FAKE TERROR - THE ROAD TO DICTATORSHIP
Burn Babylon Burn
enemies you need.
In 70 BC, an ambitious minor politician and extremely wealthy man, Marcus
Licineus Crassus, wanted to rule Rome. Just to give you an idea of what sort
of man Crassus really was, he is credited with invention of the fire
brigade. But in Crassus' version, his fire-fighting slaves would race to the
scene of a burning building whereupon Crassus would offer to buy it on the
spot for a tiny fraction of it's worth. If the owner sold, Crassus' slaves
would put out the fire. If the owner refused to sell, Crassus allowed the
building to burn to the ground. By means of this device, Crassus eventually
came to be the largest single private landholder in Rome, and used some of
his wealth to help back Julius Caesar against Cicero.
In 70 BC Rome was still a Republic, which placed very strict limits on what
Rulers could do, and more importantly NOT do. But Crassus had no intentions
of enduring such limits to his personal power, and contrived a plan.
Crassus seized upon the slave revolt led by Sparticus in order to strike
terror into the hearts of Rome, whose garrison Sparticus had already
defeated in battle. But Sparticus had no intention of marching on Rome
itself, a move he knew to be suicidal. Sparticus and his band wanted nothing
to do with the Roman empire and had planned from the start merely to loot
enough money from their former owners in the Italian countryside to hire a
mercenary fleet in which to sail to freedom.
Sailing away was the last thing Crassus wanted Sparticus to do. He needed a
convenient enemy with which to terrorize Rome itself for his personal
political gain. So Crassus bribed the mercenary fleet to sail without
Sparticus, then positioned two Roman legions in such a way that Sparticus
had no choice but to march on Rome.
Terrified of the impending arrival of the much-feared army of gladiators,
Rome declared Crassus Praetor. Crassus then crushed Sparticus' army and even
though Pompeii took the credit, Crassus was elected Consul of Rome the
following year.
With this maneuver, the Romans surrendered their Republican form of
government. Soon would follow the first Triumvirate, consisting of Crassus,
Pompeii, and Julius Caesar, followed by the reign of the god-like Emperors
of Rome.
The Romans were hoaxed into surrendering their Republic, and accepting the
rule of Emperors.
Julius Caesar's political opponent, Cicero, for all his literary
accomplishments, played the same games in his campaign against Julius
Caesar, claiming that Rome was falling victim to an internal "vast right
wing" conspiracy in which any expressed desire for legislative limits on
government was treated as suspicious behavior. Cicero, in order to
demonstrate to the Romans just how unsafe Rome has become hired thugs to
cause as much disturbance as possible, and campaigned on a promise to end
the internal strife if elected and granted extraordinary powers.
What Cicero only dreamed of, Adolph Hitler succeeded in doing. Elected
Chancellor of Germany, Hitler, like Crassus, had no intention of living with
the strict limits to his power imposed by German law. Unlike Cicero,
Hitler's thugs were easy to recognize; they all wore the same brown shirts.
But their actions were no different than those of their Roman predecessors.
They staged beatings, set fires, caused as much trouble as they could, while
Hitler made speeches promising that he could end the crime wave of
subversives and terrorism if he was granted extraordinary powers.
The Germans were hoaxed into surrendering their Republic, and accepting the
rule of Der Fuhrer.
The state-sponsored schools will never tell you this, but governments
routinely rely on hoaxes to sell their agendas to an otherwise reluctant
public. The Romans accepted the Emperors and the Germans accepted Hitler not
because they wanted to, but because the carefully crafted illusions of
threat appeared to leave no other choice.
Our government too uses hoaxes to create the illusion that We The People
have no choice but the direction the government wishes us to go in.
In 1898, Joseph Pulitzer's New York World and William Randolph Hearst's New
York Journal were arguing for American intervention in Cuba. Hearst is
reported to have dispatched a photographer to Cuba to photograph the coming
war with Spain. When the photographer asked just what war that might be,
Hearst is reported to have replied, "You take the photographs, and I will
provide the war". Hearst was true to his word, as his newspaper published
stories of great atrocities being committed against the Cuban people, most
of which turned out to be complete fabrications.
On the night of February 15, 1898, the USS Maine, lying in Havana harbor in
a show of US resolve to protect her interests, exploded violently. Captain
Sigsbee, the commander of the Maine, urged that no assumptions of enemy
attack be made until there was a full investigation of the cause of the
explosion. For this, Captain Sigsbee was excoriated in the press for
"refusing to see the obvious". The Atlantic Monthly declared flat out that
to suppose the explosion to be anything other than a deliberate act by Spain
was "completely at defiance of the laws of probability".
Under the slogan "Remember the Maine", Americans went to war with Spain,
eventually winning the Phillipines (and annexing Hawaii along the way).
In 1975, an investigation led by Admiral Hyman Rickover examined the data
recovered from a 1911 examination of the wreck and concluded that there had
been no evidence of an external explosion. The most likely cause of the
sinking was a coal dust explosion in a coal bunker imprudently located next
to the ship's magazines. Captain Sigsbee's caution had been well founded.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt needed a war. He needed the fever of a
major war to mask the symptoms of a still deathly ill economy struggling
back from the Great Depression (and mutating towards Socialism at the same
time). Roosevelt wanted a war with Germany to stop Hitler, but despite
several provocations in the Atlantic, the American people, still struggling
with that troublesome economy, were opposed to any wars. Roosevelt violated
neutrality with lend lease, and even ordered the sinking of several German
ships in the Atlantic, but HItler refused to be provoked.
Roosevelt needed an enemy, and if America would not willingly attack that
enemy, then one would have to be maneuvered into attacking America, much as
Marcus Licinius Crassus has maneuvered Sparticus into attacking Rome.
The way open to war was created when Japan signed the tripartite agreement
with Italy and Germany, with all parties pledging mutual defense to each
other. Whereas Hitler would never declare war on the United States no matter
the provocation, the means to force Japan to do so were readily at hand.
The first step was to place oil and steel embargoes on Japan, using Japan's
wars on the Asian mainland as a reason. This forced Japan to consider
seizing the oil and mineral rich regions in Indonesia. With the European
powers militarily exhausted by the war in Europe, the United States was the
only power in the Pacific able to stop Japan from invading the Dutch East
Indies, and by moving the Pacific fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor,
Hawaii, Roosevelt made a pre-emptive strike on that fleet the mandatory
first step in any Japanese plan to extend it's empire into the "southern
resource area".
Roosevelt boxed in Japan just as completely as Crassus had boxed in
Sparticus. Japan needed oil. They had to invade Indonesia to get it, and to
do that they first had to remove the threat of the American fleet at Pearl
Harbor. There never really was any other course open to them.
To enrage the American people as much as possible, Roosevelt needed the
first overt attack by Japan to be as bloody as possible, appearing as a
sneak attack much as the Japanese had done to the Russians. From that moment
up until the attack on Pearl Harbor itself, Roosevelt and his associates
made sure that the commanders in Hawaii, General Short and Admiral Kimmel,
were kept in the dark as much as possible about the location of the Japanese
fleet and it's intentions, then later scapegoated for the attack. (Congress
recently exonerated both Short and Kimmel, posthumously restoring them to
their former ranks).
But as the Army board had concluded at the time, and subsequent
de-classified documents confirmed, Washington DC knew the attack was coming,
knew exactly where the Japanese fleet was, and knew where it was headed.
On November 29th, Secretary of State Hull showed United Press reporter Joe
Leib a message with the time and place of the attack, and the New York Times
in it's special 12/8/41 Pearl Harbor edition, on page 13, reported that the
time and place of the attack had been known in advance!
The much repeated claim that the Japanese fleet maintained radio silence on
it's way to Hawaii was a lie. Among other intercepts still held in the
Archives of the NSA is the UNCODED message sent by the Japanese tanker
Shirya stating, "proceeding to a position 30.00 N, 154.20 E. Expect to
arrive at that point on 3 December." (near HI)
President Lyndon Johnson wanted a war in Vietnam. He wanted it to help his
friends who owned defense companies to do a little business. He needed it to
get the Pentagon and CIA to quit trying to invade Cuba. And most of all, he
needed a provocation to convince the American people that there was really
"no other choice".
On August 5, 1964, newspapers across America reported "renewed attacks"
against American destroyers operating in Vietnamese waters, specifically the
Gulf of Tonkin. The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats
launched an "unprovoked attack" on the USS Maddox while it was on "routine
patrol".
The truth is that USS Maddox was involved in aggressive intelligence
gathering in coordination with actual attacks by South Vietnam and the
Laotian Air Force against targets in North Vietnam. The truth is also that
there was no attack by torpedo boats against the USS Maddox. Captain John J.
Herrick, the task force commander in the Gulf, cabled Washington DC that the
report was the result of an "over-eager" sonarman who had picked up the
sounds of his own ship's screws and panicked. But even with this knowledge
that the report was false, Lyndon Johnson went on national TV that night to
announce the commencement of air strikes against North Vietnam,
"retaliation" for an attack that had never occurred.
President George Bush wanted a war in Iraq. Like Crassus, George Bush is
motivated by money. Specifically oil money. But with the OPEC alliance
failing to keep limits on oil production in the Mideast, the market was
being glutted with oil pumped from underneath Iraq, which sat over roughly
1/3 of the oil reserves of the entire region.
George wanted a war to stop that flow of oil, to keep prices (and profits)
from falling any further than they already had. But like Roosevelt, he
needed the "other side" to make the first move.
Iraq had long been trying to acquire greater access to the Persian Gulf, and
felt limited confined a narrow strip of land along Kuwait's northern border,
which placed Iraqi interests in close proximity with hostile Iran. George
Bush, who had been covertly arming Iraq during its war with Iran, sent word
via April Glaspie that the United States would not intervene if Saddam
Hussein grabbed a larger part of Kuwait. Saddam fell for the bait and
invaded.
Of course, Americans were not about to send their sons and daughters to risk
their lives for petroleum products. So George Bush arranged a hoax, using
public relations firm Hill & Knowlton, which has grown rich on taxpayer
money by being most industrious and creative liars! Hill & Knowlton
concocted a monumental fraud in which the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador
to the United States, went on TV pretending to be a nurse, and related a
horror story in which Iraqi troops looted the incubators from a Kuwaiti
hospital, leaving the premature babies on the cold floor to die. The media,
part of the swindle from the start, never bothered asking why the "nurse"
didn't just pick the babies up and wrap them in blankets or something.
Enraged by the incubator story, Americans supported operation Desert Storm,
which never removed Saddam Hussein from power but which did take Kuwait's
oil off of the market for almost 2 years and limited Iraq's oil exports to
this very day. That our sons and daughters came home with serious and
lingering medical illnesses was apparently not too great a price to pay for
increased oil profits.
Following the victory in Iraq, yet another war appeared to be in the
offering in the mineral rich regions of Bosnia. Yet again, a hoax was used
to create support for military action.
The above photo of Fikret Alic, a Muslim, staring through a barbed wire
fence, was used to "prove" that the Bosnians were running modern day
"Concentration Camps". As the headline of "Belsen 92" indicates, all
possible associations with the Nazi horrors were made to sell the necessity
of sending yet more American troops into someone else's nation.
But when German Journalists went to Trnopolje, the site of the supposed
Bosnian Concentration Camp. to film a documentary, they discovered that the
photo was a fake! The camp at Trnopolje was not a concentration camp but a
refugee center. Nor was it surrounded by barbed wire. Careful examination of
the original photo revealed that the photographer had shot the photo through
a broken section of fence surrounding a tool shed. It was the photographer
who was on the inside, shooting out at the refugees.
Once again, Americans had been hoaxed into support of actions they might
otherwise not have agreed with.
While several American Presidents have willingly started wars for personal
purposes, perhaps no President has ever carried it to the extreme that Bill
Clinton has.
Coincident with the expected public statement of Monica Lewinsky following
her testimony, Bill Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack on Sudan and
Afghanistan, claiming to have had irrefutable proof that bogeyman
extraordinaire (and former Afghani ally) Osama Bin Ladin was creating
terrorist chemical weapons there.
Examination of the photos of the debris revealed none of the expected
structures one would find in a laboratory that handled lethal weapons-grade
materials. Assurances from the CIA that they had a positive soil test for
biological weapons fell on their face when it was revealed that there had
been no open soil anywhere near the pre-bombed facility. Sudan requested
that international observers come test the remains of the factory for any
signs of the nerve gas Clinton had insisted was there. None was found. The
Sudanese plant was a harmless aspirin factory, and the owner has sued for
damages.
Later examination of the site hit in Afghanistan revealed it to be a mosque.
click for larger image
Meanwhile, back in Kosovo, stories about genocide and atrocities were
flooding the media (in time to distract from the Sudanese embarrassments),
just as lurid and sensational and as it turns out often just as fictional as
most of William Randolph Hearst's stories of atrocities against the Cubans.
Again, the government and the media were hoaxing Americans. The above photo
was shown on all the American networks, claiming to be one of Slobodan
Milosovic's Migs, shot down while attacking civilians. Closer examination
(click on the photo) shows it to be stenciled in English!
Like Germany under Chancellor Hitler, there have been events in our nation
which strike fear into the hearts of the citizens, such as the New York
World Trade Tower bombing, the OK City Federal Building, and the Olympic
Park bomb (nicely timed to divert the media from witnesses to the TWA 800
shoot down). The media has been very quick to blame such events on
"radicals", "subversives", "vast right wing conspiracies", and other
"enemies in our midst", no different than the lies used by Cicero and
Hitler.
But on closer examination, such "domestic terrorist" events do not appear to
be what they are made out to be. The FBI had an informant inside the World
Trade Tower bombers, Emad Salam, who offered to sabotage the bomb. The FBI
told him "no". The so-called "hot bed" of white separatism at Elohim City,
occasional home to Tim McVeigh in the weeks prior to the OK City bombing,
was founded and is being run by an FBI informant!
click for larger image
And nobody has ever really explained what this second Ryder truck was doing
in a secret camp half way from Elohim City to Oklahoma City two weeks before
the bombing.
So, here we are today. Like the Romans of Crassus' and Cicero's time, or the
Germans under a newly elected Hitler, we are being warned that a dangerous
enemy threatens us, implacable, invisible, omnipresent, and invulnerable as
long as our government is hamstrung by that silly old Bill of Rights.
Already there have appeared articles debating whether or not "extraordinary
measures" (i.e. torture) are not fully justified under certain circumstances
such as those we are purported to face.
As was the case in Rome and Germany, the government continues to plead with
the public for an expansion of its power and authority, to "deal with the
crisis".
However, as Casio watch timers are paraded before the cameras, to the
stentorian tones of the talking heads' constant dire warnings, it is
legitimate to question just how real the crises is, and how much is the
result of political machinations by our own leaders.
Are the terrorists really a threat, or just hired actors with bombs and
Casio watches, paid for by Cicero and given brown shirts to wear by Hitler?
Is terrorism inside the United States really from outside, or is it a stage
managed production, designed to cause Americans to believe they have no
choice but to surrender the Republic and accept the totalitarian rule of a
new emperor, or a new Fuhrer?
Once lost, the Romans never got their Republic back. Once lost, the Germans
never got their Republic back. In both cases, the nation had to totally
collapse before freedom was restored to the people.
Remember that when Crassus tells you that Sparticus approaches.
Remember that when thugs in the streets act in a manner clearly designed to
provoke the public fear.
Remember that when the Reichstagg burns down.
Rabid K. Nine
> Roman times; creating the enemies you need.
The rise of the "beast" and one world government
and yada yada yada yada....NOT
---
"A Clear and Present Danger - exist" "A Debt of Honor - must be paid"
"Executive Orders - must be followed and protected"
"Why does this sound like a mixed plot version of a Tom Clancy Book?"
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.282 / Virus Database: 150 - Release Date: 9/25/2001
Burn Babylon Burn
Rabid K. Nine <rab...@nospam.swbell.net> wrote in message
news:mh1u7.7797$ou6.3612340331@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> > It's the oldest trick in the book, dating back to
> > Roman times; creating the enemies you need.
>
> The rise of the "beast" and one world government
> and yada yada yada yada....NOT
>
A thoughtful, and coherent analysis of factual historic precedents which
indicate that sometimes government needs a unitifying war so much that it
will sacrifice it's own people and monuments to get it, was surely what you
meant?
Notice the way the herd recoil in shock, disgust and denial when told
something significant. They'd sooner trust the comfortable lies rather than
face the horrors of truth.
--
Burn Babylon Burn
"All warfare is based on deception."
The Art Of War -- Sun Tzu
Rabid K. Nine
> The Art Of War -- Sun Tzu
Our government and the governments of other
nations would not risk any attempts at what you
are suggesting. The reaction would prove much
to swift, violent and deadly.
Our leaders may make mistakes, but they are
quite far from stupid or outright insanity. You
might however try a full book on your theory
it could be a "best seller" for conspiracy buffs :)
Burn Babylon Burn
> > "All warfare is based on deception."
> > The Art Of War -- Sun Tzu
>
> Our government and the governments of other
> nations would not risk any attempts at what you
> are suggesting. The reaction would prove much
> to swift, violent and deadly.
It would certainly serve them right too. Like any illusionists, governments
and their agencies use a combination of smoke and mirrors to mould the world
their way. It happens more often than not, and frequently as brutal as the
WTC911. Usually, it's America doing the attacking, and sterilsed into laser
guided bomb footage, which cuts out the minute the carnege and blood shed
begin, as if no-one cares less what happens next..
How many of you usually say 'BOOM!' at that point.
I know I did 2 weeks ago.
> Our leaders may make mistakes, but they are
> quite far from stupid or outright insanity. You
> might however try a full book on your theory
> it could be a "best seller" for conspiracy buffs :)
Who said they were insane? Who said they are stupid? Well, I did about
Dubya, but there are some very intelligent strategists working behind the
scenes. They could very easily engineer this whole thing. Like I said
before, smoke and mirrors. Did I saw the lady in half or was it just a
trick.
--
Rabid K. Nine
long by such smoke and mirrors. To believe that
they would is to under estimate will, intelligence
and general distrust of governmental interference
into the personal lives.
As I said, you have a great book concept. In
fact one of the best I have heard thus far. Reality
says it just won't work. People are not mindless
sheep to be led to slaughter. To think otherwise
is just foolish. Have a great day:)
Craig Kling
> Perhaps so, but people are not going to be fooled
> long by such smoke and mirrors. To believe that
> they would is to under estimate will, intelligence
> and general distrust of governmental interference
> into the personal lives.
>
> As I said, you have a great book concept. In
> fact one of the best I have heard thus far. Reality
> says it just won't work. People are not mindless
> sheep to be led to slaughter. To think otherwise
> is just foolish. Have a great day:)
Have you considered that your refutations have less merit than what you
are refuting?
Even if your opinion is right enough you are posting nothing more than
your opinion based on faith.
That is cool enough I suppose. But it does not stand as much of an
argument.
I find his historical presentations interesting even if there is nothing
of it to what is going on now.
As for your assertion about people not being mindless sheep I'd suggest
that folks may have had as much belief and asserted similar sentiments prior
to the Nazi adventure that nothing like that could ever happen. Even now
there are factions who claim it didn't happen that the idea is just to
bizarre.
Rabid K. Nine
You and the bbb both have valid arguments in theory
and weak one aspect. Yes, there are many who will
follow the "party line" bloodlessly. But an extremely
high number will resort to "revolutionary stances" in
my opinion.
It is not a matter of having blind faith in government
correctness. It is a strong faith in the "free will" of the
people themselves. We now have global access to
information and the ability to transmit messages to
anywhere in the world. Our leaders and those who
represent those leaders read these messages.
In the slight and total remote possibility that such an
event can occur as you suggest. The public will find
ways to let their feelings known and subtle as possible
suggest that leadership correct the path they are on.
Look at the messages in this newsgroup alone. People
are angry, they want justice, and they want a "proper"
reaction - response to these tragedies. It does not to
me sound like mindless sheep.
Craig Kling
> Craig,
>
> You and the bbb both have valid arguments in theory
> and weak one aspect. Yes, there are many who will
> follow the "party line" bloodlessly. But an extremely
> high number will resort to "revolutionary stances" in
> my opinion.
Perhaps it wold be better if you were to post some response close to
what you are responding to.
I'm really straining here to follow what relation your response has to
what I said?
I mst confess to not having read the whole of all his prior posts to
where I came into the thread. I think I got the gist of it, but I did not
give enough study to see if he presented anything that might serve as
evidence or to indicate it being more than a thought that the present event
may be in any way such as the event he described.
To myself it wold appear that folks are currently swayed in much the
manner of folks in some time when a great fraudulant conspiracy has been
pulled off by some unscrupulous maniplators in power.
My thoghts to brush on some ideas of opportunism and conspiracy sort of
stuff. More often it has been ideas of US being led into something. But I
suppose that is much on a lot of minds.
The idea of the whole affair being staged by evil-doers in US government
seems to me to be too absurdly complicated to pull off to even give it any
consideration.
I suppose it would make for some good novel material - or grade B movie
stuff - such that US government shysters made some deals for some Arab world
religious maniplators to pull off such a stunt.
I've not been troubling my head about a lot of conspiracy stuff more
than like some entertainment level.
I figure it is a given that there is conspiracy and devious intentions
and plans on the part of the terrorists. It does not seem nlikey to me that
it goes much, if any, deeper than what is apparent.
I'd think that virtually all the folks who aspire to power positions and
are successful at it have stronger than a lot of folks of the megalomaniac
in them. Opportunist politicians are certainly going to use opportnity. Some
are less dishonorable than others I am sure and some would try to push some
opressive bills with the best of intentions - or what they convince even
themselves is the best of intentions.
Anyway - conspiracy or not there is possibilites of some events comeing
to the same sort of ends.
>
> It is not a matter of having blind faith in government
> correctness. It is a strong faith in the "free will" of the
> people themselves. We now have global access to
> information and the ability to transmit messages to
> anywhere in the world. Our leaders and those who
> represent those leaders read these messages.
I dunno. Not sure I follow your meaning. For the most part I get the idea
that you may have read a lot into what I said in my response.
>
> In the slight and total remote possibility that such an
> event can occur as you suggest. The public will find
> ways to let their feelings known and subtle as possible
> suggest that leadership correct the path they are on.
Such events have happened. Such events have happened on a grand scale
that folks would have found unbelievable any warnings that would have been
voiced. And I am sre that such events can happen again. I have not a clue if
such an event is happening now.
Well - there is lots of "clues" for folks to make interesting issues of.
>
> Look at the messages in this newsgroup alone. People
> are angry, they want justice, and they want a "proper"
> reaction - response to these tragedies. It does not to
> me sound like mindless sheep.
I dunno. There is a relatively small number of folks using usenet I
gather. - Couple three years ago I saw claims it was abot 5% of folks with
computers. In spite of the great numbers of bigots and bozos I'd think it
likely to be a bit more intellectal than a cross cut of society as a whole.
I'd bet that it is quite a smaller percentage of usenet folks approving than
is that 90% approval the poll folks report. Just an approval rating don't
mean much to me. It was an even calling for response to nail those
responsible and take measures against such happening again. Anyone as
presicent who wold talk with confidence and air of authority and start
sending military towards where the populace believes is the enemy would get
a high approval rating. I'd suggest that Jimmy Carter in the position would
have lower (I feel like changing approval to confidence - in context it
comes to much the same thing though). I'd suggest Kennedy in the current
position would not have 100% but it'd be higher and his speeches would have
folks feeling more generally inspired.
And my thought on that has nothing to do with who may be the more
competent to deal with it. Some military adventures and misadventures of the
past may have went the way they did for sake of chance as for competent
dealing.
Anyway - My other response was not saying anything such as I believed or
didn't believe there to be any great conspiracy such as the other person
suggests.
You seem to have more faith in the masses of folks than I do. I've seen
that folks don't necessarily need to be together in a mob to get caught up
in the energy and momentum of an ongoing event.
I notice that the news is feeding fears with ongoing stuff about gas and
germs and liklyhood of further attacks - with implication that some 'expert'
thinks it cold be at any moment. It is expected of the news to not give a
lot of consideration to what may be responsible reporting. Educating what to
do in some sitations that are likely to come up might be a useful thing to
do. Constant carrying on about dangerous possibilites without edcation of
how one might prepare or deal with it seems conterprodctive unless one
wishes folks fears stirred up. In like view even if something were
inevitable I think it would be counterprodctive to keep carrying on abot it
if it were something that folks could do nothing about anyway.
I think one way about news doing that sort of thing and I think another
when some governemnt spokespersons put out such stuff.
>
>
> ---
> "A Clear and Present Danger - exist" "A Debt of Honor - must be paid"
> "Executive Orders - must be followed and protected"
> "Why does this sound like a mixed plot version of a Tom Clancy Book?"
Some folks have said things about life not being like a novel or a
movie.
I'll go along with that. Often it is that the story related in the novel
or movie may seem more plausible than some report of some real life event.
I guess most folks don't wince at the sound of that cliché crap? I've
heard long speeches that seemed a cliché collection strung together with
some lubricating words to make them flow smoothly off the tongue.
Rabid K. Nine
As for media playing and others playing up aspects
for sensationalism. You can bet your "biffey" they
will for ratings. The governmental officials must in
literal terms address these issues to reduce panic.
Yes conspiracy theory runs rampant, and people
are concerned. Do I trust the public to make an
informed decision? Yes I do.
Thanks for the reply. But a quid pro quo debate
over a meaningless and impractical theory is not
on my desk calender today.
---
It's really true, I'm not biased, I hate everyone equally!"
Craig Kling
> Craig,
>
> As for media playing and others playing up aspects
> for sensationalism. You can bet your "biffey" they
> will for ratings. The governmental officials must in
> literal terms address these issues to reduce panic.
Sure.
Politicians and various agencies leak stuff to the press for their own
advantage too.
I been seeing a bit of that daily.
>
> Yes conspiracy theory runs rampant, and people
> are concerned. Do I trust the public to make an
> informed decision? Yes I do.
Even if folks were more inclined to make an informed decision than a
self centered or prejudicial one they need true information on which to base
it. An informed decision based on disinformation or misinformation is
unlikely to produce the expected result.
>
> Thanks for the reply. But a quid pro quo debate
> over a meaningless and impractical theory is not
> on my desk calender today.
Yea. They are sporty but not of much use but for entertainment.
LOL - Just thinking of one use. If I were going to do some great
conspiring to an event I might spread a lot of conspiracy theories. Maybe
even throw in the one I was about to be sure it was scoffed at with the
rest.