If one looks at history since the 1960's leaders of the resistance are co-opted or part of the plan. Daniel Ellsberg is one shining star in this regard. https://www.counterpunch.org/2003/03/08/will-the-real-daniel-ellsberg-please-stand-up/ I think Daniel Sheehan of the Christic Institute during the Contra wars is another. It is ar…
If one looks at history since the 1960's leaders of the resistance are co-opted or part of the plan. Daniel Ellsberg is one shining star in this regard. https://www.counterpunch.org/2003/03/08/will-the-real-daniel-ellsberg-please-stand-up/ I think Daniel Sheehan of the Christic Institute during the Contra wars is another. It is arguable that while Christic pursued the broad conspiracy of the "Secret Team" , the bedrock portions of the case involving the actual La Penca incidents took a back seat. A few weeks before the case was slated for trial, the Christic Institute still had not diagramed the elements of proof, a legal procedure where the text of the complaint is broken down into a list of single elements that have to be proven with either valid documentation, a sworn affidavit, or a live witness. This had created problems for researchers and lawyers who had no master list of what needed to be proven when devising questions for depositions and witnesses.
Very helpful observation on how to do a torpedoing with “plausible deniability.” Of course the legislative process is full of similar stratagems of administatrative moves to scuttle things while pretending to support them.
If one looks at history since the 1960's leaders of the resistance are co-opted or part of the plan. Daniel Ellsberg is one shining star in this regard. https://www.counterpunch.org/2003/03/08/will-the-real-daniel-ellsberg-please-stand-up/ I think Daniel Sheehan of the Christic Institute during the Contra wars is another. It is arguable that while Christic pursued the broad conspiracy of the "Secret Team" , the bedrock portions of the case involving the actual La Penca incidents took a back seat. A few weeks before the case was slated for trial, the Christic Institute still had not diagramed the elements of proof, a legal procedure where the text of the complaint is broken down into a list of single elements that have to be proven with either valid documentation, a sworn affidavit, or a live witness. This had created problems for researchers and lawyers who had no master list of what needed to be proven when devising questions for depositions and witnesses.
Very helpful observation on how to do a torpedoing with “plausible deniability.” Of course the legislative process is full of similar stratagems of administatrative moves to scuttle things while pretending to support them.