of our Republic.


This was hardly a surprising move considering the nature of candidate Trump's rhetoric about Mexican rapists and his repeated invocation of Kate Steinle. Fear is perhaps the most effective, hence popular, method of manipulating the masses. From what I've observed, it seems to that when it comes to choosing a boogeyman, right-wingers favor non-whites and non-Christians (or here in the US, particularly in the past, non-Protestants) whereas Leftist employ... well... right-wingers. In either case, the name of the game is to generate fear, distrust and outrage by using the most egregious examples from among the boogeymen.

Nothing gets results quite like a manufactured crisis and for reactionaries, it's the specter of invasive hordes of rapists that really get the juices flowing. Of course, it's not enough to simply foment a sort of hysteria — to be truly effective, the manipulator must also show an ability to remove the source of the anxiety — to resolve the crisis. (or at least be seen as the only one attempting to fight the "crisis")

On February 6th, less than two weeks after Trump signed the EO, federal agents conducted a week-long series of immigration enforcement raids. It seems readily apparent that the EO and subsequent raids were designed to show that the new President was making good on campaign promises. That's what incoming administrations do after all.

A cache of redacted emails obtained through a FOIA request by students of Vanderbilt University Law School was provided to independent media outlet, The Intercept. These emails provide an interesting peek into how federal agencies seek to promote political narratives.


On February 10, as the raids kicked off, an ICE executive in Washington sent an “URGENT” directive to the agency’s chiefs of staff around the country. “Please put together a white paper covering the three most egregious cases,” for each location, the acting chief of staff of ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations wrote in the email. “If a location has only one egregious case — then include an extra egregious case from another city.”





The email indicated the assignment was due that night, but a day later, an agent at ICE’s San Antonio office sent an internal email saying the team had come up short. “I have been pinged by HQ this morning indicating that we failed at this tasking,” the agent wrote.

As the hours passed, the pressure on local agents to come up with something grew more intense. “As soon as you come in, your sole focus today will be compiling three egregious case write-ups,” an assistant field office director at the agency’s Austin Resident Office wrote to that team on February 12, noting that the national and San Antonio offices were growing impatient. “HQ and SNA will ping us in the afternoon for sure.”

Then the agent added that a team of officers had “just picked up a criminal a few minutes ago, so get with him for your first egregious case.”




From the related emails, it seems that local offices were having quite a bit of trouble complying with the request for propaganda fodder which is clearly understood to be in support of the narrative by the reference to Trump's recent EOs:




In fact, ICE’s attempts to provide “egregious” examples of criminals being apprehended in the raids were lagging, the emails suggest. On February 11, an official responded to a colleague’s list of egregious cases by pointing out that they were unrelated to the ongoing operation.

The arrest dates are before any operation and even before the EO’s. What is up with these cases?” the official wrote.


A follow up story in The Intercept highlighted notation in the request email indicating that the request came directly from the then DHS Secretary, John Kelly:


As a reader of The Intercept pointed out, the email’s subject line — “Due Tonight for S1 – URGENT” — meant that the request had been made by the secretary of Homeland Security himself, referred to as “S1” in department shorthand.

Kelly was at the helm of the department at the time, before he was appointed in July to replace Reince Priebus as White House chief of staff.

The White House and DHS did not respond to requests for comment. ICE issued a statement in response to The Intercept’s original story, but did not answer questions about what officials meant by “egregious cases” and why they felt the need to highlight such cases in the media.

edit on 2017-10-16 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Dropped by to comment but realized half way through that ive lost all desire to participate in this stuff anymore.

I would point out that I disagree with the majority of what you post but I respect the way in which you present your positions and arguments.

**I'm fully aware I have contributed nothing but merlot has compelled me to speak**
edit on 16-10-2017 by In4ormant because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

Fair enough! I've started to develop political fatigue myself.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Illegal Alien Crime Accounts for over 30% of Murders in Many States
www.breitbart.com...

Elusive crime wave data shows frightening toll of illegal immigrant criminals
www.foxnews.com...

Illegal Aliens Murder at a Much Higher Rate Than US Citizens Do
www.americanthinker.com...



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Do you have anything directly related to the topic or are you just dropping by with links to your favorite right-wing propaganda mills expecting me to show you how you're being lied to?



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:30 PM
link   
Just sat down with the team today to go over outstanding issues and next year's budget. I asked the team to provide me with five examples of incidents across the enterprise which could help she'd light on our upcoming budget request for 2018.

I told them I wanted the most significant examples.

This is standard stuff man.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Little of both.

Here’s Proof Illegal Immigration Doesn’t Cause More Murders, In One Chart
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Hispanic crime and illegal immigration in the United States
openborders.info...

Wedge issue, used to keep us at each other's throats and not asking about medical care, term limits, lobbying....... Works every time it's tried.



,
edit on 16-10-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Hey at least they were trying to do their job apprehending some criminal illegals as opposed to the sanctuary cities giving them all a free Leftist pass.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

OMG. Say it's not true!

jk...who isn't?

On topic: I think we can safely assume all governments manipulate and lie. Some more than others. I'm arriving at the point in my life where I realize I'll never see it any other way. Maybe future generations will have better luck.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter
Just sat down with the team today to go over outstanding issues and next year's budget. I asked the team to provide me with five examples of incidents across the enterprise which could help she'd light on our upcoming budget request for 2018.

I told them I wanted the most significant examples.

This is standard stuff man.


Yes, seeing the same. I don't get the complaint here.

Getting Best / Worst examples to make your point is kind of SOP.
edit on 16-10-2017 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

So in essence, the fact that illegals are committing heinous crimes in the US isn't up for debate, you've tapped out on that... now we're stuck arguing the thresholds for "crisis" and "eggregious" and how those thresholds are approached. Gotcha.

What I don't get and likely never will is how any American reaches the point where they want our doors held wide open to the direct detriment of themselves, their family, and their country. Is there some sort of brownie point system I'm unaware of at play here... commit 10 acts of valor signalling and get a free churro? It's not even a partisan thing anymore, either... seems to be occurring on all sides these days, the vilification of age old national protectionist laws and regulations. I simply don't get it.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:37 PM
link   
I get it. I see what your saying here. How is this any different than boogeymen from the opposing side?

I've been watching American Horror Story so seeing the dramatically intense version of politics has taken a humorous turn on the whole platform.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Merlot again here but lets go.

You are corrrect, we are reduced to "acceptable" and "tolerable" levels of disposition.

When did we vote away our ability to be "absolute" in our intolerance of an issue?



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Here, I'll play along. Let's take the first piece from Brietbart that was dismantled by Politifact:


He said "criminal aliens" accounted for 38 percent of murder convictions in five states between 2008 and 2014.

In fact, the presentation offered numbers for 2005 to 2008.

That's not the only issue. The presentation’s author, James Simpson, told us he had emailed Breitbart about Tancredo’s use of his presentation. "(Tancredo) quoted the whole thing incorrectly," Simpson told PunditFact.


Worse:


Simpson’s report includes findings from two separate sources: an article that describes 2008-14 data from the Texas Department of Public Safety, and his digest of a 2011 Government Accountability Office report, which uses 2005-08 numbers.

The real figure may be impossible to know; Texas appears to be the only one of the five states that actually keeps track of convictions of criminal aliens. The "criminal aliens" label applies to noncitizens who have either legal or illegal immigration status. (It is incorrect to consider all of them as illegal immigrants.)

With various estimates floating around in Tancredo’s article, it’s useful to start with the solid numbers out of Texas.

The Texas Department of Public Safety continuously updates its tally of criminal aliens booked into local jails, tracking the charges filed and whether the person was convicted.

The agency’s latest report covers June 1, 2011, to July 31, 2015. In that time, 344 noncitizens were convicted of homicide. In about the same period, Texas had 4,571 murders. (There’s a difference between calendar and fiscal years, but as of this writing, the differences balance out.) So based on counts of actual cases, criminal aliens account for 7.5 percent of all homicides in Texas.
That figure is striking because it is one-fifth as large as the number Simpson gave in his presentation. Simpson said, "Illegal aliens have committed 35 percent of all murders in Texas since 2008."

Simpson told us he had not seen the official Texas report. He had relied solely on an article for PJ Media.


So Simpson was simply mangling disinformation from PJ Media and then the other of the Breitbart nonsense took that and mangled it even more.

The other source was the widely discredited 2011 GAO study that is often used for the source of bull# statistics. The study authors gave their own study a margin of error of +/- 20 percent for the crime stats:


The researchers detailed a host of caveats: At the state level, it’s possible that some people are counted twice if, for example, they are first kept at a county jail and are then transferred to a state prison. And the margin of error for the overall tally of homicides, as well as other crimes, was +/- 20 percent.


You can easily find critiques of the GAO study. This CATO article points out some of the ways in which the GAO study is completely abused:

There Is No Evidence of an Illegal Immigrant Crime Wave: Why the “Elusive Crime Wave Data Shows Frightening Toll of Illegal Immigrant Criminals” Is Flawed


Second, Ms. Zimmerman misreported the definition of a criminal alien which she claimed were all illegal immigrants. The GAO report claims that there were 55,000 criminal aliens in federal prison in 2010 and it defines criminal aliens as “[n]oncitizens who are residing in the United States legally or illegally and are convicted of a crime.” This is an important distinction because there were about 22.5 million foreigners living in the United States in 2010 without citizenship but only about half of them were illegal immigrants. By lumping them together, Ms. Zimmerman makes illegal immigrants seem more crime prone and legal immigrants less crime prone.

Third, the 296,000 figure was the estimated total number of incarcerations of illegal immigrants over the course of the entire year of 2009, not the number of illegal immigrants incarcerated. An example will help illustrate this point: If a criminal alien was incarcerated for 10 short sentences, released after each one, and then incarcerated after each one then that single alien would account for 10 incarcerations under the SCAAP figure.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: theantediluvian

So in essence, the fact that illegals are committing heinous crimes in the US isn't up for debate, you've tapped out on that... now we're stuck arguing the thresholds for "crisis" and "eggregious" and how those thresholds are approached. Gotcha.

What I don't get and likely never will is how any American reaches the point where they want our doors held wide open to the direct detriment of themselves, their family, and their country. Is there some sort of brownie point system I'm unaware of at play here... commit 10 acts of valor signalling and get a free churro? It's not even a partisan thing anymore, either... seems to be occurring on all sides these days, the vilification of age old national protectionist laws and regulations. I simply don't get it.


You meant "virtue signaling" — tighten up.

Thresholds for what does or doesn't constitute a crisis are indeed important. We all accept that within any group of people, there's a certain amount of criminals. That's just life, right? I mean we do what we can to prevent their crimes but it's never zero. Giving the appearance of a massive crime wave, manufacturing a crisis, is manipulation — using irrational fear as a means to and end.
edit on 2017-10-16 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I would ask this.

At what point does ANY level of criminal activity not call for a response?

Don't we all become prisoners to statistical differences that suit certain narratives and fail to realize that all our energy is placed in being right versus dealing with our issues no matter the scope?



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

My point in both my posts is that we are fed information by the 6 corps that own 90% of everything we see, hear or read. And they a deliberately telling the public 2 different stories. This is simply a wedge issue that people bite on and will not let go.

If all illegals were not here there would be less crime because the small percent of bad would not be here along with the law abiding illegals (other than breaking the law to be here).



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Sometimes i have a moment of drunken clarity and realise that we all want the same things we just word it differently or just cant squelch our pride enough to let the other guy take the first step down the path.

Another bottle calls my name.
My best to all.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant


At what point does ANY level of criminal activity not call for a response?


Setting aside issues of resource allocation, criminal activity should be met with a response at any level. But it's not reasonable to think that within any large group of human beings, there will not be criminal activity. Hell, within any small group of people, you're going to encounter some level of criminality. We live in a country where in many jurisdictions we lock up people for drug possession but polls continually show that a majority of people have used at least one illegal drug.

Just this past April:

More Than Half of Adults Have Tried Pot


More than half of American adults — or 52 percent — have smoked pot, according to a new Marist Poll that was conducted in partnership with Yahoo! News.

And in a sign that marijuana is becoming more socially acceptable, the poll also found that nearly half — or 47 percent — of parents who smoke weed at least once or twice a year have consumed marijuana in front of their (predominantly grown) children, shared it with them or done both. Meanwhile, more than 1 in 4 pot users say they’ve smoked in front of or with their own parents.


That's probably not exactly fair as smoking pot isn't a violent crime but my point is people will violate laws and some segment of people will commit violent crimes. The question we should be asking ourselves when considering whether or not we should be panicked about illegal immigrants, in my opinion, is how do their crime rates compare to rates among citizens. If there rates are comparable or lower than the general population, then an increase of illegal immigrants is no worse than adding the same number through births in terms of crime.

We deal with violent crimes typically in terms of rates because it's a better refection of actual threat to one's safety. If you live in a city of 1 million with 10 murders, your risk of being murdered is statistically the same as living in a city of 10 million with 100 murders. The risk doesn't increase 10-fold.



posted on Oct, 16 2017 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I agree with those statements.
We are hindered, as always, by resource allocation.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join