Nuclear false flag? I don't think so.

I visit several conspiracy sites on a regular basis, and one meme that keeps surfacing again and again is the “nuclear false flag incident.” (NFFI) I assume that everyone here is familiar with the concept, but just in case there are any newbies, the scenario for NFFI goes like this: “In order to justify more wars/a greater police state, the “Elite” will set off a nuclear bomb in an American city and blame it on a country or people we wish to fight.” Twenty years ago, this would have seemed like the ravings of someone in an asylum; now we live in a world where such a thing seems not only possible, but probable.

But can it happen? Will it happen?

There’s something very strange about the almost relish with which this fantasy is described, as if the conspiracy world needs it to happen. 9/11 was such a cinematic, over-the-top piece of opera that the next thing has to be bigger and badder. Ground Zero 2. More special effects. More death. It’s how we think as Americans. The door has been opened. Everything is on the table. No conspiracy is too crazy, because the elite have shown themselves to be madmen.

Well, they might be madmen, but they’re not stupid. When I was a boy in the 80’s, I used to worry that Russia was going to nuke us, after I saw the movie “The Day After.” My dad just laughed at me. “The Reds aren’t going to nuke us, son. They can’t use a cinder!” It took me years to understand what he meant.

The Elite, like Russia, rely on resources. Nuking a city means millions less workers to slave for them. It means poisoning the air, soil and water in a large swath of the country, which could come back to bite them. The Elite do not want a nuke going off. They will use passive-aggressive techniques like GMO crops that sterilize people to reduce the number of useless eaters.

An NFFI creates a couple of logistical problems. First of all, where do you get a nuke? For years, constant rumors that there are “dozens” of “missing suitcase nukes” from the former Soviet Union, have circulated the Internet.

The truth is that there is probably no such thing as a “suitcase nuke.” The evidence of the existence of such devices is extremely sketchy. There were backpack-sized “micro-nukes” but they had an extremely small yield (around a kiloton.) And Russia isn’t missing any nuclear weapons. They’ve checked, believe me. Their biggest fear is that Muslim separatists got their hands on one and will use it on Moscow.

Fine, so let’s say that the Elite has a nuke somehow. Where to set it off? What city will they be willing to sacrifice? What part of the country would they be willing to write off for generations? How will they deal with the financial chaos that follows? The Elite wants order so they can continue to rule. They use violence sparingly, and it is always tightly controlled.

So the nuke goes off, but guess what? Every nuclear weapon has its own “signature.” Based on the type of damage, the size of the explosion, etc., every other nuclear power will know whose nuke it was. It’s like committing a murder with a special type of gun that only a few people in the world have, and the police matching the shell casings to the exact gun.

So, despite the lurid fantasies, I don’t think an NFFI is in our immediate future. Generally, it doesn’t take much for us to go to war. 9/11 has already greased the wheels for a long time to come. They can coast on that for 50 years.

Thoughts?

I'm with you, sir, but you can't argue with stupid.

Pretty much every major war was decided (public prodded along) by a false flag.
Without false flags, nothing major would ever happen, because most people don't care enough about a few people's interest (money) to really do anything to anyone.

I certainly hope you're right and this doesn't happen. Sadly if it does I feel as though I'm doomed as well as many other people in New Jersey. The reason I feel it would happen in jersey is the population and generally we are looked down on now because of "The jersey shore". But meh, I'm probably just a loon.

Fantastic reasoning, S+F for you, sir!

I agree completely. As much as we are certain that a group of malevolent Elite are willing, and even capable, of "nuking" an entire city, the mess is more than they want to clean up, and would hurt them as much as it would help them.

I believe that the next "false flag" will be less serious than a nuclear one, more controlled. Much less chaotic.

Because in chaos they lose control. In chaos, we could potentially gain control. And that is the last thing they could want.

What about "Dirty Bombs"? These are a possibility.
Just because you hit some major cities doesn't deem the rest of the country useless so I can't say it won't ever happen.

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


The fact is, we aren't so sure how safe for the rest of an area a "dirty bomb" would be.
One of significant size would cause substantial fall-out for surrounding areas, so it'd have to be small enough, with just the right conditions, to effect only a single urban area.

But for the right shock factor to the American public, it'd be necessary to take out a major economic sector.
Take out New York, our economy slows to a grind.
Take out Chicago, our economy slows.
Take out Los Angeles, our economy slows.
Take our Miami, our economy slows.

You get the picture. Taking out any major city would have unpredictable financial consequences, ones that may hurt the Elite a bit more than they are comfortable with.

reply to post by Snsoc


this event could fall in this subject matter
san onofre investigating sabotage?

nuclear bombs "per se" are about everywhere
what if the worse case unfolded here at san onofre...fbi investigating.. then claims they found proof iran had agents pull it off


www.huffingtonpost.com...

reply to post by Snsoc


I am totally with you on this, it seems unlikely that the elite would use an atomic weapon as a false flag attack. However, I must point out a couple of things in your reasoning that I dont quite subscribe to.

First off, you ask how would they get the nuke. Why would they need to get it? Seems they already have plenty, the US government that is. So it seems they would just use one of the thousands they have access to. In any case, I was watching the "Prophets of Doom" on H2 I think it was and one guy was talking about terrorists acquiring a nuke. They even showed video of Obama warning of the threat of terrorist getting nuclear weapons. The video mentioned a study that was done seeing how easy it would be to acquire a nuclear grade plutonium. They talked about how someone managed to sneak out enough for a 10 kiloton (or megaton?) bomb. The same as the one used on Hiroshima. They smuggled it out in one of those big rolling tool boxes. Luckily this was only an experiment.

They then talked about how the terrorists could build the bomb relatively easily from there, and put it in a van. They then went on to say they would drive into say, a parking garage in a populated part of New York. They said the bomb would have the potential to kill 1 million+. It is possible they where just talking bull, to boost ratings but it was interesting nonetheless.

Also, you say one major reason the elite would avoid using it is because it would contaminate an area for multiple generations. Do people not live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki today? Seems that those cities have become livable again. I am just confused about this part, I assumed that a small nuclear bomb, one about the size of the Hiroshima bomb, would not leave a couple generation long uninhabitable zone. I understand how a Chernobyl style event could, but I don't think that atomic bombs have that lasting of an effect. Like what about the Nevada desert where they tested hundreds of atomic bombs? I hear that some of those bombs where within 70 miles of Las Vegas, but then again that is probably why cancer is so prevalent these days.

Anyways, I agree for the most part. I think a nuclear attack isn't really necessary to foster any war between new enemies, seems something on the scale of 9/11, or even smaller would be enough.

reply to post by gatorboi117


The "Elite" would very much gain from an attack nuclear or other. If you want to control the people, as many as we are today, you need to kill off many quickly therefore the rest would fall right in line and imprison themselves when the "Elite" come running in with a solution. That solution would involve full control.

They could bomb or even poison a few of the major cities that would make the country grind to a halt. The ones who comes in fast and offers relief or a fix could take that country over with less of a fight. Most of our resources aren't in major cities. They are from the countryside and shipped into the cities so they wouldn't be affected.

Many civilians would throw themselves at them and submit just to get electricity, clean water, shelter, and food. The only problem the "Elite" would face is another country rushing in to do the same thing.

Why so many think the US is so impenetrable is beyond me. We are only as safe as we fool ourselves into thinking we are.

Was a time when we americans thought "they" would not crash airliners into their own people too.......Well, now, I myself would not put ANYTHING past "them."

What city will they be willing to sacrifice? What part of the country would they be willing to write off for generations?

ETA: They would not necessarily need to take out a big city. Fact is, one suitcase nuke in a small rural midwest town may be more effective for their agenda anyhow? Also, I believe a smaller suitcase type nuke would cover only about a 3-4 mile blast zone from what I remember reading.

Here is a link to check the radius of several different size nukes. Pick a city, weapon, (even asteroid impacts), and nuke it and check the radius. www.carloslabs.com...

I'm pretty sure they are going to use nuclear war to usher in the NWO full force (it goes much deeper even than the NWO). If I had the time and inclination I could post hundreds of places where they show their plans, but I'll just do a couple.

Buckingham Palace (Nuke leading to capstone of NWO, among other things...):


Paralympics fire face:



"15 Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us?
16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay"

Anyone who really knows about these "people" know how they often hide things upside down, even back to the Egyptian hieroglyphs. Here is the fire face upside down.



Olympics (soo much more about this image, but for now I'll just say it's the Phoenix (NWO) rising from the ashes:


And to the guy talking about the San Onofre power plant, they show often that that place is as good as gone. Wouldn't surprise me if that Phoenix above is rising out of the San Onofre power plant destroyed. Also there is a lot that shows the Hoover Dam could likely be one of their targets as well.

Then again there are the reports of the missing nukes........

First off, you ask how would they get the nuke. Why would they need to get it? Seems they already have plenty, the US government that is. So it seems they would just use one of the thousands they have access to.

Well, the "government" has them, but who has the access? The President and the JCOS right? Unless some spy agency passes themselves off as an airman and nicks one from a plane or something. I'm no Obama fan, but I don't think the guy is gonna nuke a city. That leaves a rogue general plotting a coup (scary thought), or CIA or Mossad, who are the only people who could pull that off. I can't imagine what sort of horrible situation might occur that would make the CIA think that nuking a city was the best way to save the country. Mossad could do it to get us to go to war with Iran, but that's too far, even for them.

Most of the previous wars where we've been "attacked" involve ships, because the evidence goes down to the bottom of the ocean. They don't need to nuke a city to get us to do something. Sinking some old war ship will do the trick.

They talked about how someone managed to sneak out enough for a 10 kiloton (or megaton?) bomb.

Huge difference there. I would be interested in learning the actual amount.

Also, you say one major reason the elite would avoid using it is because it would contaminate an area for multiple generations. Do people not live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki today?

Good point. I think the nukes we have today have a much higher yield and more radiation than the WW2 nukes. The only way to avoid making an area a dead zone is to go with a "dirty" bomb-which is psychologically terrifying and incredibly inconvienient to clean up, but could have a low death rate. The problem then being, how is it a motivating force if few people die? I'm no nuke expert, but I had read that dirty bombs actually wouldn't kill many people. It might be enough to create the casus belli they so desperately need, however.

reply to post by thesmokingman


thesmokingman, that is super-creepy and more fun than it should be. Thanks for the link.