reply to post by warrenb
It's interesting to see the mainstream media finally talking about this, but as the reporters and the editors point out, this could be a
CIA-"sanctioned" story.
The story itself goes over the basics but doesn't really say much about why the CIA was put up to this, or why they have been involved in any of the
other covert destabilization projects they have carried out.
Slayer's post gives compelling strategic reasons but a) we don't know for sure this is
the reason and b) it doesn't explain the apparent
thirst for this kind of black op versus using more conventional diplomatic channels.
I much prefer to study the data leaked to us by "insiders." I think it gives a better picture of the complexity of the scene and of the struggles
that apparently go on between the various major players. Though many would like to think that the insider data is actually more accurate, I don't see
any reliable way to verify that.
We should also keep in mind how destructive of human life these tactics really are, not just because of the work of terrorists but also due to the
lies being told to the public at large and to politicians in particular.
In other words, besides the obvious moral reasons for condemning these operations, there are also ethical reasons for condemning them. I don't see
any "higher good" in them. That's why I support those calling for a fundamental shift in how society thinks and operates, regardless of how
unrealistic it might be to expect that such a change could ever occur.
Society has tolerated a huge amount of broad public misinformation down through history. I think we are at a point where there is a compelling
rationale for operating at a higher level of truth than has been the custom. Either way, the planet may not survive. But that shouldn't keep any of
us from asking ourselves: how much do we value freedom?