False Flag Forecasts
As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960′s, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up American airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. (more; see also)
One in seven people are convinced that the U.S. government was involved in a conspiracy to stage the September 11 attacks which killed nearly 3,000 people. A survey, which interviewed 1,000 people in the UK and the same number in the U.S., found that 14 per cent of Britons 15 per cent of Americans think the past administration was involved in the tragedy. (more from ’11)
More from ’08:
Such conspiracies aren’t always, or even usually, uncovered eventually, but such uncovering does happen often enough to make it seem socially useful to have betting markets on such questions.
Yes, such markets would have to be long term, and might need to be subsidized. And they might need to be housed in a reasonable distant and independent nation, like New Zealand.
But such market odds might offer an independent and reasonably reliable source to which doubters could turn when they weren’t sure how much weight to put on conspiracy theories vs. their skeptics. If you doubted who was behind the 9-11 attacks, wouldn’t it be great if you could turn to a betting market to better calibrate your doubts?
I'm thinking of auctioning a 9/11 conspiracy confirmation futures contract on eBay: http://blog.knowinghumans.n...
Thing is, the US joint chiefs wasn't willing to kill US civilians. The plan itself involved switching an aircraft with American civilians on board with an aircraft with no civilians on board. Blow up the aircraft with no civilians on board, and blame it on the Cuban government. These civilians would already be given a cover story beforehand, so nobody would ever wonder why those civilians suddenly reappear in American society after being supposedly blown up.
Even when plotting a false flag operation to justify a US intervention, the US joint chief of staff had drawn a line at killing US citizens. And no point did the US joint chief of staff wanted to kill US civilians. It forces an "update" on one's "priors" on trutherism...in the sense that the US military does not support killing Americans. That doesn't mean that 9/11 wouldn't happen...it just means that the US military wouldn't want any civilians to die in the process, and would have to "switch" the planes as well as everyone in those two towers. [Or, you know, you could assume that there's turnover in the US chief of staff, and that the preferences of Kennedy's chief of staff may differ from Bush's chief of staff.]
As a side note: The US joint chiefs of staff was willing to blow up Cuban refugees though ("real or simulated"). Take that what you will.