Infoflux and conspiracy theory.

(A perhaps unnecessary disclaimer, but safety first: we here at DHAIP make no claims for the truth of that which follows, nor are we attempting to forward any of the agendas mentioned herein. Our motives are those of intellectual curiosity and open debate. We believe that in dealing with sensitive topics such as anti-Semitism, the national perception of September 11, and conspiracy theory, it is better to defuse misconception with openness and inquiry rather than silence. That's the point of all this, in fact...)

Because of the ephemeral nature of the subject, we composed our previous post, regarding Wikipedia and the mutability of information, in something of a hurry, not our usual method by any means. (Our caution is legendary throughout the wide community of scholarly pessimism.) Revisiting it, we find the topic too important not to revisit, and to link with a topic discussed previously on this humble blog, that of conspiracy theory.

We have written in past posts about the nature of the art thereof -- taking our usual hands-off approach. We do not endorse conspiracy theories, since a great many of them (though not all -- we're holding out on Kennedy) are indeed founded in ignorance and bias. But we do admire them aesthetically as their own sort of art form: collages of data, brought together to form a unifying whole. And more: we consider them extremely socially valuable. They flush out quite interesting facts, and if they do not themselves always represent the truth, they serve nicely to illustrate that the truth is a great deal more complex than its keepers would have us believe.

It is in this field that information flux crosses the line from amusing (the "ANUL RASHES" cited in the previous post) to the dangerous.

Let us consider this 2001 story from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz:


"Five Israelis who had worked for a moving company based in New Jersey are being held in U.S. prisons for what the Federal Bureau of Investigation has described as "puzzling behavior" following the terror attack on the World Trade Center in New York last Tuesday. The five are expected to be deported sometime soon...

"The Foreign Ministry said in response that it had been informed by the consulate in New York that the FBI had arrested the five for "puzzling behavior." They are said to have had been caught videotaping the disaster and shouting in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery."


On the face of it, it serves as an example of our law enforcement's panicked and repressive reaction to September 11. Assuming the "joy" was in fact genuine, it is a mistake to assume a monolithically shocked response to the events of that day. (One of our staffers recalls a homeless man in Washington DC gleefully shouting: "Somebody smacked America's ass... about time!") And in a free country, one cannot be arrested for emotions, only for actions.

But here is where we run into problems. The story has received wide circulation online, mostly on extreme far-left and far-right sites with dovetailing agendas. Needless to say the Arab press has made much of it. Among the details mentioned on those sites but not in the Haaretz story are the allegations that the five men in question, frequently described as "dancing" as they filmed, were later identified as Mossad agents, and that they were driving a van which contained $4700 cash, two box-cutters, European passports, and highlighted maps of New York City. (Regarding those box-cutters and maps, it is important to note that the men worked for a moving company.)

The sources for this information, repeatedly cited, are ABC news, the Bergen Record (the local New Jersey paper) the Scottish Sunday Herald, and The Forward, a New York-based Jewish daily. The Forward apparently reported that the FBI had identified two of the arrested as Mossad agents, and that the five were held and possibly tortured for months before being released.

As a specifically Jewish publication, The Forward's account is of special interest, since it would seem to counteract the anti-Semitic possibilities inherent in the story. Unfortunately, no doubt alive to the way their reportage could be used, they have removed it from their site.

Less clear is why ABC should. Clicking the provided link tells us this: "You’ve requested an abcnews.com page that does not exist. If you’ve reached this page by selecting a bookmark that worked previously, it’s likely the file moved to a new location because of our recent redesign. Please update your bookmarks."

The same goes for the Bergen Record, although not, as it happens, the Herald, whose account can be seen here.

Thus the potentially reputable American press sources for all this information have vanished, become unfacts. We ask why -- not because we believe that Mossad or Israel were somehow responsible for the tragedy of September 11, nor that they knew of the attacks in advance, as has been postulated by some of the theorists, but because we fear where such a trend -- the removal of uncomfortable information from the public eye -- leads.

If the details about the cash, box-cutters, passports, Mossad, etc., were not mentioned in these accounts, then these missing news stories should be visible, so that they cannot be cited. If they are mentioned, then follow-up reports are clearly required to explain and clarify, so that conspiracy theories can be defused. If these are mistakes, corrections need to be issued. Repression of information serves no one and has the potential for great harm. (And let us not forget that this story contains yet another allegation of torture at the hands of the U.S. government, a topic that clearly requires vigilance.)

What happened on September 11 has had an enormous impact on both America and, through our response, the world. But what is often forgotten is that our perception of the tragedy differs hugely from that of the international community. Noam Chomsky has pointed out that since the rest of the world had not been repeatedly misinformed about a connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, a great many saw our actions in Iraq as either incomprehensibly ignorant or unbelievably racist. It is best that we make sure that we are all on the same page. Secrecy and obfuscation do not advance those ends.


"As soon as Winston had dealt with each of the messages, he clipped his speakwritten corrections to the appropriate copy of the Times and pushed them into the pneumatic tube. Then, with a movement which was as nearly as possible unconscious, he crumpled up the original message and any notes that he had made himself, and dropped them into the memory hole to be devoured by flames."
--1984, George Orwell