It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Is ATS responsible for preventing many false flag attacks?

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 01:24 PM
Well I mentioned this in another thread, and a member u2u me to start a thread about it, I didnt really want to since I was sure there had to be other threads about the subject, anyway the u2u stayed as new even though i clicked on it several dozen times so i dont know i just took it as a sign.

The comment I made was from this thread ..... its was about ats being proof we need to get laid more.

My comment is as follows.

The only thing ats is preventing in my opinion is the various false flag attacks and events from transpiring, that random members claim will go down. So long as random people make hypothetical guesses as to when there will be another false flag attack, there wont be one on that day.

So with the arctic ship cargo theories and what not, I wanted to get other members thoughts on this.

With all the claims and theories about terror attacks and what not, is it possible that to prevent making it to obvious has ats been instrumental in preventing another false flag attack up till now?

Im sure many of you can recollect the various threads I am talking about.

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 02:06 PM
In the large scheme of things, ATS is a very small fish in a huge ocean, so the thought that ATS posts would prevent false flag events is really grasping if you ask me.

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 02:11 PM
Star, and Flag. I think the OP is right on the money. A small idea to a small audience travels. I do believe every time someone comes close to the truth, and "shines" it up a little, it does put wrinkles in the NWO game plan.

It's called being VIGILANT!

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 02:17 PM
reply to post by sanchoearlyjones

If the NWO actually existed, and ATS was indeed putting a wrinkle in any so called plan, you can bet your bottom dollar that ATS wouldn't exist anymore.

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 02:23 PM
reply to post by sensfan

I can see where Your coming from, but there are many People, and Sites that have put obvious wrinkles in the NWO gameplan.

You don't have to call it that. There are powerful Power Brokers who are stuck on the Power drug, and want more all the time.

You do strike on a good point, and that is why don't they ban the websites, or stop the different LOUD voices that are speaking out?

I cannot say for sure on that one; I lean toward the NWO putting a lot of disinformation out into the "kitty"; as a means to keep it in check. I also, believe to censor Speech right in the present society could create riots.

There is only a few of them, and many many of us.

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 02:29 PM
While I can see how a major leak could interrupt some secret false flag operation if it was posted on any major social networking site, it would have to be a REAL and MAJOR piece of leaked information in my opinion. You could then bet that ATS or wherever the leak was posted at might become a 'threat' to whoever. But anything else, like guesses or whatever will not stop it, I mean I could 'guess' that a nuclear false flag attack will happen tomorrow in San Fransisco at 9:00AM....Probability says it could happen, but will it more than likely? NO......But because I said it does not mean it is going to stop whomever from doing whatever. It takes more than a brief post without evidence to back up the claim to rattle any type of major entity (that would be capable of such a FF attack). Just my opinion though...

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 03:24 PM
Thanks, DC. I've been looking forward to a discussion like this.

To start with, I have to agree that ATS is a small fish. That is understood and any attempt to over-glorify our position in the world would be pretty arrogant. Having stated that, how important are two genes? How important is one quart of oil in your engine? How important is two degrees Fahrenheit when trying to boil or freeze water?

I firmly believe that ALL things become part of a collective consciousness, or a collective reality. It would be just as silly to deny OUR influences on each other and the world as it would be to assert that influence as more important than anyone else's.

We have to KNOW that we are part of webbot and other unknown and very classified systems of information gathering, classification and reporting. We are part of the 'alternate viewpoint' crowd, that as a commander, or leader, one would HAVE to be aware of. Governments, though they seem to fly in the face of it, have read history books as well. A small number of people can, when working together, have a huge impact on the operation of any system. If I were a leader of this country, or responsible for supplying intelligence to him, I can guarantee you that there would be bots scouring this site regularly as well as others to pick out things that may be of interest or concern.

Now the interesting part. The original question, as I would interpret it was whether our through DISCUSSIONS of potential false flags, or even REAL operations for that matter, they could be delayed, prevented or somehow changed merely by them being a debate in our collective.

This is as deep pychologically as any subject I have ever encountered on this site.

If a group of leaders' advisors, let's just call them a 'think tank' for now is responsible for collecting and analyzing information and then reporting to those leaders, they would certainly be remiss if they discounted ideas of patriots, scientific and philisophical giants, spiritual evolutionists, stargazers, astronomers, videographers, mathmeticians, sociologists and common citizens. There is just such a community of non-paid, but highly skilled and dedicated individuals right here on ATS.

Recap. The leaders MUST use information available. There is a wealth of expertise and understanding right here.

This is the point where it becomes more of a poker game. If I had ever been able to PLAY poker successfully, I'm sure I would understand it a little better. I think that a little bit of human nature comes in to play and you'll have to forgive me, as the only human nature I am almost intimately familiar with is my own.

If you tell me I am going to go to the store in ten minutes and buy me a Dr. Pepper, (yum) I may in fact WANT a Dr. Pepper, but what I DON'T want is YOU telling me when I am going to have one. I will either wait until ten minutes and four seconds, or I will leave now and get it before. There are few things I hate more than someone trying to tell me exactly what I'm going to do, whether they are right or not. I f you tell me there is something that you ABSOLUTELY KNOW about me, then I will try my damnedest to prove you wrong. I'm just a prick that way. In this regard, I don't know if my human nature lines up with anyone else's, but again, it's all I know.

A leader, being human, would have to, I'm sure, turn away from some of the more selfish things that dominate the human experience. Some have not, and have paid the price. He would at least need to disguise them a little better, or increase the violence with which he rules. It would be arrogant of me to assume that a leader of a great nation would have any of the limitations internally that I have nurtured for so long, that's why I'm not the president.

I am overly simplistic sometimes. To ME, if I was in charge and my think tank told me that on September 13th the CTs are claiming an impending false-flag, I would change my plans if they had been for that date. To allow it to happen would lend credence to this group of people that I have tried so hard to discredit. Their following would increase and the problems inherent in their free speech would increase. By ignoring their claims and continuing my false flag as planned, they have become prophets. There can be no prophetic leaders in my nation unless they are working for me.

By moving the date a week or so, or a month, or scrapping those plans altogether and adopting another, there is no risk that the legitimacy of my false flag will have been compromised. For all of our complexities, I think that in times of dispute, or difficulty, or thinking becomes more simplistic. As we gain more time to make a decision, or options are explored further.

As an example: (This is hypothetical, bots, so bite me.) I'm the leader of a great nation. I am planning a false flag to rally my people, even though I am corrupt. My approval ratings have slipped, my people are angry at the increased spending and lack of attention to their voices. My intention is to destroy a large ship on August 26th and leave evidence and make statements to pin the blame on a country whose religious and social ideologies are far from those shared by my people, thus making a convincing enemy. It's a week ahead of time and my think tank reports that someone has predicted just such an attack and has even got the date right. To preserve my leadership, I add about 26 days to the target and change the large ship to a building. Problem solved. I remain in control and the insightful CT is discredited and his following neutralized before they have become a problem. Since I am the leader of a nation, with trillions of my citizens' taxes to spend, I can change my plans on a whim. It's only YOUR money after all.
To make it easier for me, when I plan my false flags now, I have twelve scenarios and choose the one least discussed. This seems like a lot of trouble, but again, it's only YOUR money and I can't have anyone interfering with my plans.
Do I think it's possible that our discussions could prevent false flags? Yeah, I do, to a certain extent. But the solution becomes obvious when it's looked at from that angle.
We just have to spend a lot of time coming up with and discussing every false flag we could conceive of and that would limit the governments' ability to perpetrate one.
Easy enough right? Ok, Well, I guess when you put it that way, it might sound a little silly.

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 03:28 PM
It would nice to have a pinned post that has collected all of the CORRECTLY proven conspiracies that were first posted or discussed on ATS.

After reading over a bunch the past week, I doubt there would be any to put in the post, but a whole bunch to put in the nonsense department.

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 03:49 PM
In my opinion the constant coincidence that we discuss false flags and the fact that they don't happen points to the fact that the false flag claims are pretty much fake and constant.

I really doubt this site, as much as I love it, has had anything to do with it because I don't think they were real in the first place. Self-fulfilling perhaps...


top topics


log in