Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed on the liquid bomb plot

[Peter Presland]

So as to calibrate the level of violence. Does this means what I think it means, namely causing violence to spiral higher via false flag operations? Or am I simply being too cynical?

I personally doubt it is possible to be too cynical when it comes to the covert operations of States in pursuit of their hidden agendas.

My reading of Tunander on this is that the US has massive logistical capability to provoke unrest and violence between potentially antagonistic factions, communities and small states. Couple the logistical with the in-depth 'intelligence' resulting from UK historical involvement plus massive ongoing surveillance and communications intercepts and the result is the ability to 'calibrate the level of violence' in a manner to precisely suit the objectives du jour. Whether one or other of the parties to the violence is an ostensible ally simply does not enter into the matter other than as just another variable to be included in the overall calculation.

US/UK dealing with the Reds and Whites in post WW1 Russia is probably a good analogy.

I have no doubt whatsoever that, if a major terrorist attack involving large civilian casualties were calculated as likely to seriously assist US objectives in Central Asia, then such an attack would inevitably occur. I also doubt that ANY of the major 'terrorist' attacks all over the world in recent years have occurred without the involvement of one or other (or a combination of) the Western SIS's and the countries where the attacks happened.