At 08:40 AM 2/11/99 -0500, Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
>> IAN: But the facts speak clearly: if military
>> personnel are told to go and dump chemical or
>> biological agent X on a whole community, they
>> will do it, because they have done it, and
>> I've never heard about a single military
>> personnel complaining or coming forward
>> to blow the cover-up. The facts simply
>> appeared in some FOIA request responses,
>> and that was about tests old enough to
>> be declassified, and the Govt is not held
>> accountable because poisoning's been legal.
>
>While small operations may behave thus (they recruit their members from
the run
>of the mill active duty rosters by culling according to physchological
ratings,
>selecting those with marked lack of moral/ethical concern). I doubt that they
>could get the general military to go along with such things. Even in the
>situation of these minor projects, the personnel need to be convinced
either that
>what they are doing is not harmful or that there is a greater threat...
IAN: Or "greater good." Right I agree with your points. Even the Nazis' had the SS, and evidence suggests that Special Forces in the U.S. have SS- type subgroups of elite terrorists, these are the types that are used in help regimes in other countries torture political opponents...
The rank-and-file National Guard will be a different lot, and no doubt many would even resist shooting citizens. But hoping that that would prevent such an operation from reaching its objectives is not likely. SS-type groups are designed to weed out "trouble makers" (ethical people) in the military.
>> Do people think that in Nazi Germany there
>> was just a real bad crop of young men that
>> inflicted untold brutality on prisoners, that
>> pushed whole families into gas chambers? I
>> think the logical situation is that German
>> youth of the 1930s were not an inherently more
>> bad group of people than others, I think it's
>> just that a fair percentage of the people you
>> see every day would push your family into a
>> gas chamber if the powers that be of their
>> society were to order them to do it.
>
>The media aside, there is no total control over communications like back
then...
IAN: Yes, but the majority is bought and sold on mainstream media, i.e. Federal PR Office, disinfo. It seems to me that they'll let "weeds" like me grow in the information garden, but if you get in with a person respected by the majority, like Pierre Salinger, then they apply weed-killing measuring with heavy applications of poisonous falsehoods. Controlling the majority mind is their objective.