|
Some lie for what they perceive as good reasons, some (perhaps all) to protect themselves, and some, it seems, just for the hell of it. This is the first bunch I have seen, for over fifty years of watching, that lie about everything-all the above reasons and any other one can think of.
Other administrations have had official misdirection groups but this outfit is the one which created the OSI (office of Strategic Information), whose primary function was to spin (lie about) everything. There is no particular reason, except these cheesy brained intellectual flyweights are convinced that EVERYTHING must be kept secret.
Due to circumstances beyond my control, I have have had the dubious honor of watching virtually every hearing that has been on cspan and cspan2, as well as all the other crap on dish network.
In the last two years I have found that, instead of the normal process of listening and observing someone's speech, mannerisms, etc and trying to pick out the parts that don't match reality, one must discount every statement and then tease out any little scrap of reality from the mess of curdled brains.
Ugh!(shudder) This process is very difficult because it is so foreign to the normal way one proceeds. It is sometimes fascinating-sort of like trying to play Pink Floyd or Devo backwards to see if there really are secret messages there. The actual amount of valid content is kind of limited due to the printed-backward-with-crayon-on-toilet-paper nature of sorting out the nonsense, but, strangely enough, it can be done since there isn't a whole lot of complicated value in what they have to say anyhow. The essence of what they say is pretty simple and, yes, the tin foil hat types have it basically correct!
Give it a try, sometime. Make the true assumption that every, every little thing said is a lie. Record the conversation and play it as many times as necessary, while making notes of your own general impressions using these rules. The answers, while not surprising to the initiated, are indeed enlightening.
Try taking a transcript of one of W's speeches and lining out each phrase that is obviously just a non-sequitor. This will reduce the speech to an agreeably small amount of working material. With the remainder, reverse or skew the these statements that seem to be substantive and then retype. Voila! You will find you have exactly what this bunch has been doing all along! This can be a kind of amusing game, but, invariably, I have found that it takes on a surreal, swim in the sewer type of experience. Whew!
Yours in good editing...
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
