Helicopters are a favorite dramatic method when it comes to getting rid of the simActors used in military/intelligence connected media hoaxes.
FLASHBACK Excerpted from The Virginian Pilot: Two members of the FBI’s elite counterterrorism unit died Friday while practicing how to quickly drop from a helicopter to a ship using a rope, the FBI announced Monday in a statement.
The statement gave few details regarding the deaths of Special Agents Christopher Lorek and Stephen Shaw, other than to say the helicopter encountered unspecified difficulties and the agents fell a “significant distance.”
One of the most common questions about 9/11 and any other big psyOp is how could so many people keep quiet? The main reason is that it’s a military intelligence operation. Here’s an expansion of that concept from I Gestalta:
Such matters as discretion and confidentiality permeate many aspects of the day-to-day lives of quite a wealth of people: the military, various intelligence institutions, the police force, doctor-patient privilege, etc.
The thesis is, “too many people are involved for there not to have been a leak, or some manner of internal subterfuge”. Really? Let’s think about this in very simplistic terms, shall we?
A good starting point for mounting a counter-argument against this knee-jerk defense mechanism would be to cross-compare the implications of such a conclusion with what can be referred to as a “known” or “accepted” “conspiracy”. For instance, the effectiveness of a military campaign—be it clandestine or not—heavily depends upon the efficiency and fidelity of the chain of command. “Chain of command” implies “discipline”, and “discipline” typically implies “conviction” or “belief”. The reason the military is able to function as effectively as it does is due to these core ideals supporting it as the very foundation of each echelon of its infrastructure.
Those residing nearest the lower rungs of the ladder are, quite obviously, not going to be privy to the nitty-gritty details and the synthesizing of a tactical campaign, because, why risk it? All they need to know is that what they’re doing is in the best interest of their country, its ideals and its population.
The common assumption implied by the “too many people” paradigm is that, in order for such a campaign to be successful, all participants must be aware of the true intentions of those entrenched in the staging and development process.
If the “too many people” concept were at all valid, then it stands to reason that pretty much no covert/surprise attack conducted by the military could possibly work, ever; and that is preposterous. All that matters is that everyone believes in what they’re doing, in whatever capacity they are involved.
Like all hierarchies, be it a cult/mystery religion/secret society, the military or even the freaking CIA (what’s the difference?!), the more involved you become, and the more groomed by and desensitized to its operational tenets you are, the less likely you are to violate its codes and dogmas; and this is because of a massive amount of psychological conditioning which leads one to conclude that, say, shooting some Arab with an M-16 is making America safe from terrorists.
Why aren’t celebritys’ psychologists all over television giving the scoop on their personal lives?
Why did a cop, who stopped by my apartment the other night while I was enjoying a smoke on the porch, proceed to ask me all kinds of questions about my upstairs neighbors, but refused to comment when I asked him if I should be concerned with any criminal activity?
Why won’t my parents (former intelligence) talk about even the dumbest little details about what they really did in the military?
This is a very basic breakdown of my thoughts on the “too many people” idea, but I think this line of thinking is quite rational in some respects. While a military attack and a media deception are not exactly 100% analogous, the operational parallels which exist between them are undeniable.
Lastly, money is another great motivator, and so is a standing death threat.