Layer upon layer of deceit creates a "Wilderness of Mirrors".(1)

An untruth can lead to an incorrect conclusion and/or lead to choosing a direction that does not bring one to the desired destination.

Sometimes an untruth can be built upon another untruth. Layer upon layer of untruth(s) can lead to a place where the final destination becomes hidden and unknown. It can also lead to a place where one is unsure of one's own location.

In counter-intelligence and espionage circles (and poetry as well(2)), this is what is know as the "Wilderness of Mirrors".

In counter-intelligence the goal is to deceive the opponent by providing them with incorrect information. Provide them with enough incorrect information that they begin to believe a new reality. A reality that appears to be substantiated by "facts". But in fact the facts being used to substantiate this reality are also lies. This is the "Wilderness of Mirrors".

Messages sent are designed to keep you going in the wrong direction, reaching the wrong conclusions and continually ending up at wrong destinations. Looking upon reflection upon reflection of untruths(strange loop(s)(3))and be caught in the Wilderness of Mirrors.

This is the technique of not only spy and counter-intelligence agencies but other agencies, individuals and organizations who wish to keep those they wish to control under control.

The ultimate goal of the Wilderness of Mirrors is to create a misleading scenario in the mind of the target that is so deep, so intricate that the target begins to create his own mirrors in his mind. Mirrors that become self-perpetuating (self-developing and self-sustaining).

Following is an example:

One day, a boy went to the circus to see the animals. There were lions and tigers and monkeys and all sort of animals in cages. The animals were walking back and forth, or hanging on the bars as if looking for a way out of their cage. Further on, the boy spotted and elephant outside a tent. Looking upon the massive bull elephant with massive tusks he noticed that there was a string tied to his leg. The other end was tied to a small wooden stake that had been driven into the ground. He saw that the string was no bigger than a clothesline, and in fact much smaller, more like the string one would use to fly a kite. He asked a man who was forking hey for the elephant, "Hello sir, how is it that that little tiny string can hold that big elephant. Surely he can break it with an easy pull".

The gentleman turned to the boy and smiled. Put his arms up on the pitchfork and said, "When the elephant was just a baby we tied his leg with a heavy chain to a pole planted firmly in the ground. Everyday the elephant would pull with all his might to break free of the chain. But he could not. As time went on, and even as the elephant grew, we tied smaller and smaller chains to the elephant's leg every morning he would pull on the chain. But each time he would not pull as hard as he did the day before before. It was like he was just tugging to see if the chain were still there, thinking it was the big heavy chain. So even though he was bigger and stronger and the chain smaller and smaller, it held him just as effectively as before. Now that he is full grown we are able to hold him with this little string. Every morning we tie him he will give the string a couple of little tugs. We have created in the mind of this great and powerful beast the illusion that a great unbreakable chain is on his leg.

The Wilderness of Mirrors can be implemented in many ways and can take many forms. First one mirror, than one by one the mirrors are added. Until the mirrors become reality. And finally the victim creates his own mirrors to substantiate the mirrors that have been erected around him. He doesn't realize that now, that he is stronger, he can break the chain that binds him and crash the mirrors.

The Wilderness of Mirrors does not alter Truth, but it can hide it.

"Frequently things turn out just as expected or prophesied, not because of a mysterious knowledge of the future, but because people's behavior tends to make the prophecy come true. For example, a teacher who predicts that a student will fail may treat the student in ways that make failure more likely, thus fulfilling the original prophecy. The tendency for prophecies to be self fulfilling is well known in the realms of economics, politics and religion. It is also a matter of practical psychology. So how does this apply to science? Many scientists carry out experiments with strong expectations about the outcome, and with deep-rooted assumptions about what is and what is not possible. Can their expectations influence their results? The answer is yes…
The tendency for experiments to yield the expected results is known as the 'experimenter effect', or more precisely the experimenter expectancy effect'. Most researchers in the behavioral and medical sciences are well aware of this tendency, and try to guard against it by the use of 'blind' methodologies…

These expectations may not only include those of individual investigators, but also the consensus among their peers. Scientific paradigms, models of reality shared by professionals, have a great influence on the general pattern of expectation and could influence the outcome of countless experiments…
It is sometimes suggested, in a joking way, that nuclear physicists do not so much discover new subatomic particles as invent them. To start with, the particles are predicted on theoretical grounds. If enough professionals believe they are likely to be found, costly accelerators and colliders are built to look for them. Then, sure enough, the expected particles are detected, as traces in bubble chambers or on photographic films. The more often they are detected, the easier they become to find again. A new consensus is established: they exist. The success of this investment of hundreds of millions of dollars then justifies yet further expense on even bigger atom smashers to find yet more predicted particles, and so on. The only limit seems to be set not by nature herself, but by the willingness of the US Congress to go on spending billions of dollars on this pursuit…

In the physical sciences, although there has been very little empirical research on experimenter effects, there have been many sophisticated discussions of the role of the observer in quantum theory… Perhaps the mind can influence the probabilities of happenings which are 'probabilistic', not rigidly determined in advance…

… 'a scientist' preparing his apparatus, getting his animals ready, and then leaving them with some feeling of assurance that the experiment will run and the animals will appropriately 'do their thing' cannot but remind us of certain aspects of magic, ritual, or perhaps petitionary prayer. Something is done with the confidence that it will produce a desired result, and the participant, once he has done this, psychologically puts a distance between himself and the outcome…"(4)