Cui bono for shockedshockedshocked?
A common theme of current fake "news" is fake surprise.
Stories about spying and surveillance are full of fake surprise. We're supposed to be shocked that NSA "violates" "laws" by spying on everyone. In fact there are no "laws", and NSA has been spying on everyone for 70 years.
This week USA STRONG officials are suddenly "surprised" by Chinese spying, which has been going on for 30 years with official approval and assistance.
I've seen it personally.
The fakest of all is the "surprising" "revelations" about priests and bishops. As I've been tiresomely noting,
this problem is at least 1000 years old. Rome has been incalculably wicked for a THOUSAND YEARS without ever changing or reforming. Once in every generation a "council" pretends to do something, and then the wickedness gets worse. The currently fashionable vice has been documented since at least 1274 AD. That's 3/4 of a millenium.
= = = = =
When a fact that everyone has known forever suddenly becomes a "fresh" piece of "information", the proper question is cui bono.
Who benefits by each of these fakes?
For Rome, the council trick is probably the best explanation. The appearance of reform is sufficient to keep the cultists inside the cult, keep them paying and helping the criminals.
For the spying fakes this trick doesn't seem valid because the spies aren't showing any pretense of reform. Is it just distraction, like the pork-buster routine? Get the rabble excited about spying on Germany, which is THE PROPER AND NECESSARY JOB OF A SPY AGENCY, so the rabble won't have any outrage left for the IMPROPER work of NSA?
Labels: Asked and badly answered