"INDEPENDENT"s Thomas Sutcliffe: same 911 smear -doesnt comprehend doublebubble
scepticism, yes - but. | 19.02.2007 12:40 | Anti-militarism | Other Press | Terror War
Despite the pretence of independence, the treatment of certain news items by the "independent" is, if anything, more reactionary compared to other papers. The TV review (19 feb 07) of the 911 programme is a good example of this. Too often people that write for this website assume bad intentions, rather than the usual influences, so, as a sort of "informed sceptic", allow some explanations: engage!
My fathers father was amongst those that spun america into war - WW2 - set up "terror training camps" at the border - for SOE, then the OSS, - POLITICAL WARFARE, they called it. Very odd. BUT, it happened.
Those he worked alongside, after the war, did a few "odd" things too - but some of them werent ALL for the "defence of the realm" at all.
In these times its getting crucial for EVERY journalist to have at least SOME idea of the surface effects of these sort of talents in action. Yes , even TV commentators.
So, a single phrase intro.
"DOUBLE BUBBLE"
This is of the "oldie but goldie" variety - but "covert ops" or "info-war" people, even the amateurish, clumsy, very detached from "state" work people, think it ALWAYS works, due to the fact that they think the world they inhabit is so VERY complex in comparison to the world everybody else does. It isnt. A few old card trick equivalents put together ad nauseam, with, at times, a bit of semi-understood new 'tech DOESNT mean its complex - in fact - in this case, you've probably sussed what the phrase means already.
Yes, its putting out such a lot of "chaff" over a couple of grains of fact that - when the "outer" "BIG" (multicoloured, spinning, fluorescent) bubble bursts, nobody sees that the other balloon remains, or even that it is growing larger.
Straightforward as that.
For examples of this, its easiest to allow the "comments" to do the job - but - to use a perhaps overmentioned "burning the reichstag" reference - the equivalent might have heard the claims that the entire nazi leadership had got photographed setting it ablaze during a sex-romp, with pink pyjamas as the fuse. . . .but then - everybody knew the fuhrer always wore black - but - wasnt that blue munich photo proof that . . . .
- hence, to DISTRACTION,
- but i'm sure you might suss that out for yourself !
OVER TO YOU, AGAIN.
PS
What do i think about 911. . . . hate to admit it, but, amongst the "chaff" - a lot of good questions.
This aint the "senior scientist sees ufo" bit.
Its the 2+2=4 of a lot of all this - as much as the lack of it in all of the (perhaps complicit - but in inadvertent ways) administration explanations.
Hate to say this, too, but the further information a person has about "that sort of thing" of the last 50 years - less the theories, but what is in the actual "logbooks", so to speak, the further a person has cause to worry.
Yes, "big secrets" get (sort of) kept - for ages. . . . enigma code getting broken was kept secret for 30 years - we had got it sold it to half the third worlds diplomatic corps - but the amount of cock-ups, even in "sideshow" jobs of "ex-experts", reassures you about the "to err is human" bit, if increasing all other worries the world could have, as much as the desperation or stupidity of cover-ups, etc. In fact, cover-ups sort of "avalanche".
But I think it wont cover-up.
Even if IT wasnt the current USA administration that was responsible for it, in the same way that current Russian leadership wasnt - itself - involved in the dodgy foiled flats bombings Litvinenko wrote about - if it looks like (ex)covert ops people of either nation were, then the world is looking at a bit of turbulence, yes, but much less compared to letting them get away with spinning the world in this way - for they wont stop - but they are all too human, so the consequences of these con tinuing actions might spiral out of control - in fact, creating a "fashion" for terrorism is amongst the most idiotic things possible to imagine, in this century.
Nuclear proliferation itself is a serious threat to the world - worse compared to the height of the cold war - but strategists are allowed to amp up the UK / USA s stockpile as if it was a solution, but, distracted by the so called war on terror, serious thought isnt allowed it - yet that is a single ACCIDENTAL side effect of the situation, amongst others.
Those he worked alongside, after the war, did a few "odd" things too - but some of them werent ALL for the "defence of the realm" at all.
In these times its getting crucial for EVERY journalist to have at least SOME idea of the surface effects of these sort of talents in action. Yes , even TV commentators.
So, a single phrase intro.
"DOUBLE BUBBLE"
This is of the "oldie but goldie" variety - but "covert ops" or "info-war" people, even the amateurish, clumsy, very detached from "state" work people, think it ALWAYS works, due to the fact that they think the world they inhabit is so VERY complex in comparison to the world everybody else does. It isnt. A few old card trick equivalents put together ad nauseam, with, at times, a bit of semi-understood new 'tech DOESNT mean its complex - in fact - in this case, you've probably sussed what the phrase means already.
Yes, its putting out such a lot of "chaff" over a couple of grains of fact that - when the "outer" "BIG" (multicoloured, spinning, fluorescent) bubble bursts, nobody sees that the other balloon remains, or even that it is growing larger.
Straightforward as that.
For examples of this, its easiest to allow the "comments" to do the job - but - to use a perhaps overmentioned "burning the reichstag" reference - the equivalent might have heard the claims that the entire nazi leadership had got photographed setting it ablaze during a sex-romp, with pink pyjamas as the fuse. . . .but then - everybody knew the fuhrer always wore black - but - wasnt that blue munich photo proof that . . . .
- hence, to DISTRACTION,
- but i'm sure you might suss that out for yourself !
OVER TO YOU, AGAIN.
PS
What do i think about 911. . . . hate to admit it, but, amongst the "chaff" - a lot of good questions.
This aint the "senior scientist sees ufo" bit.
Its the 2+2=4 of a lot of all this - as much as the lack of it in all of the (perhaps complicit - but in inadvertent ways) administration explanations.
Hate to say this, too, but the further information a person has about "that sort of thing" of the last 50 years - less the theories, but what is in the actual "logbooks", so to speak, the further a person has cause to worry.
Yes, "big secrets" get (sort of) kept - for ages. . . . enigma code getting broken was kept secret for 30 years - we had got it sold it to half the third worlds diplomatic corps - but the amount of cock-ups, even in "sideshow" jobs of "ex-experts", reassures you about the "to err is human" bit, if increasing all other worries the world could have, as much as the desperation or stupidity of cover-ups, etc. In fact, cover-ups sort of "avalanche".
But I think it wont cover-up.
Even if IT wasnt the current USA administration that was responsible for it, in the same way that current Russian leadership wasnt - itself - involved in the dodgy foiled flats bombings Litvinenko wrote about - if it looks like (ex)covert ops people of either nation were, then the world is looking at a bit of turbulence, yes, but much less compared to letting them get away with spinning the world in this way - for they wont stop - but they are all too human, so the consequences of these con tinuing actions might spiral out of control - in fact, creating a "fashion" for terrorism is amongst the most idiotic things possible to imagine, in this century.
Nuclear proliferation itself is a serious threat to the world - worse compared to the height of the cold war - but strategists are allowed to amp up the UK / USA s stockpile as if it was a solution, but, distracted by the so called war on terror, serious thought isnt allowed it - yet that is a single ACCIDENTAL side effect of the situation, amongst others.
scepticism, yes - but.