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.
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 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. Further details can be found at the end of this article.
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 to which 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 effect there needs to be real deaths. The attackers need to be convincing in their role as soldiers of Country B, so clothes, uniform, weapons need to match appropriately. The likelihood 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, therefore, 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 its 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 population’s 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%.
Göring: Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.
Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
From an interview between Gustave Gilbert, an American psychologist, and Hermann Göring during the Nuremberg Trials. Found in the book; Nuremberg Diary
Reality-based Community… “The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, “Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush,” quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove):
“The aide said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” … “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
On December 1st 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 ’30s. 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.
- 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, though 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.
As with proven false-flags, failed attempts are just as valuable in establishing the reality of these staged events. The Reagan assassination attempt and Ukraine coup are both excellent examples. The Ukraine attempt was a failure as the primary objective was Eastern Ukraine (valuable farmland), including Crimea (where Russia’s largest Naval base is located at Sevastopol). The shoe bomber, and the underwear bomber (in which we have an expert witness, attorney Kurt Haskell, who exposed this fraud) are two other recent examples. This is an area that needs some deeper research. Failed attempts will be more easily forgotten, under reported, or unreported.
Real Terrorism / Real Death
Some terrorism is organic, meaning not state sponsored or created and controlled by the globalists. 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 baseline to compare known verifiable events against suspected staged events. An excellent example is the Beslan School Massacre from 2004 in which Chechnya terrorists took a 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. The short video below is ample evidence of what REAL violence, heroism, blood, anguish, and death look like.
Anatomy of the False-Flag
By breaking down the false-flag into into various components, not only can we better understand how they work but why they are used. Also, by doing so it will be proven that the fingerprint(s) of false-flags clearly demonstrate a larger plan. The false-flag uses a standard plan of action, similar to a business plan or battle plan. The purpose is to fully flesh out in writing all elements of the event. The following is a list of the different elements that make up the plan which will then be followed by a breakdown for each section.
The Event Plan by sections:
- Event Type
- Main Event
- Event Execution
- Back-up plans
- Official Narrative
The false-flag begins with an objective, a purpose, a reason for being. Sometimes the purpose is singular, but many times there are multiple purposes (which is a tell-tale sign of advanced planning, and hence further proof that a particular event is a false-flag). The primary objective: eliminate an opponent, further a specific agenda (gun control), or justify war. The more sophisticated events seem to always have multiple objectives, or secondary objectives. The secondary objectives tend to be more psychological, more soft, subtle. These could include creating specific emotional responses, such as fear, anger, apathy. More specifically a public killing might be chosen in order to send a message, a warning. Which was the case in the ’60s with JFK, MLK, and RFK. Another objective of these three ’60s assassinations was the Vietnam war, which is one strong thread that links the three murders together, and the perpetrators. Another sub-objective might be to create an anger response, coupled with some patriotism to manipulate the people into accepting war. The very recent Paris Friday 13th event seems to have at least 5 objectives: justify French participating in the proxy war in Syria, strip privacy/freedom rights of the French people, eventual shut-down of all European borders, prevent any potential protests at the Climate Summit in Paris at the end of the month, create anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant sentiment. Long Term Planing. Many of the recent mass shooting events in the USA have at least 2 objectives: further the gun control agenda, and stir up discord among people of different races, and/or religions.
The focus of an event is that which the designers want the audiences attention focused on. This is not necessarily the event itself. It can be the victim, the perpetrator, or other elements.
On 9/11 the focus of the event was terrorism, hence ‘Osama bin Laden’. He was the villain. He was the reason ‘you’re either with us, or for the terrorists.’ He was the bogeyman that had to be found and killed. He is what justified invading Afghanistan, and getting those poppy fields producing again. Which then led to the next bogeyman, Saddam Hussein. And the invasion of Iraq. In recent shootings in America it has become painfully obvious that the focus of the events is pushing the gun control agenda.
Another part of the focus is who is the primary or intended audience? In the JFK assassination the primary audience was not the American people per se, it was the politicians and those directly involved in governance. Both at the national and international level. This was a message for the insiders… ‘This is what we’ll do to those who oppose us’. On 9/11 the target audience was the American people.
The importance of the Event Type cannot be understated. At the simplest level the Event Type determines how the objective is achieved. If it is a killing, then will it be an ‘accident’, suicide(ed), assassination, etc. Another important decision is will the operation piggyback onto a scheduled real event, or will the operation be created from scratch? Another critical decision is determining the ‘level of involvement’ for the Main Event. The level of involvement defines who are the actors and if there will be unknowing participants; victims, persons thrust into the story due to the created circumstances, and bystanders. The level of involvement can be a simple as the perpetrator and the victim, or one actor with the rest unknowing participants, or the entire event being faked. So the level of involvement is on a continuum from minimum (one actor) to maximum (all actors). From having the villain participate (Hinkley, Sirhan Sirhan), to present (Oswald, James Holmes, Tsarnaev’s brothers), to non-existent (Adam Lanza). From the victims being real (actual deaths), to fake deaths (actors), to all fabricated. It is important to avoid the stereotyping that a false-flag only follows a specific format.
A good analogy would be types of movies, which are themselves real illusions. Old-school action moviedd where all stunts are done with real people, in a real environment, with real props. Then we have the now common scenario where it is a mix of real/live action and CG. Then the movie where all special effects and stunts are CG. And, finally, the fully CG or animation movie. All of these movie types are real. Each of them required real people to work on them, create them, produce them. And all of these movies are illusions. They are works of fiction. They are deliberate creations; produced, planned, directed, and acted to be recorded (filmed) and distributed to be viewed. To entertain and en-train (for movies are powerful tools for social control), and of course to make money. I can’t help but think of the movie Wag the Dog.
False-flags are fundamentally the same. Whether there is one actor or many. Whether there are real deaths or fake. Or whether the entire false-flag is but the news report itself (the official narrative). Each type of created illusion is real. They also are absolutely used for social control; in fact, this really is their primary purpose. Problem-Reaction-Solution. With the goal being of manipulating the solution upon the greater population, thus controlling the population. Like a movie, the false-flag is a deliberately planned and executed production. It is a real illusion. A better comparison might be the stage play, since the ‘performance’ is done live, on location, with a real audience.
Eventually we come around to the question of “What is ‘real’?” It can be simply a matter of perspective. Look at it from an accident standpoint. The accident can be a mistake or it can ‘deliberate’. A classic, and shall we say harmless, example is from the iconic Christmas Story movie. Where the wife ‘accidentally’ knocks over and breaks the sexy leg lamp. Of course the father suspects it was not an accident. But she feigns innocence. You could witness a deliberate accident, and depending on the circumstances and the skill of the perpetrator would swear it was a mistake. Again, the event really occurred, you were an eyewitness. So it was ‘real’, but it was not a mistake, it was a deliberate illusion. And in fact you might have been selected specifically to witness the event as proof that is was a mistake since most people trust your judgment and opinion.
Which leads us the deeper issue of this project. That many of the false-flags are connected. That there is a very deep game of deception that we live within. Perpetrated in large part by the myriad of secret societies vying for power and control in the world. It is this deep game of deception that makes it difficult to analyze false-flags. Confusion, misdirection, misinformation all used to obfuscate what really happened.
The focus of this article is on the overall plan of a false-flag event. From objective, to initial planning, on through to the cover-up. But normally when someone refers to a False-Flag they are referring to the Main Event; the hero shot, Act three… the climax. The crux of the planning will be focused on the Main Event. Regardless of what theory you accept as to how 9/11 was carried out, there is one absolute fact. A tremendous amount of planning was required in order to pull it off, years in advance.
It’s at this level that ‘The Plan’ coalesces into what exactly the performance will be. This is where the actual ‘script’ is created. The specific location is selected, the actors chosen, the spoken lines created, and the props needed. Time and date are decided. As well as how much financing will be required for a successful performance.
On 9/11 the Main Event was the falling of the Twin Towers. This was the climax. This was the psychological ‘shock and awe’ on the American people, which preceded the physical shock and awe that fell upon the Afghani and Iraqi peoples. It is the image of the falling tower(s) that is still used today to reinforce that fear and anger. JFK, RFK, MLK the Main Event was the shooting, but the murder was but one objective.
The date and time are both crucial decisions. We know for followers of the occult that dates are VERY important. See Christine Lagarde’s, IMF’s Managing Director, Magic of Number 7 speech for proof of the importance of numerology.
Jump to the :50 mark to hear her talk about numerology.
The esoteric and exoteric significance of a date should be closely examined. Another important factor of date and time is how they coincide with the news cycle. Date can also be critical depending on how soon the Main Event is needed or required to take place. The date can be a deciding factor, especially if time is short, on how/where the Main Event is completed. For the September 11th, 2001 attack, the date is normally shortened to 9/11 and in the USA emergency services number is 9-1-1. Therefore, everytime 9-1-1 or 911 is mentioned or seen it recalls 9/11, and the associated trauma. The recent Paris attacks happening on 11/13/15, which just happens to be Friday the 13th. But it appears this was predicted from the January 2015 Economist magazine (Rothschild co-owner) with two arrows with the numbers 11.5 and 11.3, the same exact 6 numbers as the date. These arrows are in front of the picture ‘La belle ferronnière’ by Leonardo da Vinci, which is found at the Louvre Museum in Paris.
Like date/time the location often is a critical part of the event. Signaling on both the esoteric and exoteric levels. The name of the location and/or city as well can also be of significant importance. Locating a shooting in a Gun Free zone, and at schools to maximize the emotional impact. The geographic location in relation to the event to send a signal. Like the Oklahoma City bombing, the center or heart of the nation, signaling the ‘heartland’ is not safe from terror. Other important factors in location is how much control can be exerted at the place, in particular control of movement of non-participants, and ingress/egress to location. It goes without saying that in 9/11 you could consider the location as the event, it certainly was the ‘star’ of the event. Both the Twin Towers and NYC.
Participants can be classified into 4 groups: Knowing-Willing, Knowing-Unwilling, Unknowing-Willing, Unknowing-Unwilling. The knowing-willing are the actors, the knowing participants. The knowing-unwilling are persons who are aware of the event before it takes place and are participating against their will. So they’ve either been tricked, blackmailed, or coerced into it. The unknowing-willing are participants thrust into the main event at the time of its execution and decide to fully participate, most likely unaware they are in the midst of a false-flag event. The unknowing-unwilling are participants thrust into the Main Event who have no idea it is staged and do not want to participate. They may simply be bystanders, they may be victims, or they may actually participate against their will. I think an interesting study of this is Wayne Carver of Sandy Hook fame. My intuition is that he was a knowing-willing participant of what he was told was a crisis training drill. At some point the drill/event went ‘live’ and he was thrust into the middle of it. At that point you could classify him as a unknowing-unwilling participant who then gives his infamous press conference and says the following;
I hope, uhh, I hope they (referencing his medical team) and I hope uhh the people of Newtown, uhh don’t have it crash on their head later but…
Jump to the 4:40 mark to hear the above sentence.
I suspect there are much more unknowing-unwilling participants who are ‘forced’ into the drama than one would first think. Afraid to speak out, play along to get along, don’t rock the boat all factors in their complicity of silence… but Fear being the strongest motivator.
First is the perpetrator(s) to be known or unknown? If the perpetrator is to be known then he/she becomes the villain of the narrative. The lone crazy gunman or Terrorist! Focus the attention on the targeted patsy. Is the perpetrator to be feared, loathed, or possibly sympathetic? All these are taken into account based on the objective of the operation. If the perpetrator is to be unknown then do they simply not exist (as in the case of suicide by murder), or is the case that it is known there is a perpetrator but the identity is to remain secret? In some cases the psychological affect of the unknown/at large perpetrator is greater than the event(s) themselves. Such as the case with serial killers. As previously mentioned another very important aspect of the overall plan is determining what role the perpetrator (patsy) is to play in the actual main event. Is the perpetrator to play a critical role in the event execution, as in the case of Sirhan Sirhan in RFK’s assassination? Or is the patsy planted there under false pretenses; such as playing a part in a drill, or surveillance work?
Oswald knew he was set up, and it is an established fact that he was involved with intelligence services. What if the planners were hoping he would keep mum? He could claim innocence and not implicate others. But he had multiple undocumented conversations with Dallas Police Cpt Will Fritz, and two FBI agents. (Note: original notes were either destroyed or created after the interviews) So then the perpetrators knew he was going to ‘sing’, hence the need for Ruby. I’m unconvinced that Oswald played no role. Oswald fled the scene, so he knew immediately he was in possible trouble. But if his hands were clean, why flee the scene? Was he a bag man? The person who delivered the weapon to the site? Or maybe he thought there was only one shooter, and deliberately sabotaged the event to prevent its success? In which case he would be very surprised that Kennedy was shot. Or possibly he was instructed to leave? Whatever his role, leaving the scene was his death knell.
Depending on the objective the victim might be the sole purpose or target of the event, or the victim(s) might just play a minor part. How the victims are treated can be critical to ascertaining if an event is a false-flag. The type of victim (age, race, sex, socio-economic level) are all important factors to consider, and to a large degree determined by the objective, as well as the number of victims. Will the victims be real? Or will the victims be actors? Knowing-willing fake deaths, or unknowing-unwilling real deaths? Why choose one over the other? Real deaths because of the requisite shock upon the population as a whole, and in particular as a message (warning) to opponents ‘in-the-know’. Why fake deaths? Because the fake dead don’t have any real family demanding answers! The reason the 9/11 Commission Report was created was because of persistent family members demanding an investigation, in particular the four ‘Jersey Girls’. If real children had died at Sandy Hook you would have seen numerous hysterical parents, instead we get Robbie Parker’s infamous performance. If you have never watched the below video you need only watch the first 40 seconds, pay close attention to his behavior.
We get a Robbie Parker instead of angry, incensed, emotional parents who, as 9/11 proved, can be quite a problem. The worse the real perpetrators have to deal with is persistent investigators on which they can hang the label ‘conspiracy theorist,’ and thus the public has been conditioned to ignore, discount, or ridicule. Therefore, much easier to handle the cover-up with fake deaths.
The date/time, participants, and location have been set. Now it’s time to prepare the participants and the location for the Main Event. Is the villain a MKUltra mind-controlled individual? Then it needs to be determined that the appropriate level of control can be achieved and on a consistent basis. If it is to be a well-scripted/acted event then the participants must practice their roles in as much of a realistic setting as possible. As for the location itself, how much preparation is needed? In the case of 9/11 a tremendous amount of preparation was required, in fact an unprecedented level of preparation. If the location needs preparation, how much can be done before the event? In particular how much can/needs to be done days/weeks/months before, and how much just prior minutes/hours. Just like a professional sporting event, or a concert, or play. The better the preparation the better the chance of success during the actual ‘performance’.
Putting the plan into action. Or more precisely… Showtime! This is it, all the planning and preparation comes to a head as the Main Event is performed. Everything is in place and simply awaits the go/no-go sign. In fact, this is the most critical decision at this moment. There are multiple reasons to give the no-go signal. Non-actors in the wrong position, weather (it was raining the morning of Nov 22, 1963 in Dallas, TX. Hence the occasional umbrellas and why Jean Hill was wearing her red raincoat. If the rain had persisted a little longer, the top would have stayed on the car), equipment failure, target unavailable. It makes one wonder how many planned false-flags were given the no-go signal? A common trait of more recent events is some kind of ‘drill(s)’ occurring at the exact same time and place as the false-flag. The drill provides excellent cover to stage the event without raising suspicion. And if they don’t ‘go-live’, so a no-go, then it’s simply another preparation drill. And for those unknowing participants none the wiser as to how close they came to being thrust into a false-flag performance.
No battle plan survives contact with the enemy. – German military strategist Helmuth von Moltke
And thus is the case with any plan, especially the more complex. And thus all good planners, therefore, have back-up or contingency plans. Plan B, or C. It seems logical to assume that the more control over the participants, the less likely to have the event not go according to plan. Which is a strong argument for having the 100% staged event. The classic example of the use of back-up is the JFK assassination. The plan was a single head shot from the rear, the frontal kill shot was the ‘if all else fails’ option.
As much planning will go into the creation of the narrative, the ‘official story’, as the rest of the plan combined. Not only into the narrative itself but the control of the dissemination of the narrative. The narrative can include; news stories, eyewitness accounts, expert witnesses, talk show host talking points, politicians’ opinions, and others. The narrative is as important as the Main Event itself. And in some cases more important. In particular if the event is rushed then the narrative may have to carry the operation. The narrative is what sets the tone, identifies the villain, the victim(s), creates the mood, and pushes the propaganda message for the event. The Official Narrative IS the event for most people, but especially consumers of the news. So it is well planned and crafted. The narrative can also be a tell-tale sign of a false-flag event.
The official narrative is much easier to push and control when the media is controlled, such as 90% of media in the US is controlled by 6 companies. And when there is no legitimate investigative journalism happening from news sources, like what is happening now in the USA.
A successful event does not guarantee overall success. Loose ends must be taken care of. Evidence destroyed, which many times is very important. Witnesses silenced (mysterious/untimely deaths). Investigators discouraged. Keeping the official narrative secure and defended can be as much work and take much more time then the entire operation up to that point. JFK and 9/11 are both excellent examples of Cover-up in action. The commitment, number of persons involved, time, media used. In JFK’s event the kill shot was suppose to be from the rear. The frontal shot created the need to suppress/cover multiple items; people hearing gun shots from the grassy knoll, the total number of shots, suppression and manipulation of the Zapruder film, use of Officer Tippit as a body double (he looked so much like JFK he was regularly teased about it). Personally I’m still amazed at the level of commitment for the JFK narrative… 50+ years later. Which also proves that there are long-term plans involved and groups whose participatory members have long since died since the event(s). It is my opinion that numerous mysterious deaths post Main Event are those of unknowing-unwilling participants, who figured out enough to know that the official narrative was impossible and whose opinion or testimony would be dangerous.
Some mistakes can be covered with back-up plans, others cannot. Mistakes can blow the entire event. It is probably safe to assume that due to mistakes or poor execution of the plan, some events are NOT taken live. That they stay just a drill event at the local level, with disappointed knowing-willing participants, and unknowing participants none the wiser as they are told it was just a practice drill. Let’s consider Flight 93 of 9/11 fame. I first considered this a back-up plane, that if one of the other three failed it would fill in the gap. But its long and erratic flight path from NYC to the field in Pennsylvania, and the ridiculously small hole they claimed it crashed into indicate to me that something went wrong with this plane. It was to have taken off at 8:01 from Newark, but was delayed 41 minutes. Many have speculated this plane was meant to hit Building 7. Whether you believe that the 4 commercial jets were real or did not exist, or whether you believe specially prepared planes were used, regardless something went wrong with Flight 93. Another mistake was the Oklahoma City bombing, not all of the charges were detonated and explosives were found mounted on columns in the building, thus debunking the truck bomb myth. Which of course had to be buried and concealed. Watch A Noble Lie documentary about the OKC bombing for much more.
Post-event reactions. One sure way to identify a false-flag but also its objectives is to wait and observe the ‘Solutions’ or responses to the event… the ‘effects’. Again, Cui Bono? Who benefits? Taking the Paris Friday 13th event. Does ISIS, ISIL, IS, Daesh (the use of multiple names is done to deliberately confuse) benefit from this supposed attack? The prior 6 weeks Russia had been bombing the shit out of ISIS, and their response is we can’t get enough of our brothers’ deaths, so let’s piss off another military power who can increase the number of bombs being rained upon our heads?? Maybe they confused Paris with Moscow?…
By identifying and listing the Commonalities among false-flag events we will be able to link together the events, and show too many ‘coincidences’ to be mathematically possible; therefore, this indicates planning by same/similar groups. Commonalities include: lone gunman, mental instability, SSRIs, multiple shooters reported become one, lack of evidence (no proof of victims), destruction of evidence, crisis actors, training drills at the same time/location of the event, victim memorial foundations created immediately after event… or before.
Certainly an excellent example of Commonalities is ‘training drills’, happening weeks, days, the morning of or during the event itself, and either at the exact location or close by. A partial list of events in which drills were taking place before or during the event; 9/11, Boston bombing, Charleston shooting, 7/7 bombings, Sandy Hook, Aurora, CO (Batman), Paris Friday 13th,, Oslo, Norway shooting, Madrid bombings, Umpqua Community College, Oregon.
In Connections we take the evidence and known participants of the various false-flags and link them together. To demonstrated not only that these are events carried out by the same individuals and groups, but to prove how they are connected. What organizations, what specific peoples. To prove that there are larger agendas at play of which each false-flag plays a part. Also proving that long-term planning is required. In Connections what will be created is a series of threads that connect individual events together and then connect the treads themselves together to show the tapestry of false-flag events.
As a little more obscure example of a thread running through multiple events we have Defense Attorney Judy Clark who represented; Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (Boston Bombing), Zacarias Moussaoui (9/11), Ted Kaczynski (Unabomber), Jared Loughner (2011 Tucson Shooting).
The Tucson shooting, reported 6 killed and 12 injured, which has gotten lost somewhat in the cavalcade of deliberate events, is interesting for several reasons but in particular for the victims. Victim Judge John Roll, a US Federal Judge, who stated that the Brady Bill was unconstitutional, treading on the 5th and violating the 10th Amendment. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act mandated federal background checks for gun purchases. The Act was named after James Brady, who was shot by John Hinckley, Jr. during an attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981. U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who did survive a serious head wound, has gone one to create her own gun control initiative. Her husband is Mark Kelley, an astronaut. Finally victim Christina Taylor Green, the 9 year old whose birthday was… wait for it… September 11, 2001. President Obama brought the 9/11 ‘Remembrance Flag’ to Tuscon to spread out over the memorial sight. Many commonalities and connections here. 9/11, terrorism, lone gunmen, mental health, gun control, Reagan assassination, ‘conspiracy theorist’ (Loughner was identified as such).
In this section we will be identifying specific groups. CIA, FBI, Zionist(Talmudic Jews), Freemasons, CFR, etc. I believe it is important to delineate that this does not mean that every member of said organization is in on the take. The reason for this is some people when they hear the CIA was involved in…, maybe it would be easier to list what they weren’t involved in??… I digress. When some hear the CIA was involved in the assassination of JFK they immediately discount it because they can’t believe the ‘entire’ CIA organization was in on the plot. This is valid reasoning. Thus the need to explain that no the entire XYZ organization was not involved. Really in any event, only a handful from any one organization would be the norm. Classic compartmentalization. Key individuals. Also these organizations will deliberately have personnel who are the ‘good’ guys, thus are not ‘in-the-know’. Like Freemasonry, the average low-level Freemason has no idea what is happening at the higher levels. It’s just a fraternal lodge, provides some charity for the community, good for camaraderie and business connections… maybe influence a local election… for a fellow mason.
Untimely/Convenient/Suspicious (Suicided) Deaths
Outside of the Cover-up deaths. Though not necessarily false-flag per se, the untimely or suicided deaths show the same pattern and many times are linked to false-flag events and/or groups involved in creating false-flags. Suspicious or convenient deaths of which these are but a few of many; Danny Casalaro; investigative journalist working on a book involving the CIA, PROMIS software, drug running, BCCI… called ‘The Octopus’. Gary Webb; Dark Alliance newspaper series exposing the CIA’s drug running involving LA gangs (Bloods, Crips), and Honduras Contras. Michael Hastings; investigating the CIA’s Director John Brennan’s witchhunt of investigative journalist. See the CIA trend there? These just happen to be the first three that popped in my mind. And coming back around to false-flag objectives. Certainly one objective of Hastings death was sending a very clear ‘warning’ to other investigative journalists.
False-flags are normally the operations of secret societies, whether they be private (Freemasons, Milner Round Table (CFR, RIIA, Trilateral), religious based (Rosicrucian, Society of Jesus(Jesuits), Zionist), or state sponsored (CIA, MI6, Mossad). And hence by their very nature deeply involved in the occult. For many serious practitioners of the occult a ‘sacrifice’ is necessary in order to ensure the success of a plan… or event. We know that in some events the ‘sacrifice’ itself is the event. Such as JFK or 9/11. It is my contention therefor that at least one living human must pay with their life in order to ensure success. As an example in Sandy Hook, it’s my theory that Nancy Lanza was the sacrificial killing. For historical context. In Homer’s Iliad, Agamemnon the Greek King sacrificed his daughter Iphigenia in order to ensure success in his war against Troy to recapture Helen, the wife of his brother the King of Sparta, from Paris, the son of the King and Queen of Troy. Not sure if that’s a good example as it reads like a bloody soap opera. Regardless history, especially ancient and more primitive, is replete with human sacrifice being used in order to appease the God(s)… Lucifer?
I recently heard of several books that focus on a specific false-flag event but get into the bigger issue of false-flags being used to shape public opinion, and act as catalysts for change. Because of the sheer number of false-flag events that are occurring today and the amount of good research and books done by numerous persons it seems that what needs to be done is a presentation or book whose focus is on the broader issue of false-flags themselves.
While working on a basic outline, which really is what this article is, I was struck where the real meat of this project would be. The piecing together of these various false-flags to show how numerous false-flags are related. By doing so, it is my opinion, that the community at large can prove that the events are not ‘isolated’ incidents. But are part of a much larger plan. That the commonalities of many false-flags are too numerous to ignore or dismiss as mere ‘coincidences’, and that there are numerous direct connections of specific individuals, corporations, and organizations among false-flag events. By creating such a project we can awaken more that there is a larger agenda afoot. That is being carried out over decades and even centuries. That this can only be done at the very highest levels of government and business. And that because if these plans were publicly known the populace would resist and/or revolt, therefor they must be kept secret and hence the need for secret societies to carry out these plans over long periods of time.
So I am putting this Anatomy of False-Flags outline out into the Internet ether, hoping that it will cross the conscious and subconscious void and inspire someone(s) to create such a report, presentation, book. If I were to do it I would make a point to contact the leading researchers on specific false-flag events to get their insight and input on what commonalities and connections they found. So I see it as very much a collaborative project. By being able to source info from specific events from others should then allow the researcher to focus on the bigger picture and identify the commonalities and make the connections across time, places, and people. For the real meat and power of this project is the Commonalities and Connections information.
Some ideas I had while working the outline: it would probably be helpful to create a simple database to track the data and form it into useful information. For instance linking single individuals to multiple events. In the Commonalities section a table listing false-flags on one axis and Commonalities on the other with each intersection checked if a commonality exist would be a powerful visual. Each Chapter could highlight a particular false-flag to illustrate the focus of the chapter. This does not mean that other events cannot be mentioned, but that one event in particular is used to support the focus of the chapter. Another idea after each section of the ‘Event Plan’ has been covered take a single event and break it down using ‘The Plan’. Explaining the event section by section, Objective through Cover-up. From a book standpoint each of the bolded titles and accompanying text would correspond to a book chapter.
Why am I not doing this project? Good and fair question. I’ve been wrestling for awhile with exactly where my focus should fall. And have concluded that false-flags is not where my focus is to be. My focus has fallen on that of Social Control, or the manipulation of populations attitudes, beliefs, opinions, and ultimately their actions. Also called social engineering, opinion formation, engineering consent, or more bluntly but quite accurately mind control. Of which the false-flag is but one tool of the social engineers.
You can read more from Kevin Scott King at his site Truthshock.wordpress.com
Murray N. Rothbard was the father of what some call Radical Libertarianism or Anarcho-Capitalism which Hans-Hermann Hoppe described as “Rothbard’s unique contribution to the rediscovery of property and property rights as the common foundation of both economics and political philosophy, and the systematic reconstruction and conceptual integration of modern, marginalist economics and natural-law political philosophy into a unified moral science: libertarianism.”
This book applies the principles of this “unified moral science” to environmental and natural resource management issues.
The book started out life as an assigned reading list for a university level course entitled Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View.
As I began to prepare to teach the course, I quickly saw that there was a plethora of textbooks suitable for universal level courses dealing with environmental and natural resource economics. The only problem was that they were all based in mainstream neo-classical (or Keynesian) theory. I could find no single collection of material comprising a comprehensive treatment of environmental and natural resource economics based on Austrian Economic Theory.
However, I was able to find a large number of essays, monographs, papers delivered at professional meetings and published from a multitude of sources. This book is the result. It is composed of a collection of research reports and essays by reputable scientists, economists, and legal experts as well as private property and free market activists.
The book is organized into seven parts: I. Environmentalism: The New State Religion; II. The New State Religion Debunked; III. Introduction to Environmental and Natural Resource Economics; IV. Interventionism: Law and Regulation; V. Pollution and Recycling; VI. Property Rights: Planning, Zoning and Eminent Domain; and VII. Free Market Conservation. It also includes an elaborate Bibliography, References and Recommended Reading section including an extensive Annotated Bibliography of related and works on the subject.
The intellectual level of the individual works ranges from quite scholarly to informed editorial opinion.