Denial and deception

The particulars of D&amp.D thus deserve closer academic scrutiny.
According to Shulsky (2000, p. 17), “‘Denial’ refers to the attempt to block all information channels by which an adversary could learn some truth (e.g., about a military development program, a policy, a course of action, etc.), thus preventing him from reacting in a timely manner.” Thus, “denial” includes all methods that may be employed in order to safeguard information that may be “classified”, such as security programs.
Shulsky also wrote: “’Deception’ by contrast refers to the effort to cause an adversary to believe something that is not true, to believe a ‘cover story’ rather than the truth, with the goal of leading him to react in a way that serves one’s own interests, rather than his.” “Deception” therefore involves creating an “alternative reality” which the target is induced to believe.
While denial and deception are two different concepts, they are so intertwined in practice as to make one a necessary adjunct to the other. After all, deceiving one into believing a story other than what is reality is denying him the reality.
According to (Caddell, 2004), deception is traditionally accepted as an integral component of political and military conflict. It is even a popularly accepted truth that a certain level of deception regularly occurs in all levels and types of human interaction and even in nature. Disinformation/deception, however, should not be confused with unintentional misinformation. Deception has two elements: intention to disinform, and intention to gain an advantage from the disinformation.
In nature, deception exists in some forms of natural defense among flora and fauna. For instance, protective coloration or “camouflage” is common, in order to visually conceal the plant or animal in its natural habitat. Some animals are

You Might Also Like