A question about the St Nazarre raid

[fredjones]

I've watched the story of the St Nazaire raid which is available here.

It would be obvious to state that they were incredibly brave and courageous people obviously but I must ask the following.

Given all the people who died and given the fact that people would have certainly died under all circumstances, why didn't the RAF just load a bomber full of explosives and get someone to fly at the gates? 

[burrunjor]

Nov 20, 2021 19:46:50 GMT fredjones said:

I've watched the story of the St Nazaire raid which is available here.

It would be obvious to state that they were incredibly brave and courageous people obviously but I must ask the following.

Given all the people who died and given the fact that people would have certainly died under all circumstances, why didn't the RAF just load a bomber full of explosives and get someone to fly at the gates? 

What the hell are you talking about? 

I don't mean to come down hard on a new poster. (Assuming you aren't Barlow) but these posts do have me worried a bit. Granted I'm not sure I fully understand them, but from what I do gather, you seem to think that the secret service is monitoring your posts online? If that is true then I think it's probably just a result of anxiety. 

I'm not saying the secret service isn't dodgy as f*ck and that there aren't real Orwellian things that happen online, but I think you're taking it too far. I'm not trying to be mean or bully you or anything, I just think that your posts from what I gather seem a bit paranoid. 

[fredjones]

Nov 21, 2021 11:12:30 GMT fredjones said:

Well
1) They monitor everyone's posts through various mechanisms and pay attention to particular conversations through filtering.
2) I referred to everyone and not to myself in stating what I stated.
3) In my case, given the nature of where I come and what I might reveal, this is to be expected so it cannot be described as "paranoia".
4) I have not revealed anything so one cannot form such a judgement.
5) See my point about authorities and the reaction of the public to them with reference to the catholic church and indeed the class system.
6) This pertains to the St Nazarre raid.
7) I don't know who Barlow is.

Well
1) This pertains to the St Nazarre raid and I am not sure about how a simple discussion about why they used particular tactics pertains to mental states.

2) They monitor everyone's posts through various mechanisms and pay attention to particular conversations through filtering. This is very easy for them to do as you might perhaps realize from the Snowden revelations.

3) I referred to everyone and not to myself in stating what I stated.

4) In my case, given the nature of where I come, who I am and what I might reveal, this is to be expected so it cannot rationally be described as "paranoia". 

5) I have not revealed anything so one cannot form such a judgement.

6) See my point about authorities and the reaction of the public to them with reference to the catholic church and indeed the class system. If I were to
a) Discuss corruption in the catholic church in the 1970s in Ireland and this was the 1970s, the reaction would have been similar to yours
b) One might also state that the intelligence services have a greater capacity for secrecy than an ecclesiastical authority might have had 50 years ago.

7) This is not a reaction I get abroad.

8) I don't know who Barlow is. Perhaps you might enlighten me.

9) Paranoia is a form of cognitive bias and cognitive bias can only be said to apply to those who presume paranoia.

10) With regards to my post in relation to the "possible sadako"
a) Doctor who forums tend to be somewhat snarky.
b) I was concerned that perhaps I had said something that might have upset people although I could not determine what it was.
c) I am unfamiliar with totems in forums and such a judgement is incorrect.

11) You will note that I am came to the same conclusions as you did with respect to the Fitroy crowd on the basis of an informed suspicion without access to direct evidence. This is not indicative of someone who has poor judgement and who is liable to paranoia.

[fredjones]

And apologies if I am reediting that post because I always think "I should have said X" after I post.

[burrunjor]

These are extreme accusations without any shred of proof and sound like the type of thing someone who was overly anxious would say. "IE they're monitoring everything I say online." That's really all I can say about it. You'd have to be an ex secret agent for them to monitor you to the extent you think. I don't know maybe you are, but either way it all sounds very much a the CIA are listening to me on the radio.

[fredjones]

Nov 21, 2021 11:46:26 GMT burrunjor said:

These are extreme accusations without any shred of proof and sound like the type of thing someone who was overly anxious would say. "IE they're monitoring everything I say online." That's really all I can say about it. You'd have to be an ex secret agent for them to monitor you to the extent you think. I don't know maybe you are, but either way it all sounds very much a the CIA are listening to me on the radio.

Well

1) My accusations are accusations made on the basis of evidence which I have not revealed. As such you cannot state that "there being no proof" because you have not seen the evidence..

2) The monitoring was revealed by Edward Snowden and the guardian and indeed by I think Duncan Campbell. Some of the tools used include those devised by JTRIG and indeed Echelon. They look for keywords in online conversations and other forms of communications and will monitor things which may be said to be sensitive. For example "corruption in GCHQ". They will do so because
a) They have the capability to do so
b) They do not like revelations of corruption as one can see from, to give just one example, the Geoffrey Prime case and the manner in which they handled it (They refused to help the police and blocked previous investigations into corruption). This is because such revelations have a bearing on the "special relationship".

3) I do not really wish to reveal how this might be said to apply to me except in so far as I might reveal corruption and why this is pertinent. I could however state to give one example, I had the same minder as the famous "spy in the bag" Gareth Williams who without meaning to go all heavy on you, was murdered. This is the reason why I do not talk about such things.

4) You cannot therefore form such a judgement.

5) You state "I can't see" and "it sounds like the CIA listening to people" it on the basis of things of which you have no knowledge and conclude that it is not there and the other person is wrong in claiming that he has knowledge of such things.

6) As such, if I may say, the only form of cognitive bias comes from yourself because you dismiss at the outset something which you do not know about. You even dismiss evidence which is readily available.

7) People in essence talked about the authorities dumbing down and ensuring that they do not question things. In this case, at the outset, in advance of hearing any evidence and dismissing evidence which is readily available, you form a conclusion and claim that there is no evidence or "shred of proof" which, without meaning to sound insulting, does concur with such a view.

8) How would the CIA listen to people on the radio and how would they bother? It does happen however that they and other agencies use tools such as the following to listen to people. Given that such tools exist, such things do happen.

9) As regards your comment that one has to be a "secret agent" for them to monitor people, I really think you should read more about Snowden or indeed about whistleblowers such as Julian Assange or indeed others. To give one notable example, you perhaps might like to read about the Pegasus spyware which was mentioned recently in the news 

[fredjones]

Oh and most importantly, if you want to talk on a scientific basis about paranoia, there is no evidence that someone with a high level of perceptual reasoning can experience such mental states.

I know because I have done the research, asked around and indeed submitted freedom of information requests.

I would welcome evidence to the contrary but there is none.

For reference and without stating as much as a boast but to put you in the picture with regards to what I have outlined above, my level of perceptual reasoning is 135.

[fredjones]

And I have finished the reedit

[fredjones]

And added some bits.

Anyway, perhaps someone might be interested in answering the question (or maybe not) because I don't know the answer and its an event which I find astonishing.

In case you are interested, Jeremy Clarkson, an individual whom one might not like, presented a rather interesting program on the The raid on St Nazarre which was known as "the greatest raid of all time"

www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Zd0Oy8JyQ