+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Players, organisations, and events of deep politics (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-32.html)
+--- Thread: The failure to assign blame (/thread-14628.html)
The failure to assign blame - Tracy Riddle - 01-04-2016
I had been thinking of posting about this, and I brought it up briefly on another thread. Why were no government officials (civilian or military, at any level) reprimanded, blamed, demoted, or fired after 9/11 or the JFK assassination? I do remember that one FAA or NORAD official quietly resigned at some point, and of course FBI Agent James Hosty was punished by Hoover for blabbing to the Dallas police about Oswald. But otherwise, nothing. Even the Secret Service agents out drinking the night before the assassination were left alone. The CIA and FBI people who monitored Oswald, the failure of air defense on 9/11, the numerous missed warnings by FBI and CIA...
The WC did direct some criticism at the Secret Service and FBI as institutions, but no individuals were blamed. The 9/11 Commission went even further in blaming systemic failures and institutional miscommunication, but no actual people were at fault.
I think that it was primarily a way of keeping everyone quiet. To throw anyone under the bus - a lowly air traffic controller, SS agent, NORAD official, FBI clerk, State Dept official or whoever - would risk causing those people to complain to the media, point fingers at others, blame superiors, talk about the drills they thought they were participating in, testify before Congress. All of this might lead to real investigations. The media might have no choice but to pay attention and actually do its job. And the whole thing unravels. But if no one is punished, people who know or suspect something will just keep quiet to preserve their jobs and the institutions they work for.
The failure to assign blame - Lauren Johnson - 01-04-2016
Tracy Riddle Wrote:I had been thinking of posting about this, and I brought it up briefly on another thread. Why were no government officials (civilian or military, at any level) reprimanded, blamed, demoted, or fired after 9/11 or the JFK assassination? I do remember that one FAA or NORAD official quietly resigned at some point, and of course FBI Agent James Hosty was punished by Hoover for blabbing to the Dallas police about Oswald. But otherwise, nothing. Even the Secret Service agents out drinking the night before the assassination were left alone. The CIA and FBI people who monitored Oswald, the failure of air defense on 9/11, the numerous missed warnings by FBI and CIA...
The WC did direct some criticism at the Secret Service and FBI as institutions, but no individuals were blamed. The 9/11 Commission went even further in blaming systemic failures and institutional miscommunication, but no actual people were at fault.
I think that it was primarily a way of keeping everyone quiet. To throw anyone under the bus - a lowly air traffic controller, SS agent, NORAD official, FBI clerk, State Dept official or whoever - would risk causing those people to complain to the media, point fingers at others, blame superiors, talk about the drills they thought they were participating in, testify before Congress. All of this might lead to real investigations. The media might have no choice but to pay attention and actually do its job. And the whole thing unravels. But if no one is punished, people who know or suspect something will just keep quiet to preserve their jobs and the institutions they work for.
Another piece of this would be the almost instantaneous meme that this was not a crime but an attack on the Homeland and should be treated as such. This smells like a well thought out PR strategy.
The failure to assign blame - Magda Hassan - 01-04-2016
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Tracy Riddle Wrote:I had been thinking of posting about this, and I brought it up briefly on another thread. Why were no government officials (civilian or military, at any level) reprimanded, blamed, demoted, or fired after 9/11 or the JFK assassination? I do remember that one FAA or NORAD official quietly resigned at some point, and of course FBI Agent James Hosty was punished by Hoover for blabbing to the Dallas police about Oswald. But otherwise, nothing. Even the Secret Service agents out drinking the night before the assassination were left alone. The CIA and FBI people who monitored Oswald, the failure of air defense on 9/11, the numerous missed warnings by FBI and CIA...
The WC did direct some criticism at the Secret Service and FBI as institutions, but no individuals were blamed. The 9/11 Commission went even further in blaming systemic failures and institutional miscommunication, but no actual people were at fault.
I think that it was primarily a way of keeping everyone quiet. To throw anyone under the bus - a lowly air traffic controller, SS agent, NORAD official, FBI clerk, State Dept official or whoever - would risk causing those people to complain to the media, point fingers at others, blame superiors, talk about the drills they thought they were participating in, testify before Congress. All of this might lead to real investigations. The media might have no choice but to pay attention and actually do its job. And the whole thing unravels. But if no one is punished, people who know or suspect something will just keep quiet to preserve their jobs and the institutions they work for.
Another piece of this would be the almost instantaneous meme that this was not a crime but an attack on the Homeland and should be treated as such. This smells like a well thought out PR strategy.
Indeed it does. They are selling some thing. An idea or a concept. Not describing a real event.
The failure to assign blame - Tracy Riddle - 01-04-2016
If we look at the torture scandals, it started out "small" - Abu Ghraib and "bad apples" like Lynndie England being thrown under the bus.
But according to Wikipedia: In a May 11, 2004, interview with Denver CBS affiliate television station KCNC-TV, England reportedly said that she was "instructed by persons in higher ranks" to commit the acts of abuse for psyop reasons, and that she should keep doing it, because it worked as intended. England noted that she felt "weird" when a commanding officer asked her to do such things as "stand there, give the thumbs up, and smile". However, England felt that she was doing "nothing out of the ordinary".
and
The main defense was that Charles Graner was following orders from, and supervised by, intelligence officers.[SUP][31][/SUP] Graner and others testified that many senior officers were aware of the activities and actively supported them. This is why he was not worried about taking and distributing the photographs which were later used against him. Referring to military intelligence, Graner testified "I nearly beat an MI detainee to death with MI there" before Pohl cut him off.[SUP][32]
[size=12]And so it unraveled, little by little, until eventually we learned that it went all the way up to the White House, CIA and Pentagon.
[/SIZE][/SUP]
The failure to assign blame - Lauren Johnson - 01-04-2016
I have a conviction, based on nothing other than my self proclaimed status as a profiler, that certain top persons watched and possibly even supervised the torture. They got off on it.
The failure to assign blame - Tracy Riddle - 01-04-2016
Lauren Johnson Wrote:I have a conviction, based on nothing other than my self proclaimed status as a profiler, that certain top persons watched and possibly even supervised the torture. They got off on it.
I'm sure they made films and the elites watch them on Saturday night for fun.
The failure to assign blame - Lauren Johnson - 01-04-2016
Tracy Riddle Wrote:Lauren Johnson Wrote:I have a conviction, based on nothing other than my self proclaimed status as a profiler, that certain top persons watched and possibly even supervised the torture. They got off on it.
I'm sure they made films and the elites watch them on Saturday night for fun.
This just might be going over the edge a bit ... but what the heck.
I wonder who got to be the pivot man in the circle jerk? I say GWB.
:
:
The failure to assign blame - Tracy Riddle - 01-04-2016
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Tracy Riddle Wrote:Lauren Johnson Wrote:I have a conviction, based on nothing other than my self proclaimed status as a profiler, that certain top persons watched and possibly even supervised the torture. They got off on it.
I'm sure they made films and the elites watch them on Saturday night for fun.
This just might be going over the edge a bit ... but what the heck.
I wonder who got to be the pivot man in the circle jerk? I say GWB.
:
Actually, I was being kind. They probably show the films at their kids' birthday parties. :
:
The failure to assign blame - Peter Lemkin - 02-04-2016
Tracy Riddle Wrote:I had been thinking of posting about this, and I brought it up briefly on another thread. Why were no government officials (civilian or military, at any level) reprimanded, blamed, demoted, or fired after 9/11 or the JFK assassination? I do remember that one FAA or NORAD official quietly resigned at some point, and of course FBI Agent James Hosty was punished by Hoover for blabbing to the Dallas police about Oswald. But otherwise, nothing. Even the Secret Service agents out drinking the night before the assassination were left alone. The CIA and FBI people who monitored Oswald, the failure of air defense on 9/11, the numerous missed warnings by FBI and CIA...
The WC did direct some criticism at the Secret Service and FBI as institutions, but no individuals were blamed. The 9/11 Commission went even further in blaming systemic failures and institutional miscommunication, but no actual people were at fault.
I think that it was primarily a way of keeping everyone quiet. To throw anyone under the bus - a lowly air traffic controller, SS agent, NORAD official, FBI clerk, State Dept official or whoever - would risk causing those people to complain to the media, point fingers at others, blame superiors, talk about the drills they thought they were participating in, testify before Congress. All of this might lead to real investigations. The media might have no choice but to pay attention and actually do its job. And the whole thing unravels. But if no one is punished, people who know or suspect something will just keep quiet to preserve their jobs and the institutions they work for.
No, no one was really punished - nor in either case was a real investigation done. Why, because the 'secret/deep/hidden government' felt that in both cases it was a job 'well done', and while there had been minor slip-ups, both missions were accomplished successfully, the People fooled, and the Nation changed dramatically for the 'better' for those behind these events. Why spoil a [in their minds] 'good' thing and punish anyone or even investigate as if it were a crime. ::bowtie:: That would only expose the 'hidden hand' - something magicians and deep political movers never do.