Tuesday, 8 July 2008

Plausible Deniability?

This is running more from the comment from my page about Debunking9/11.com being a PNAC front.

I asked why, if the US government was all powerful, would they bother paying people to argue with CTists.

The somewhat surprising result was that I actually got a response (as you can see, writing stuff that people comment to isn't really my forte).

Basically the argument runs that if a CTist site was taken down it means that something they said was something that the US government didn't want people to know.

When I said what I did I was thinking more in the early stages, when a site like Infowars or PrisonPlanet could be removed with little or no problem.

Now that some of these seem to be somewhat big it does pose a problem now wouldn't it?

Funnily enough I don't think so.

My evidence comes from a somewhat unlikely source.

The PNAC website.

The direct link takes you (as of 8/7/08) to a page saying:

"This Account Has Been Suspended Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible."

What I want to know is wouldn't this still be a possibility for a site like Infowars? Making it look like they didn't pay their server fees?

Even the Wayback Machine and other such sites could be affected. Look at Operation Clambake on the Wayback Machine.

Not there.

Scientology got their lawyers to remove it (also see here).

I would assume that it would also be easy to just remove the offending page(s) from the archive instead, I mean you can still find PNAC on there, you could still do something similar for Infowars.

No comments: