It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Possible false flag coming?

page: 1
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Let me start off by stating that i am not trying to give any definite proof or saying that this will definitely happen. This is just something i thought of as I was going through new posts today. If you remember, right before 9/11, it was announced that the U.S. had "lost" a bunch of money in the trillions (or something to that extent). Thanks to xuenchen's and lacrimaererum's posts today (referenced below), i got to thinking. Congress is forseeing another trillion deficit to be added on this year in the midst of our craphole economy and at the same time the latest fearmongering is that Iran supposedly is willing to attack on U.S. soil. Personally, I don't think that Iran has the capability or willingness to attack on U.S. soil at all. Add the fact that the rhetoric demonizing Iran has been going on for a while and the government is obviously itching to go to war with them. This all leads me to believe that a false flag blamed on Iran couldn't be ruled out at this point. Your thoughts? links referenced below.

www.abovetopsecret.com... (by xuenchen)

www.politico.com... (xuenchen's source)

www.abovetopsecret.com... (by lacrimaererum)

www.washingtonpost.com... eQ_story.html ( lacrimaererum's source)




posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 05:55 PM
link   

"...it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.) " -US foreign policy makers in the Fortune 500 funded Brookings Institution's "Which Path to Persia?" report, pages 84-85
.
www.blacklistednews.com...

Good find I was getting ready to make a post myself here's a little of what I found! Really interested in this brooking institutes report on which path to Persia started reading it I'll post stuff if I find anything interesting it's over a hundred pages so might be a few! Here link for PDF if anyone wants to take a gander www.brookings.edu...



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by DIRTYDONKEY
 


thats just what i mean, they are itching for war...and i don't want any part of it.

also, it looks like my second source is all jacked up. I can't get the link to post, but if you go to the washington post home page, it should be on the left, about halfway down.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
WashPost
See if this one works! I thought if anything it would be a attack on the navy being in the straits, but a attack on our soil?! This crap is out of hand, all my life we've been involved in some sort if conflict, I don't want to sound like a hippy but seriously can't we all get along? WTF!



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Yep, couple that with "Inspectors inspecting nuclear facilities" and you have the makings of............, well, past history? Dejavu enyone?
The script never changes it seems.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
My thoughts?

Simple.

The Iranian regime don't need to be falsely blamed for something they've been willing to do for decades. Deranged and dangerous dictatorships don't require false flags by the US government and if anything did happen, I'd avoid ATS for months if I had to just to get away from the sheeple who blame it on the US attacking themselves with no evidence to support that claim like they have since a little incident in New York City 11 years ago.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by curious7
My thoughts?

Simple.

The Iranian regime don't need to be falsely blamed for something they've been willing to do for decades.


And how do you know this as fact? You a spook? You work for the CIA? Or are you just as ignorant as the rest of world relying on whatever "officials" tell you?

Since you apparently have all the insider information conferming "Iran" as a threat can you tell my why it is they have waited apparently "decades" as you have put it, to commit suicide? What is the rationale behind waiting for the US to build such a unstoppable military force to then try and "attack them"...??

Are you one of those people who in one sentence laughs at the Iranian military and their capabilities to wage a war...then in the very next sentence try to portray them as the most dangerous threat to the US and Israel and to the WORLD??? So which is it? Should we be laughing at them with you or trembling in fear at them with you?

I am being honest when I say I would LOVE to hear your "knowledge" on the "Iranian" issue and apparently how "dangerous" they are and how they are ready and willing to attack us...I would love it even more if you could do it without citing or resourcing MSM or the US Government...


edit on 31-1-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by curious7
 


I have to respectfully disagree. We (the U.S.) are really the only ones making it our business to go around the world attacking peoples. Also, I don't know if I would call people that question the story of the 9/11 attack sheeple. I think that it's healthy to question the government's story of 9/11 with all the fishy circumstances that surrounded it. If the U.S. was willing to do it (false flag) and blame cuba (reference Operation Northwoods), what makes you think that they wouldn't be willing to try it again. I know Operation Northwoods was never carried out, but it came pretty close.


edit on 31-1-2012 by BrainPower because: grammatical correction



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   
Honestly, I think at this point the enemies of the US are far more likely to conduct a false flag. They know that more people incountry than ever mistrust their goverment. If Iran could set off a nuke in a high rise building, or something even less spectacular and vehemently point out that it wasnt involved and that it might have been a false flag, even if america does not try to pin the event on Iran, it could send the country into heavy public unrest and maybe even upheaveal within the armed forces, with people convinced that it was yet another false flag carried out by their goverment.
edit on 31-1-2012 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Goal: War with Iran
Prerequisite: American public support
Justification: "Iranian attack on America"
Means: "False Flag" Attack

C'est la vie - c'est le guerre.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Oui!



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
Honestly, I think at this point the enemies of the US are far more likely to conduct a false flag. They know that more people incountry than ever mistrust their goverment. If Iran could set off a nuke in a high rise building, or something even less spectacular and vehemently point out that it wasnt involved and that it might have been a false flag, even if america does not try to pin the event on Iran, it could send the country into heavy public unrest and maybe even upheaveal within the armed forces, with people convinced that it was yet another false flag carried out by their goverment.
edit on 31-1-2012 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)


I have thought about this option as well. However I am not sure enough people in the US or Armed forces believe in "false-flags" to begin with (even with all the evidence such as Northwoods) to actually bring about anything of significance. If this were the case there would have been more significant headway on a new investigation of 9-11.

Also this is a huuuge risk for any country willing to try and put the theory of a "reverse false-flag" to the test. If people don't fall for it, then they have paved a legitimate and justifiable path to their destruction and occupation and this is what they don't want. Which is why (im assuming) they haven't attacked anyone yet. Iran has played a defensive roll this whole time. I don't know why most everyone fails to see that it isn't them over here, its US over THERE...

If Iran had bases in cuba/mexico/canada I would expect the US to react and act just as Iran is acting now.

A "reverse false-flag" all though possible is not so much plausable.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:16 PM
link   
I think that the US does not need a false flag to attack Iran. If they want to, they will. Iran can't do too much about it. The US has been stepping up the propaganda very noticeably trying to garner support for such an invasion.

They don't need a false flag to invade. Just convince enough people that they COULD be a threat and watch as different western Countries start screaming for war to stop the possible threat.

Is Iran a threat? Hell no. But the US has been trying to get back control of Iran ever since we were kicked out years ago by the ayatollah.

Spread propaganda and lies about just how dangerous Iran is. Do this until Iran starts threatening retaliation or to strike US soil( And Iran has been doing just that and the US will get what they want.

No false flag needed at all. The US knows what it is doing. The US knows what it wants and it knows how to get it.
edit on 31-1-2012 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
I don't really see a reverse false flag as possible since they would really be signing their own death warrant. Either way, it will garner the support of the populace for an invasion. I feel like the public here in the U.S. is on the fence about Iran but an attack would put them over and begging for war. A person is smart but people in large numbers tend to be just the opposite. Also, more people than i care to admit take the crap spouting out of the media's mouth as truth. I really hope this stuff just blows over though cause I am sick and tired of war, especially unjust wars. I'm tired of Iraq (glad we're "done" there), I'm tired of Afghanistan, and I'm tired of exporting democracy and importing oil.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


Its called chess and it is a chess game.

They want to call in the Last IMAM.

The false prophit.

They figure if they can take down the great satan. Which is us he will come down from the heavens and take them away to paradise.

This is there beliefe is it not.

Shall I dig up some words from the supreme leader him self. Quote un quote.

I can prove it if you like.

Just saying.

They have been waiting in fear of what we know and what they know.

They were very afraid we were going to attack them when we found out the were 100% involved.

Shall I elaborate a little for you.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
wow.They removed that page from the Washington Post



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by theubermensch
 


Here's another from the WP. Now, the wait....
www.washingtonpost.com... ACwGweQ_story.html



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   

I don't think that Iran has the capability or ...


With all due respect, a bunch of nomads from Afghanistan have the capability to launch an attack on US soil, so i very much think Iran has the capability.

They aint going to send ships or aircraft, but if they were to attack, i would imagine it would be in a way that made them look "not guilty" i.e. dirty bomb etc



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Those who think a false flag attack is needed to for the US administration to drum up public support for an attack on Iran are really trying to flatter the American public. The US government doesn't need public support for any attack against any Muslim country nor will it lack the support if one is launched. It doesn't need one to justify such an attack to other countries either since it no longer cares about offering justifications to others.

So if a false flag attack does take place (there is no way Iran is going to initiate a conflict by launching a terrorist attack on the US), it will be by some elements within the US administration that want an immediate conflict with Iran to force the hand of the others who don't want one immediately. That can mean only thing, that they are expecting unacceptably high losses in the beginning of the conflict and they need a justification to stay the course despite the early losses.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by jrmcleod

I don't think that Iran has the capability or ...


With all due respect, a bunch of nomads from Afghanistan have the capability to launch an attack on US soil, so i very much think Iran has the capability.

They aint going to send ships or aircraft, but if they were to attack, i would imagine it would be in a way that made them look "not guilty" i.e. dirty bomb etc


They do? Care to elaborate on how a bunch of nomads can launch an attack on the U.S?



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join