16 reasons not to think 9/11 was an inside job.

[Doubt]

The smoking gun has 16 plots that were to be used against Cuba.

Some of these are so bad you would think they were part of a Monty Python skit. None of these were ever tried........I hope.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0801061castro1.html

[Dave1001]

Sadly, US intelligence incompetence may be alive and well. Recently it was revealed that a part of the govt. (I think the Pentagon?) was secretly investigating a law school's gay student group for protesting that the military could recruit on campus even though they discriminate against gays. Part of the report noted the group's name, Outlaw. I think we all understand why a gay law student group would choose the name Outlaw. Yet spy report seriously mentioned that the group's name "Outlaw" possibly indicated an interest in breaking the law, perhaps to commit terrorist acts.

[MarkyX]

I find it funny that Canadian secret service does not even has as much funding as the states but have been proven to be quite effective and don't make stupid mistakes :)

Americans are so funny sometimes :D

[gfunkusarelius]

i agree a lot of those ideas (i didnt even make it very far) seem really stupid, but anyone who has been in a thinktank (hate that term) situation where you are trying to solve a very difficult problem knows that you often write down every idea, however absurd, because it might spark an idea later. like i said, i didnt even read all of these, but from what i saw, it seems like the vast majority of these were just brainfarts. i think sometimes this stuff is declassified and possibly taken too seriously, as if it was given more consideration than it actually was.
i could be wrong

[Cylinder]

i agree a lot of those ideas (i didnt even make it very far) seem really stupid, but anyone who has been in a thinktank (hate that term) situation where you are trying to solve a very difficult problem knows that you often write down every idea, however absurd, because it might spark an idea later. like i said, i didnt even read all of these, but from what i saw, it seems like the vast majority of these were just brainfarts. i think sometimes this stuff is declassified and possibly taken too seriously, as if it was given more consideration than it actually was.
i could be wrong

You're pretty close to the mark. The docs cited by TSG are study summaries. Studies are think-tank style reports. They are not vetted and are often submitted to be outside-the-box proposals.

Like you state, there is also a bit of observation bias at work as well. The useful actually programs are often re-classed and do not see the light of day where the useless ideas lose their value and end up in the public sphere.

The reason the Germans had ballistic missiles in WWII is that the US military planners treated Dr. Goddard as somewhat of a kook with a very strange hobby and German military planners treated him as a visionary.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I find it funny that Canadian secret service does not even has as much funding as the states but have been proven to be quite effective and don't make stupid mistakes :)

Americans are so funny sometimes :D

They did run an infiltration of the leadership of the Reform party (roughly equivelant to your republicans) using a known holocaust denier/white nationalist as thier agent under orders from then Prime Minister Jean Cretin (leader of the Liberal party, roughly equivelant to the democrats).

CSIS has it's share of boners.

[Doubt]

i agree a lot of those ideas (i didnt even make it very far) seem really stupid, but anyone who has been in a thinktank (hate that term) situation where you are trying to solve a very difficult problem knows that you often write down every idea, however absurd, because it might spark an idea later. like i said, i didnt even read all of these, but from what i saw, it seems like the vast majority of these were just brainfarts. i think sometimes this stuff is declassified and possibly taken too seriously, as if it was given more consideration than it actually was.
i could be wrong

The thing is that somebody thought enough about them to create a name and write them down. More effort than they are worth.

And the CIA did consider trying to off Castro with an exploding sea shell. That was only one of many other dumb ideas.

Place this stuff in context with operation Northwoods and you see why such ideas should not be taken seriously even when somebody does work out the details.

[Moose]

CSIS has it's share of boners.

There was a story a few years back about the depressing number of CSIS laptops that were misplaced, swiped, and/or forgotten on public transit.

[Hamradioguy]

The smoking gun has 16 plots that were to be used against Cuba.

Some of these are so bad you would think they were part of a Monty Python skit. None of these were ever tried........I hope.


The late humorist Jean Shephard (With tongue firmly in cheek) once devoted an entire show to how in WWII the Army built four 50ft high slingshots. They were to be placed on the front lines and used to launch giant boulders into the ranks of the German army. The idea was to make them think that God was angry with them and thus they'd throw down their guns and run away. I laughed at this back then. Given the current administration and thinking at the Pentagon I'd not be laughing if I heard this story today.

[gumboot]

The late humorist Jean Shephard (With tongue firmly in cheek) once devoted an entire show to how in WWII the Army built four 50ft high slingshots.


The Monty Python skit about the funniest joke ever written is in the similar vein. What most people don't appreciate is these jokes are based on reality - some of the things tried in the history of warfare are simply ludicrous - and some of the most successful aspects of warfare stem from these strange experimentations.

The only difference is these days they conceptualise and "workshop" ideas instead of just trying them out on the battlefield.

Bear in mind a lot of technology that is now firmly established in modern warfare was initially dismissed as silly or ridiculous.

-Andrew

[ranson]

Of course, there's always the old canard that these secret agencies manage to keep many of their successes, well, secret, and make sure that some of the more spectacular failures are publicized in order to make opponents underestimate them.

I don't know if they are that smart or not, which I guess may be the point.

[gumboot]

Of course, there's always the old canard that these secret agencies manage to keep many of their successes, well, secret, and make sure that some of the more spectacular failures are publicized in order to make opponents underestimate them.


There's certainly that... :) It's a rather complicated world...

The other thing is of course, in recent years especially, failures tend to usually be grossly exaggerated... or often ops that were not failures are presented as failures...

Two high profile ops that spring to mind are Operation Eagle Claw (exaggerated failure) and the Battle of Mogadishu (successful mission presented as failure).

-Andrew

[Gravy]

Of course, there's always the old canard that these secret agencies manage to keep many of their successes, well, secret, and make sure that some of the more spectacular failures are publicized in order to make opponents underestimate them.

I don't know if they are that smart or not, which I guess may be the point.
For instance, the Bay of Pigs fiasco got lots of publicity, but you hear nothing about the highly-successful Operation Glacial Creep, which has been in effect for 47 years and is an ingenious plot to force Castro to die of old age.

[Cuddles]

For instance, the Bay of Pigs fiasco got lots of publicity, but you hear nothing about the highly-successful Operation Glacial Creep, which has been in effect for 47 years and is an ingenious plot to force Castro to die of old age.

They've nearly got him now.