Future False Flag / "Terror" Attacks?

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.

Future False Flag / "Terror" Attacks?

Postby Dcopymope on May 4th, 2010, 1:29 am

There is a lot of hype going around about the possibility of a nuclear false flag attack in the works. Is it possible that they could fake a nuclear attack? I personally don’t see how they could possibly fake one.
Dcopymope
Member
 
Posts: 670
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:59 am

Postby fbenario on May 4th, 2010, 2:09 am

Dcopymope 4 May 3 2010, 08:29 PM wrote:There is a lot of hype going around about the possibility of a nuclear false flag attack in the works. Is it possible that they could fake a nuclear attack? I personally don’t see how they could possibly fake one.


If every "nuclear explosion" so far has been faked, why would it be hard to contemplate a fake nuclear explosion in a city? Who would stick around to test whether or not there actually is any radiation in the air?
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2195
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Dcopymope on May 4th, 2010, 2:20 am

fbenario @ May 4 2010, 02:09 AM wrote:
Dcopymope 4 May 3 2010, 08:29 PM wrote:There is a lot of hype going around about the possibility of a nuclear false flag attack in the works. Is it possible that they could fake a nuclear attack? I personally don’t see how they could possibly fake one.


If every "nuclear explosion" so far has been faked, why would it be hard to contemplate a fake nuclear explosion in a city? Who would stick around to test whether or not there actually is any radiation in the air?




What exactly do you mean? The only nuclear explosions in recorded history were the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Do you have concrete proof that those were faked?
Dcopymope
Member
 
Posts: 670
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:59 am

Postby fbenario on May 5th, 2010, 1:32 am

Goodness, haven't you looked at the Nuke Hoax thread on this website?

And what do you mean by saying the only explosions in recorded history were Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Are you purposely ignoring all the faked 'nuclear testing' that's been done over the last 60 years?
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2195
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Dcopymope on May 5th, 2010, 7:34 am

fbenario 4 May 5 2010, 01:32 AM wrote: Goodness, haven't you looked at the Nuke Hoax thread on this website?

And what do you mean by saying the only explosions in recorded history were Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Are you purposely ignoring all the faked 'nuclear testing' that's been done over the last 60 years?



Well, maybe I worded my post wrong. I wasn’t trying to say Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the only recorded explosions in history, but they are the only ones that were done on a given population. So if they were to detonate a 10 kiloton nuke in a city center, could they fake it the same way they faked the 9/11 attacks?
Dcopymope
Member
 
Posts: 670
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:59 am

Postby MartinL on May 5th, 2010, 10:48 am

"provide value and opportunities"

http://www.uaff.info/femaoverview.pdf

NLE 2010 stopped?

http://armchairgeneralist.typepad.com/m ... elled.html

"may be scaled back"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03746.html

9/11 perp connected to exercise:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-3_Communications

"FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, removed its NLE 2010 draft from their website and requested that all media circuits refrain from reporting on the document."

http://drdapo.com/politics/fema-nle-2010/
MartinL
Member
 
Posts: 319
Joined: October 19th, 2009, 11:08 am

Postby fbenario on May 6th, 2010, 2:14 am

Dcopymope 4 May 5 2010, 02:34 AM wrote:So if they were to detonate a 10 kiloton nuke in a city center, could they fake it the same way they faked the 9/11 attacks?


First of all, many of us here aren't convinced nuclear bombs exist, and we certainly aren't sure any were exploded over Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

Leaving that aside, and assuming for the moment that nuclear bombs actually exist, why do you believe they would need to actually explode a real bomb to accomplish their goals? All they have to do is tell the world a nuclear bomb exploded in Las Vegas, and the world goes into immediate panic mode.

Remember, on 9/11 they accomplished all of their goals - wars overseas, police state at home, hatred of Muslims by the people - without either flying planes into buildings, or actually killing anyone at all. All they had to do was spoon-feed that ridiculous story to everyone, and people lapped it up, because they are more comfortable believing what they are told, and hating Muslims, than they are thinking for themselves.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2195
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Dcopymope on May 6th, 2010, 3:07 am

fbenario 4 May 6 2010, 02:14 AM wrote:
Dcopymope 4 May 5 2010, 02:34 AM wrote:So if they were to detonate a 10 kiloton nuke in a city center, could they fake it the same way they faked the 9/11 attacks?


First of all, many of us here aren't convinced nuclear bombs exist, and we certainly aren't sure any were exploded over Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

Leaving that aside, and assuming for the moment that nuclear bombs actually exist, why do you believe they would need to actually explode a real bomb to accomplish their goals? All they have to do is tell the world a nuclear bomb exploded in Las Vegas, and the world goes into immediate panic mode.

Remember, on 9/11 they accomplished all of their goals - wars overseas, police state at home, hatred of Muslims by the people - without either flying planes into buildings, or actually killing anyone at all. All they had to do was spoon-feed that ridiculous story to everyone, and people lapped it up, because they are more comfortable believing what they are told, and hating Muslims, than they are thinking for themselves.


I believe they would actually have to detonate a real bomb the same way they actually had to blow up towers 1, 2 & 7 on 911, as well as put a hole in the pentagon. Even though the footage they showed us of the 911 attacks was forgeries, it doesn’t exclude the fact that the buildings were actually blown up. Just reporting in the news that a bomb went off in a heavily crowded area will not be enough, a bomb actually has to go off for the operation to succeed, casualties or not. If the news reported that the WTC towers were pulverized into dust and I were to drive down to the scene myself only to find the buildings still standing in pristine condition, the whole operation would have failed miserably.
Dcopymope
Member
 
Posts: 670
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:59 am

Postby Jazza on May 6th, 2010, 4:34 am

Until a lot more people wake up, I don't think there will be a need for another false attack.

Since 2001, every other terrorist attack in the USA has been stopped, and therefor 'preventing the next 911'. This does two things,

1) Keeps the memory of 911 alive and the fear high.
2) Shows that all those new government powers after 911 to protect the country are indeed working.

At the moment, a false flag simply isn't needed IMO. They have the people right where they want them, and justification for their freedom controlling rules.

The only people who keep up with this next false flag talk are the controlled alternative media. Which also helps to distract and undermine the real 911 research.
Jazza
Member
 
Posts: 25
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 1:59 pm

Postby D.Duck on May 6th, 2010, 5:44 am

Yes Jazza,

One of the reasons 9/11 was done is that you can have a war that can go on forever and can never be won cos you cant defined the enemy because the enemy is a terrorist and they are out there somewhere all the time.

Now, a terrorist can be anyone and terrorists can change clothes and color.

One day it could Muslims the next day it can be Pakistanis with American passport the next day it can be Americans with Japanese Parents (remember 1942), the list can be very long.

One thing will be sure, all defense spending will pass in congress and senate and the Military Complex will get their money.

Who will pay for this BS, well, you and I will if we don't stop it.


D.Duck
D.Duck
Member
 
Posts: 295
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:08 pm

Postby Dcopymope on May 6th, 2010, 7:35 am

Jazza 4 May 6 2010, 04:34 AM wrote: Until a lot more people wake up, I don't think there will be a need for another false attack.

Since 2001, every other terrorist attack in the USA has been stopped, and therefor 'preventing the next 911'. This does two things,

1) Keeps the memory of 911 alive and the fear high.
2) Shows that all those new government powers after 911 to protect the country are indeed working.

At the moment, a false flag simply isn't needed IMO. They have the people right where they want them, and justification for their freedom controlling rules.

The only people who keep up with this next false flag talk are the controlled alternative media. Which also helps to distract and undermine the real 911 research.


So I guess I'm controlled opposition than, is that correct? I'm looking at this whole situation from the perspective of motive. I didn’t make the thread just because of the hype of a nuclear false flag possibly being in the works. They have a motive of regime change in Iran; the covert effort to do so is failing miserably. Their fake green revolution has failed and Iran captured the head of the CIA backed terrorist group Jundullah, which was a major blow to the covert effort to destabilize and ultimately overthrow the Iranian regime. Now that the covert operations have mostly failed, now the war drums are beating again, with another round of hardcore sanctions that just passed on April 23rd. They continue to accuse Iran of having a covert nuclear weapons program, so based on this bogus accusation, set off a nuke and frame Iran as the perpetrator of it. The only other thing I see they could do in relation to Iran is stage a Gulf of Tonkin type incident either in the Persian Gulf or even the Gulf of Aden. All of the draconian laws they have been passing since 2001 especially will most definitely be in full force, and all avenues of information, the internet included, will be on total lockdown. All of this and more will come over a period of time, not necessarily all at once, because they like to do things gradually, the way of the Fabian Society. They cannot continue to just cry wolf, eventually they are going to have to make something big happen.
Dcopymope
Member
 
Posts: 670
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:59 am

Postby Jazza on May 6th, 2010, 8:09 am

{b]Dcopymope[/b]
So I guess I'm controlled opposition than, is that correct?



Nup... well you might be... but I certainly don't know, and I didn't mean to imply that you were.

There are however a catalog of websites that are the alternative media, (supposedly trying to show the government for what it is) that have a new scare campaign every week...

"they are gonna nuke us"
"they are going to take down the internet"
"they are gonna stick everyone in camps"

They are going to do this, that, and the other thing, and so far.. nothing.

One side says the terrorist are going to kill us, the other side says the governments going to fake a terrorist attack to kill us. And both the sheep and the conspiracy theorist run around in fear. Its now 2010, still waiting...

(And yes, they are building a case for Iran. But that will happen with or without faking a nuke. Wouldn't be the western world unless we were at war with someone.)
Jazza
Member
 
Posts: 25
Joined: October 21st, 2009, 1:59 pm

Postby MartinL on May 6th, 2010, 10:58 am

If the "conspiracy movement" lives on fear - that's their problem.

I see nothing wrong in trying to analyze what these criminals is up to - whether it's planned hoaxes or false flags. We should try to gain edge every day.

If something happens (real or fake), what better way to expose it than to already have investigated some of their plans?

Screw fear - we are on the winning side. Can't we just keep informed and keep discussing and analyzing their moves without getting all emotional?

In this case we have a 9/11 perp company (L-3) connected to Rand corporation, Lockheed Martin, Lehman Brothers and Raytheon - so it's worth checking out just because we might stumble across something 9/11 related.


A widely circulated article states that the stocks flagged by the SEC included those of the following corporations: American Airlines, United Airlines, Continental Airlines, Northwest Airlines, Southwest Airlines
, US Airways airlines, Martin, Boeing, Lockheed Martin Corp., AIG, American Express Corp, American International Group, AMR Corporation, AXA SA, Bank of America Corp, Bank of New York Corp, Bank One Corp, Cigna Group, CNA Financial, Carnival Corp, Chubb Group, John Hancock Financial Services, Hercules Inc., L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc., LTV Corporation, Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc., MetLife, Progressive Corp., General Motors, Raytheon, W.R. Grace, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., Lone Star Technologies, American Express, the Citigroup Inc., Royal & Sun Alliance, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., Vornado Reality Trust, Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter & Co., XL Capital Ltd., and Bear Stearns.



Source: http://www.911research.wtc7.net/sept11/stockputs.html (is this confirmed?)

Interestingly enough the first company acquired by L-3 was "System Development Corporation (SDC), based in Santa Monica, California, was arguably the world's first computer software company." - a product of Rand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Dev ... orporation
MartinL
Member
 
Posts: 319
Joined: October 19th, 2009, 11:08 am

Postby fbenario on May 7th, 2010, 1:36 am

Dcopymope 4 May 5 2010, 10:07 PM wrote:


I believe they would actually have to detonate a real bomb the same way they actually had to blow up towers 1, 2 & 7 on 911, as well as put a hole in the pentagon.


Well of course something would have to be detonated! But you keep theorizing that it would have to be a nuclear bomb, and of course it WOULDN'T have to be a nuclear bomb.

As I'm now saying for the third time, they would merely have to tell everyone it was a nuclear bomb - after they exploded something which of course wasn't nuclear.

To paraphrase Simon on the lack of any necessity to kill anyone for the 9/11 story to succeed, there isn't any need to explode a nuclear bomb (if any exist) in order to get everyone to believe that a nuclear bomb actually did explode. The American sheeple are so stupid that they will believe anything they are spoon-fed by mainstream media.
fbenario
Member
 
Posts: 2195
Joined: October 23rd, 2009, 2:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Dcopymope on May 7th, 2010, 5:46 am

fbenario @ May 7 2010, 01:36 AM wrote:
Dcopymope 4 May 5 2010, 10:07 PM wrote:


I believe they would actually have to detonate a real bomb the same way they actually had to blow up towers 1, 2 & 7 on 911, as well as put a hole in the pentagon.


Well of course something would have to be detonated! But you keep theorizing that it would have to be a nuclear bomb, and of course it WOULDN'T have to be a nuclear bomb.

As I'm now saying for the third time, they would merely have to tell everyone it was a nuclear bomb - after they exploded something which of course wasn't nuclear.

To paraphrase Simon on the lack of any necessity to kill anyone for the 9/11 story to succeed, there isn't any need to explode a nuclear bomb (if any exist) in order to get everyone to believe that a nuclear bomb actually did explode. The American sheeple are so stupid that they will believe anything they are spoon-fed by mainstream media.


Do you know of any bombs that they may have that can mimic that of a nuclear explosion? The only kind of bomb that I know of that can is the neutron bomb.
Dcopymope
Member
 
Posts: 670
Joined: April 10th, 2010, 2:59 am

Next

Return to General World Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron