It’s a pretty well recorded technique of US intelligence to push a much more extreme and clearly false narrative to undermine the distribution of the less extreme version which is more plausible and problematic.
So we see nutty theories around thermite online leading people to associate any complicity in 9/11 with unhinged theorists, conveniently overshadowing the far less extreme scenario where actionable intelligence around an attack was shelved because of the opportunities such an attack would create on the international stage.
My favorite example of the technique in action was how in the 1950s, the same year UFO sightings made the front page of Washington DC local newspapers, one of the CIA’s psyops recruits who had graduated MIT in only 3 years suddenly leaves the agency to buy up a struggling national news brand called The National Enquirer. Not long after, no self-respecting news organization was running stories about UFO sightings on any page, let alone the front page.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Cheney had meddled with intelligence that resulted in a major oversight - who even knows what was in all the documents he burned when leaving office. And we know for a fact they had no qualms with messing with intelligence reporting soon after with WMDs in Iraq or outing the wife of a critic.
Similarly, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Netanyahu had a hand in actively preventing proper action being taken on the warnings of an attack leading up to it. Less than 2 weeks before the attacks he was facing supreme court judicial review of his latest grasp to maintain power which was a process going until Jan 2024. And right in the middle of that he’s now ended up in a war.
Orchestrating an attack is a huge (and unlikely) conspiracy. Conveniently fucking up is plausibly deniable, especially if you seed a few more extreme and unhinged associated theories to discredit anyone suggesting you intentionally screwed up.
It’s a pretty well recorded technique of US intelligence to push a much more extreme and clearly false narrative to undermine the distribution of the less extreme version which is more plausible and problematic.
So we see nutty theories around thermite online leading people to associate any complicity in 9/11 with unhinged theorists, conveniently overshadowing the far less extreme scenario where actionable intelligence around an attack was shelved because of the opportunities such an attack would create on the international stage.
My favorite example of the technique in action was how in the 1950s, the same year UFO sightings made the front page of Washington DC local newspapers, one of the CIA’s psyops recruits who had graduated MIT in only 3 years suddenly leaves the agency to buy up a struggling national news brand called The National Enquirer. Not long after, no self-respecting news organization was running stories about UFO sightings on any page, let alone the front page.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Cheney had meddled with intelligence that resulted in a major oversight - who even knows what was in all the documents he burned when leaving office. And we know for a fact they had no qualms with messing with intelligence reporting soon after with WMDs in Iraq or outing the wife of a critic.
Similarly, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Netanyahu had a hand in actively preventing proper action being taken on the warnings of an attack leading up to it. Less than 2 weeks before the attacks he was facing supreme court judicial review of his latest grasp to maintain power which was a process going until Jan 2024. And right in the middle of that he’s now ended up in a war.
Orchestrating an attack is a huge (and unlikely) conspiracy. Conveniently fucking up is plausibly deniable, especially if you seed a few more extreme and unhinged associated theories to discredit anyone suggesting you intentionally screwed up.