Samstag, 5. Juni 2010

Problem - Reaction - Solution: an age-old con re-examined

1. The ruling power, in its own interests, contrives a phony event to provoke public outrage against some innocent third party or thing.

2. The public, duly outraged, demands 'something' be done.

3. The ruling power, in response, provides a 'solution' to the problem it had itself

originally created.

Let's expand a bit. I know others have examined this concept before (most recently of note, David Icke, although he was not the first but all credit to you nonetheless, Mr. Icke). In any event, it is very worthy of further examination in the light of the times we currently live in.

We are witnessing the unfolding of an extraordinary age where our fundamental freedoms and rights are under serious and sustained attack by those who purport to rule us by our consent. The country where this disturbing state of affairs is most obviously the case, and has been for a generation now, is the UK. Rights and freedoms have been removed at a rate not seen there for nearly 800 years, and on the flimsy pretext of preventing possible 'terrorist attacks.' But the trend is far from confined to one country and we have seen similar attacks on our rights here in the US and further afield as well.

The problem-reaction-solution hypothesis requires a trigger event. In the US, the most prominent for many decades was the 9/11 attacks in New York (which of course we now know were carried out by Israel with George Bush's blessing). There have been other, less high-profile attempts since then, with various individuals trying to blow up aircraft with bombs concealed in their clothing (most notably the "underpants bomber" who was kindly escorted on board a US flight by none other than the US intelligence services, incredibly).

This is the way the classical model for this scam has worked in the past. Some kind of outrage takes place; the people demand action; the government complies, but the measures have "unintended negative consequences" for our personal freedoms (unintended, yeah, right). But recently, the steps involved have become a little flaky. Whilst we have seen no end to the pressure to curtail our rights and attack our freedoms (Stage 3 of the process) there has been a distinct lack of drive for such measures to come about from stages 1 and 2.

It is as if our governments were giving up on trying to fool us that it is all about 'protecting us' from some external threat. After all, since the truth about 9/11 broke free of the MSM pen, there have scarcely been massed columns of outraged citizens marching down Pennsylvania Avenue demanding more of their liberties be sacrificed, have there? Each new phony, government-orchestrated "terror" alarm is met by increasing levels of scepticism if not outright disbelief by an increasingly better-informed public.

More and more, in the age of the Internet and the ubiquitous presence of 'citizen journalists' with their vast numbers of cell phones and camcorders, Stage 1 operations appear to have been abandoned as now too risky for governments and their lackeys to carry out. Stage 2 (public outrage) which was increasingly failing to materialize anyway due to public suspicion, consequently arises no longer at all.

But hey-ho! There's nevertheless the Stage 3 'solution' to these non-existent threats: take the citizens' ancient, hard-fought rights away regardless, on the basis that there's some vague and unspecified but nonetheless serious existential threat to public safety that we cannot be told about in detail owing to, ahem, 'security considerations.'

We really must be NUTS to suffer this despicable situation to continue. As Huxley warned us more than five decades ago, the only REAL threat to peace and our traditional way of life is generated by our very own governments. And boy, they are surely demonstrating this uncomfortable little fact more and more with every year that passes.

Keine Kommentare:

Kommentar veröffentlichen