World War III isn't so bad, is it?
One of my sons follows conspiracy accounts for fun, and he says everyone is claming the attack was a "false flag." But surely for there to be a false flag, there has to be a flag? A false flag operation is when you blame one entity but another really did it. In this case, our government hasn't blamed anyone.
Apparently Barack and Michele Obama once made a documentary that included a scene of a huge ship running onto a beach, which somehow proves they were behind this attack.
All the people I follow passed this stuff along with the tag, "predictable response." And it was predictable.
What does that mean?
What, if anything, do the people who post this stuff really believe? Are a lot of them doing it for fun and profit?
But let's assume a lot of people really believe this stuff, or at least believe it is plausible. Why? How did we come to have this reservoir of distrust so vast and deep that even perfectly obvious accidents appear to people as sinister acts by evil cabals? Is this just hangover from Vietnam, the Cold War, and the Invasion of Iraq? If our government tried harder to be more honest, would that help? Or does this distrust spring from a deeper place?The other day I was talking to my conspiracy-enjoying son about the fake moon landing thing, and he said, "To some of these people, everything the government says is a lie, and since all we know about the moon landing comes from the government, it has to be fake." But the people who say things like that constantly rely on "the government" to tell the truth – about the weather forecast, upcoming road closures, when the first day of school will be. How do they know which statements are just from the government, and which are from "the government"?
How much does any of this matter?
All things equal the bridge strike needs to be investigated and fault assigned. Bridge design or construction that allowed for catastrophic structural failure? The Harbor Pilot? The Captain of the Dali? What a major disaster. Yes an accident of the greatest proportions but even with port anchor dropped, why did it careen in the opposite direction directly at the pylon. The ship track is straight until first power loss and then it turns, straight in to the pylon.
ReplyDeleteWind and current.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoPRz7wk3WY
ReplyDeleteOne of my sons follows conspiracy accounts for fun, and he says everyone is claiming the attack was a "false flag." But surely for there to be a false flag, there has to be a flag? A false flag operation is when you blame one entity but another really did it. In this case, our government hasn't blamed anyone.
ReplyDeleteI mean, there's the Indian flag - it being an Indian ship, with an Indian crew.
Maybe the "Truthers" think that Uncle Sam falsified the nationality of both, and it was secretly a government ship with a crew of Black Ops agents, and they only CLAIM it was Indian!
Because they want to... uhh... drum up public hatred for India? For some reason? And I guess the whole thing recently where the Indians assassinated a sitting Canadian politician over comments about Sikh independence doesn't matter to most Americans, so they can't use that... but hurting the American economy by interrupting some shipping via both bridge and by sea WILL rile people up? I guess?
Or maybe it was secretly the Russians? Maybe he hired the Indians to be crisis actors, and pretend like it was all an accident, while they were all secretly in on it and a bunch of Spetsnaz agents oversaw the entire operation to intentionally crash the ship into the bridge? Putin outplaying us at Seven Dimensional Chess, once again!
Or maybe it was actually THE INDIANS?!? Modi is mad that Joe Biden hasn't done more to combat Sikh separatism in America, but can't act openly, and so he arranges for a bunch of MARCOS naval special forces to pose as a "civilian" crew who have an "accident", allowing him to enact revenge? Clearly the best false flag is no flag at all!
/eyeroll
The other day I was talking to my conspiracy-enjoying son about the fake moon landing thing, and he said, "To some of these people, everything the government says is a lie, and since all we know about the moon landing comes from the government, it has to be fake."
ReplyDelete"All we know about the moon landing comes from the government" isn't even correct. We left retroreflectors on the moon's surface - you can rig up a powerful enough laser and a sensitive enough light detector, and with that you can sweep the moon's surface from earth and get very clear spikes of the amount of reflected light at the locations they were set up.
In fact, half of the six locations are the work of OTHER governments. The Soviets set up two via unmanned landers / rovers, and India set up another just last year with their own lander. And both Soviet landers had retroreflectors which were manufactured by the French, so that adds another layer of complexity for any "it was a hoax" claims to grapple with.