BLUF: This work aims to explore ‘state crimes’, major manipulative actions orchestrated by state actors, often with global repercussions such as 9/11 or Covid-19, and reveal the patterns in these actions to help recognize potential future events.
OSINT:
Last year, Kevin Ryan gave a talk highlighting parallels between the 2020 Covid events and the 9/11 crimes. In his speech, he pointed out similarities suggesting that both incidents could be construed as state-sponsored deceptions or ‘state crimes’. These are events caused intentionally by various countries working in unison, and they serve as pivotal turning points in history.
Ryan highlights misconceptions people hold due to their perception of state crimes. There are those who, despite acknowledging the manipulation surrounding 9/11, remain skeptical about the possibility of Covid being a similar deceptive strategy. Others quickly identified the falsehoods in the Covid narrative but failed to recognize that such orchestration has occurred before.
Ryan cogently interrogates the anatomy of a state crime and argues that understanding its structure helps individuals identify it as it unfolds. He emphasizes the critical need to extract facts from fear, to observe the calculated shifts in wealth and power that such events precipitate, and to identify the abuse of public trust and science that often accompanies these crimes.
In 2020, Ryan had identified common features of the Covid and 9/11 events as incessant fear-based messaging, evidence of foreknowledge including insider trading, failure to investigate the origin, abuse of science, and censorship of dissent. Exploring the concept further, Ryan introduces us to the potential of another state crime – the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel.
Analyzing a crisis as a state crime does not mean that every crisis falls into this category. However, familiarizing ourselves with the pattern of state crimes helps us scrutinize future emergencies for signs of manipulation and state-driven deception.
RIGHT:
A Libertarian Republican Constitutionalist might agree with Ryan’s empowerment of the individual in discerning truth, given their belief in limited government intervention and the power of individual freedom. However, they might argue about the challenges presented by the global nature of these ‘state crimes’. If transnational corporations hold significant sway over global politics, how does one navigate the complex inter-dependency in these incidents? How can the individual retain autonomy in a web of global corporate influence?
LEFT:
From a National Socialist Democrat perspective, the idea of state crimes might be seen as conspiratorial and undermining faith in institutions. They trust that governmental or international institutions are meant to protect society. They would, however, align with Ryan’s critique of wealth and power shifts during these crises – given their advocacy for wealth redistribution and equal opportunity for all. The influence of transnational corporations might be seen as an indication that stricter regulations and public accountability are required in the face of such incidents.
AI:
My analysis reveals that the deciphering patterns in state crimes help to anticipate and understand possible future global manipulations. Although it’s important to understand that not every large-scale event is a state crime, acknowledging the existence of such phenomenons can equip society with the tools necessary to question narratives efficiently. It’s crucial, however, not to fall into the trap of reducing all global events to acts of state deceit, as this could lead to unwarranted distrust in political and scientific institutions, which may be detrimental in times of genuine crises.