PDA

View Full Version : Plausible Deniability



Mluck
28th September 2010, 18:52
Plausible Deniability: refers to the denial of blame in lose and informal chains of command where upper rungs quarantine the blame to lower rungs, and the lower rungs are often inaccessible, meaning confirming responsibility for the action is nearly impossible. In the case that illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high ranking officals may deny awarness of any such act or any connections to the agents used to carry out such acts.


In politics and espionge, deniability refers to the ability of a "Powerfull Player" or actor to avoid blowback by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party, ostensibly unconected with the major player. In political campaigns, plausable deniabilty allows candidates to stay "clean" and denonuce advertisements that use unethical approaches or innuendo based on opposition research.


More generally, "plausable deniability" can also apply to any act that leaves little or no evidenece of wrongdoing or abuse. Examples of this are the use of electricity, waterboarding, and pain compliance holds as a means of torture or punishment, leaving little or no tangable signs that abuse took place.


Plausible Deniability is a LEGAL CONCEPT. It refers to the lack of evidence when proving an allegation. Standards of proof vary in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "more likley so than not" whereas in a criminal matter, the standard is "beyond a resonable doubt". If your oppenent lacks incontrivertable proof of their allegation, you can plausibley deny the allegation even though it may be true.


Really makes you think why are so called Justice Systems are set up the way the are!!


Now This Is Important For Everyone:


The doctirine has six major flaws


1. It was an open door to the abuse of authority; it requried that the parties in question could be said to have acted independently, which in the end was tantamount to giving them license to act independently.


2. It rarley worked when invoked; the denials made were rarley plausable and were generaly seen through by the the general populace and the non controlled media.


3. It only increases the risk of misunderstanding between senior officals and their employees.


4. If the claim fails, it seriously discredits the political structure and figures involved.


5. It only shifts blame, and generally, constructs rather little.


6. If it succeeds, it creates the impression that THE GOVERNMENT WE SEE IS NOT IN CONTROL OF THE STATE.


HMMMMM makes you think does it not