by hoi.polloi on Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:40 pm
"Fake tech" is a subject after my own heart, since looking at the extravagant and unbelievable claims of hologram technology, as promoted by some of the worst 9/11 conspiracy theorist shills; and it has since been an engaging topic to me. I don't doubt that a fair number of military stories about mind control, death rays, spaceships, weapons, time travel and so forth are completely scaremongering nonsense. It's just that some of them get to be really "featured" stories in our media, such as the ones about nuclear weapons.
But they all start as little things like this, someone tinkering around with fakery, making believably bad "exclusive" pictures and fabricating the hype.
On the other hand, I think one of the best arguments for so many of the stories being fake is that the public will be kept in the dark about any attempts to warn us when a steadily developed tech is real. And why should they go through all the trouble to do this? To make a military operation a success, naturally. Perhaps, to avert prior knowledge of a technological attack, such as one involving - perhaps - a unique combination of tactical and psychological weapons. Such as - perhaps - an electromagnetic weapon used to scramble any signals associated with photography or recording, while replacing the selfsame sector of coverage there with a pre-rendered propaganda movie.
I wonder why that - and an Internet-based pushing of the skepticism that such a thing is possible - comes to mind for me ...
