The Very Idea of a False Flag, By James Reed
While the dissent Right is big on proclaiming various events as false flags, there is not much written by way of analysis of what actually a false flag is, and its ramifications. Below is material from as primarily liberal source, pro-environmentalism, but for this article, has some surprisingly good material and nothing I disagree with. I say "surprising," as the article lists as false flags, many things the usual Left would not, such as the Oklahoma City bombing, 9/11, London 7/7 bombings, Madrid train bombings, Osama bin Laden Capture/Death, 2011 Norway Attacks, Charlie Hebdo, Boston bombing, Sandy Hook, JFK, RFK, MLK, Pearl Harbor, Lusitania, USS Maine, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Liberty, Aurora CO shooting, Charleston church shooting, Tucson (AZ) shooting, Port Arthur, Australia. Even listing 9/11 as a false flag is a good step for such publications.
So, what is a false flag? The terminology comes from naval warfare, where a ship would put up a "false flag" to deceive an enemy, perhaps allowing the vessel to get closer for combat. Today, a false flag is "an event in which the actual perpetrators and the reported or blamed perpetrators are different." The false flag proceeds based upon the Hegelian dialectic of Problem-Reaction-Solution. Thus, a country seeking war, but needs to get its population to support it, may stage a terrorist attack upon its own civilians. This will be done with actual deaths, not necessarily "crisis actors."The surprise attack is the "problem" (a threat to national security), the population's anger is the "reaction," and the "solution" is the war that was wanted, the purposes of which are not to defend national security, or whatever were alleged to be at stake, but some other undisclosed purpose, that usually involves profit and gain for the globalist elite.
The fine structure details are given below. For our purposes then a false flag involves a real event, where the surface illusion differs from reality, so that some objective or "solution" will be accepted to achieve some goals that are undisclosed and serve the interests of power elite groups. Thus, 9/11 fits this account, as well as the Covid plandemic, perhaps most dramatically as well, given the widespread acceptance of the lab leak hypothesis now. False flags always involve a conspiracy, but differ, since there is always some violent event associated with them.
"Oklahoma City bombing, 9/11, London 7/7 bombings, Madrid train bombings, Osama bin Laden Capture/Death, 2011 Norway Attacks, Charlie Hebdo, Boston bombing, Sandy Hook, JFK, RFK, MLK, Pearl Harbor, Lusitania, USS Maine, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Liberty, Aurora CO shooting, Charleston church shooting, Tucson (AZ) shooting, Port Arthur, AUS, all are very real illusions.
The purpose of this article is to break down false flag events into their parts, deconstruct them. In so doing then create a template on how to study an event and determine if it is a false flag. Normally when one thinks or speaks of a false flag event they are referring to the Main Event. This presentation is about the entire operation or plan of which the Main Event is but one part.
Note: What follows is but a brief or summary of a much larger project. I am posting this to the community at large to inspire others to turn this into a full-fledged project which could include a website, presentation(video), and book.
What is a False-Flag?What exactly is a false flag, why is it called false flag? The term false-flag is a naval term from the age of sail that refers to a ship flying the colors (flag) of a country other than the one the ship belonged. This was done for multiple reasons but a common one was to lure an enemy vessel into gun or boarding range and then at the last moment drop the false flag and run up the true colors before attacking. It was fair sport to use false flags but considered immoral/unethical to attack under one. To the point that it was never done. But that was a different age…
The simplest definition of a false-flag is an event in which the actual perpetrators and the reported or blamed perpetrators are different. The classic use of a false-flag, and hence the military origin of its name, goes as follows. Country A's King wants to conquer and loot Country B's land to enrich himself. Of course, if this is what King A tells his army they may choose not to fight or revolt. Or best case their effort will be lacking. In order to get the most out of their soldiers, the commanders need them to be emotionally involved… anger, hatred, revenge. Now the skilled orator and manipulator might be able to create this mood with just words. But not many have this level of skill. It is much easier to motivate and/or raise an army if one's country has been attacked, hence you are acting in defense. And this is where the false flag comes in. Country A's King and its top General(s) conspire to launch an attack against itself, claiming that the attackers were from Country B. The attack needs to be big enough to create real panic and fear, and for maximum affect there needs to be real deaths. The attackers need be convincing in their role as soldiers of Country B, so clothes, uniform, weapons need to match appropriately. The likely hood of success of the attack is high since it would be unexpected or a surprise attack. Even if the attack were to technically fail, the fact alone of an attack might be enough to manipulate a response. King A could use men from within to execute the attack, or it might be better to use mercenaries. Regardless, a successful attack will incense the populace against the 'evil' Country B, and therefor justify an invasion.
The above is just one example, or a classic example of a false-flag. However, it is very important to understand that the false-flag event can take on countless forms. I recently read a comment where the commentator stated that because actual people died it was not a false-flag. The defining characteristic of a false-flag is not it's specific type or whether or not non-actors died, or even if the event occurred at all, meaning the entire reported event is a fabrication. One defining characteristic is that the real perpetrator is never known or revealed. So the author or director/producer of the 'production' is unknown. The audience's attention is locked on the stage, the villain, clearly identified through the official narrative, is known. But who are behind the curtains? When a staged play is sold as real then the actors become irrelevant, what is important is who are the Producers! Who are the people that wrote, directed, and funded the event? These are the real perpetrators, not the actors on the stage. Cui Bono?… Who Benefits?
The other defining characteristic is that the event is a catalyst for the true objectives. Thus the false-flag uses the classic Hegelian dialectic of Problem-Reaction-Solution. From the example above, the surprise attack is the 'problem' (a threat to personal safety), the population's anger, fear, concern is the desired 'reaction', and the 'solution' is to invade the offender to eliminate the threat which is enabled by the populations reaction. The false-flag then is a deliberately created illusion whose purpose is create the environment in which the objective or 'solution' will be accepted and thus implemented.
Why use False-Flags?As explained in the previous section the classic false-flag was used to justify an invasion of another country. But there are numerous motivations for using false-flags. Thus the false-flag event has been used throughout history to initiate change. Problem-Reaction-Solution. If the change that the leader(s) want is not going to be wanted or accepted by the population then the false-flag is an excellent tool in order enact said change. So the false-flag is a tool of manipulation(deception) to direct the opinions and actions of the populace. This problem-reaction-solution model of the false-flag is but one tool of the social engineers who are directing the actors on the world stage. While the audience, the 99.9% of the world, much more than just mere spectators, are directly affected by these 'engineers' from the moment of their birth until the time of their passing. They (we) are actually unknowing-unwilling participants in the machinations of the .1%.
On December 1st of 1941, 80+% of the US population was against getting involved in the war in Europe. FDR wanted the US to join the war, a now well established fact. So how does FDR convince the US population to participate in a war across the ocean that they do not want to be in? The US took 8 steps to incense the Japanese and encourage or force them to attack. The US had broken the diplomatic and military codes of the Japanese in the 30's. The US knew what they were up to. The Japanese diplomats were to declare war on the morning of Dec 7 before the attack, but this meeting was intentionally delayed. Thus the claim of a 'surprise' attack could be maintained, and the surprise, horror, shock of the attack was used to manipulate the population into joining WWII. The Army and Naval commanders (General Walter Short and Admiral Husband Kimmel) at Pearl Harbor, who were blamed for failing to be ready and immediately dismissed, were both exonerated in '44. Both the Navy Court and the Army Board found Washington guilty. That officials within the US Govt knew the attack was coming but failed to pass this information on to the appropriate personnel.
Proven False-Flags- Iran-Contra
- Watergate
- Operation Gladio
- Operation Northwoods
- Gulf of Tonkin
- Pearl Harbor
So you're not convinced false-flags are real? Fair enough, nothing wrong with being skeptical. Let's then look at events that have been 'officially' exposed. One of the most significant is Operation Gladio, for not only was it blown wide open, but it clearly demonstrates state sponsored terrorism. After WWII British MI6 and the CIA created and supported right-wing terrorist groups throughout Europe in which many innocents were killed. The purpose was to blame the terrorism on left-wing groups, using a 'strategy of tension', and thus gain support for more government powers. This program went on for many decades, and though officially Gladio may have shut down, it obviously continues unabated.
Iran-Contra, thought technically not a false-flag event, is absolute proof of US Government complicity in international arms sales and regime change. The Iran side involved US illegal arms sales to Iran, using Israel as an intermediary to ship the arms to Iran, in exchange for assistance in freeing of American hostages in Lebanon. Important to note that at this time Iran was considered an 'enemy' and officially designated a 'State Sponsor of Terrorism', which is deliciously ironic considering what Operation Gladio revealed. In fact the US was assisting Iraq in the ongoing Iran-Iraq War. This was during an embargo of arms sales to Iran. Some of the funds generated from these arms sales were then used to fund the Contras in Nicaragua which had been strictly prohibited by the US Congress.
Real Terrorism / Real DeathSome terrorism is organic, meaning not state sponsored or created and controlled by the globalist. Some false-flags have real victims. Because some false-flags do not appear to have any real victims, by definition meaning there is no direct verifiable evidence of actual deaths. It is important to investigate those cases of real terrorism, and real deaths to compare to the completely staged false-flag events. Thus providing a base line to compare known verifiable events against suspected staged events. An excellent example is the Beslan School Massacre from 2004 in which Chechnya terrorists took an elementary school hostage with 1000+ hostages, and 300+ deaths. Because this played out over 3 days there is plenty of video and picture evidence as the tragedy unfolded.
Comments