2025-12-04
We are familiar with the the term "false flag" - something happens in such a way that it is attributed to someone or some grouping that wasn't actually involved.
It's a straight deception, originating in naval battle where an attacking force flies a flag other than its own in order to elude culpability.
In these more sophisticated days it is often associated (so some conspiracy theorists might aver) with a need to influence public opinion to accept a course of action to which they would not otherwise consent.
Such as war.
Martin Geddes has a slightly but significantly different problem with his legal battles to try to establish the validity of the operations of our current system of justice.
Mark Sexton would seem to be running up against a similar although less clear-cut (in the sense that the vagueness appears as deliberate but fundamentally indefensible) problem.
In view of the pervasive and thus unavoidable nature of the problem, Martin has suggested a new term to describe the general condition where the provenance of a situation cannot be satisfactorily determined.
Welcome to the world of the "vague-flag". I'm sure we can think of plenty ... although how to deal with them is no doubt the intentional problem.
Since there may well be no deterministic solution, are we being guided to consider that the solution must be spiritual?
