22-06-2011, 12:14 PM
Ed, In have to disagree with the your previous comment somewhat. We live in a world of multiple "conspiracies" or planning of and execution of pre planned policies.
A conspiracy is really an UNLAWFUL plan by several people... a policy or a law is considered lawful and acceptable.
We all typically exhibit some sort of pre-planning in our activities and most of us have plans which involve other people in future actions.
The distinction here is in the notion of secrecy of a conspiracy and the fact that it is to be an unlawful action or plan. And further the conpsiracy like all criminal acts seeks to cover up their plan and attribute the event to "other causes".
The classic false flag is one of the tactics of conspirators to cover their actions and create the appearance that some one else or some other group or nation etc, is the proximate cause the what will become a response.
It's interesting to not that in the case of "terrorism" the "false flag" aspect will shift the blame and cause a policy against a terrorist, a group or more recently a war ON terrorism based on the perceived (false flag) action of a terrorist, group or even "rougue nation", but the response never even calls for an examination of what a person, group of rougue nation might have acted ... as they are alleged to have done. That is there is never an attempt to understand why the accused in a false flag might have been conceivably responding to other situation.
Some will, for example, provide an "excuse" of "blowback" for terrorism or anti Americanism. They, rightly say that terrorists are disgruntled and are so for some cause... usually based on US hegemony. This may not justify their supposed act of terrorism, but it gives it a somewhat rational and understandable cause and this would of course force an examination of hegemonic cause for "anit Americanism" and terrorism.
The Israeli v Palestinian / Arab conflict is the perfect example of this at play and the tit for tat nature of "state" retribution for purposeful acts. The Israelis always claim they are simply punishing acts of terrorism and criminality... and the Paistinians / Arabs are claiming retribution for unlawful draconian punishments meted out by "illegal occupiers" and international law breakers. All fo the "actions" by both sides are "planned" and share that with the notion of a conspiracy.
Supposedly there are some who are powerful enough to move the world such as a dictator who can begin a war or a president who can order a police action... undeclared war. But even these actions are likely taken with counsel of other "conspirators".
In fact it's really hard to see ANY action or policy taken by a government, a corporation or in many cases individuals which don't share the essential qualities of a conspiracy - pre planning. The "conspiracy" however is unlawful and secret and seems to ALWAYS involve someone else aside from the conspirators taken the rap for the "plan" or the action...
Labeling someone a conspiracy nut is an attempt to humiliate or legitimatize a person's demand to examine the actual evidence and establish what ACTUALLY happened. How dare anyone confront conventional wisdom,ethics and intent, "professional" historians, the state, the criminal justice system etc.... as the assumption is these groups ONLY act in the interest of "the people". Nothing could be further from the truth. Institutions are corrupt by definitions and protect those who have power within them.
A conspiracy is really an UNLAWFUL plan by several people... a policy or a law is considered lawful and acceptable.
We all typically exhibit some sort of pre-planning in our activities and most of us have plans which involve other people in future actions.
The distinction here is in the notion of secrecy of a conspiracy and the fact that it is to be an unlawful action or plan. And further the conpsiracy like all criminal acts seeks to cover up their plan and attribute the event to "other causes".
The classic false flag is one of the tactics of conspirators to cover their actions and create the appearance that some one else or some other group or nation etc, is the proximate cause the what will become a response.
It's interesting to not that in the case of "terrorism" the "false flag" aspect will shift the blame and cause a policy against a terrorist, a group or more recently a war ON terrorism based on the perceived (false flag) action of a terrorist, group or even "rougue nation", but the response never even calls for an examination of what a person, group of rougue nation might have acted ... as they are alleged to have done. That is there is never an attempt to understand why the accused in a false flag might have been conceivably responding to other situation.
Some will, for example, provide an "excuse" of "blowback" for terrorism or anti Americanism. They, rightly say that terrorists are disgruntled and are so for some cause... usually based on US hegemony. This may not justify their supposed act of terrorism, but it gives it a somewhat rational and understandable cause and this would of course force an examination of hegemonic cause for "anit Americanism" and terrorism.
The Israeli v Palestinian / Arab conflict is the perfect example of this at play and the tit for tat nature of "state" retribution for purposeful acts. The Israelis always claim they are simply punishing acts of terrorism and criminality... and the Paistinians / Arabs are claiming retribution for unlawful draconian punishments meted out by "illegal occupiers" and international law breakers. All fo the "actions" by both sides are "planned" and share that with the notion of a conspiracy.
Supposedly there are some who are powerful enough to move the world such as a dictator who can begin a war or a president who can order a police action... undeclared war. But even these actions are likely taken with counsel of other "conspirators".
In fact it's really hard to see ANY action or policy taken by a government, a corporation or in many cases individuals which don't share the essential qualities of a conspiracy - pre planning. The "conspiracy" however is unlawful and secret and seems to ALWAYS involve someone else aside from the conspirators taken the rap for the "plan" or the action...
Labeling someone a conspiracy nut is an attempt to humiliate or legitimatize a person's demand to examine the actual evidence and establish what ACTUALLY happened. How dare anyone confront conventional wisdom,ethics and intent, "professional" historians, the state, the criminal justice system etc.... as the assumption is these groups ONLY act in the interest of "the people". Nothing could be further from the truth. Institutions are corrupt by definitions and protect those who have power within them.