(Reading time: 33 - 65 minutes)
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 are 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 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 it’s 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 affect there needs to be real deaths. The attackers need be convincing in their role as soldiers of Country B, so clothes, uniform, weapons need to match appropriately. The likely hood 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 therefor 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 it’s 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 populations 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 of 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 30’s. 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.

Proven False-Flags

  • Iran-Contra
  • Watergate
  • Operation Gladio
  • Operation Northwoods
  • Gulf of Tonkin
  • Pearl Harbor
  • (See longer list here)

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, thought 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.

Failed False-Flags

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 globalist. 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 base line 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:

  • Objective
  • Focus
  • Event Type
  • Main Event
  • Date/Time
  • Location
  • Participants
  • Perpetrator
  • Victim(s)
  • Event Execution
  • Back-up plans
  • Official Narrative
  • Cover-up


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 60’s with JFK, MLK, and RFK. Another objective of these three 60’s 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 peoples, 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.

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 terrorist.’ He was the bogey man 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 obviously 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’. 9/11 the target audience was the American people.

Event Type

The importance of the Event Type cannot be understated. A 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 piggy back 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 movie 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 affects 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, produced 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 eye witness. 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.

Main Event

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 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.

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.

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. 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 every time 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.

economist magazine cover 2015


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 it’s 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 here 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 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 it’s 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) 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.

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. Therefor 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’.

Event Execution

Putting the plan in action. Or more precisely… Showtime! This is it, all the planning and preparation come to 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 therefor 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 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.

Official Narrative

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, politician’s 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, that 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. Lets 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 it’s 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 it’s 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 has 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 and therefor this indicates planning by same/similar groups. Commonalities include; lone gunman, mental instability, SSRI’s, 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 9yo 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.

Sacrificial Killing(s)

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?

Authors Note:

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-flags 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 sub-conscious 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 therefor 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.

Governments Admit that Much of Modern History Has Been Manipulated By False Flag Attacks

Posted on March 30, 2016 by WashingtonsBlog

Presidents, Prime Ministers, Congressmen, Generals, Spooks, Soldiers and Police ADMIT to False Flag Terror

In the following instances, officials in the government which carried out the attack (or seriously proposed an attack) admit to it, either orally, in writing, or through photographs or videos:

(1) As admitted by secret Russian police files that are part of the Hoover Institution’s archives, the Russian Tsar’s secret police set off bombs and killed people in order to blame and arrest labor agitators. And see this.

(2) Japanese troops set off a small explosion on a train track in 1931, and falsely blamed it on China in order to justify an invasion of Manchuria. This is known as the “Mukden Incident” or the “Manchurian Incident”. The Tokyo International Military Tribunal found: “Several of the participators in the plan, including Hashimoto [a high-ranking Japanese army officer], have on various occasions admitted their part in the plot and have stated that the object of the ‘Incident’ was to afford an excuse for the occupation of Manchuria by the Kwantung Army ….” And see this.

(3) A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that – under orders from the chief of the Gestapo – he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.

(4) Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building in 1933, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.

(5) Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev admitted in writing that the Soviet Union’s Red Army shelled the Russian village of Mainila in 1939 – while blaming the attack on Finland – as a basis for launching the “Winter War” against Finland. Russian president Boris Yeltsin agreed that Russia had been the aggressor in the Winter War.

(6) The Russian Parliament, current Russian president Putin and former Soviet leader Gorbachev all admit that Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered his secret police to execute 22,000 Polish army officers and civilians in 1940, and then falsely blamed it on the Nazis.

(7) The British government admits that – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews attempting to flee the Holocaust to seek safety in Palestine, set up a fake group called “Defenders of Arab Palestine”, and then had the psuedo-group falsely claim responsibility for the bombings (and see this, this and this).

(8) Israel admits that in 1954, an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this).

The U.S. Army does not believe this is an isolated incident.  For example, the U.S. Army’s School of Advanced Military Studies said of Mossad (Israel’s intelligence service):

“Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”

(9) The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.

(10) The Turkish Prime Minister admitted that the Turkish government carried out the 1955 bombing on a Turkish consulate in Greece – also damaging the nearby birthplace of the founder of modern Turkey – and blamed it on Greece, for the purpose of inciting and justifying anti-Greek violence.

(11) The British Prime Minister admitted to his defense secretary that he and American president Dwight Eisenhower approved a plan in 1957 to carry out attacks in Syria and blame it on the Syrian government as a way to effect regime change.

(12) The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s through the 1980s and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism.

As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security”so that “a state of emergency could be declared, so people would willingly trade part of their freedom for the security” (and see this) (Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred). And watch this BBC special. They also allegedly carried out terror attacks in France, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the UK, and other countries.

The CIA also stressed to the head of the Italian program that Italy needed to use the program to control internal uprisings.

False flag attacks carried out pursuant to this program include – by way of example only:

(13) In 1960, American Senator George Smathers suggested that the U.S. launch “a false attack made on Guantanamo Bay which would give us the excuse of actually fomenting a fight which would then give us the excuse to go in and [overthrow Castro]”.

(14) Official State Department documents show that, in 1961, the head of the Joint Chiefs and other high-level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. The plans were not carried out, but they were all discussed as serious proposals.

(15) As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in 1962, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.

(16) In 1963, the U.S. Department of Defense wrote a paper promoting attacks on nations within the Organization of American States – such as Trinidad-Tobago or Jamaica – and then falsely blaming them on Cuba.

(17) The U.S. Department of Defense also suggested covertly paying a person in the Castro government to attack the United States: “The only area remaining for consideration then would be to bribe one of Castro’s subordinate commanders to initiate an attack on Guantanamo.”

(18) A U.S. Congressional committee admitted that – as part of its “Cointelpro” campaign – the FBI had used many provocateurs in the 1950s through 1970s to carry out violent acts and falsely blame them on political activists.

(19) A top Turkish general admitted that Turkish forces burned down a mosque on Cyprus in the 1970s and blamed it on their enemy. He explained: “In Special War, certain acts of sabotage are staged and blamed on the enemy to increase public resistance. We did this on Cyprus; we even burnt down a mosque.” In response to the surprised correspondent’s incredulous look the general said, “I am giving an example”.

(20) A declassified 1973 CIA document reveals a program to train foreign police and troops on how to make booby traps, pretending that they were training them on how to investigate terrorist acts:

The Agency maintains liaison in varying degrees with foreign police/security organizations through its field stations ….

[CIA provides training sessions as follows:]

a. Providing trainees with basic knowledge in the uses of commercial and military demolitions and incendiaries as they may be applied in terrorism and industrial sabotage operations.

b. Introducing the trainees to commercially available materials and home laboratory techniques, likely to he used in the manufacture of explosives and incendiaries by terrorists or saboteurs.

c. Familiarizing the trainees with the concept of target analysis and operational planning that a saboteur or terrorist must employ.

d. Introducing the trainees to booby trapping devices and techniques giving practical experience with both manufactured and improvised devices through actual fabrication.


The program provides the trainees with ample opportunity to develop basic familiarity and use proficiently through handling, preparing and applying the various explosive charges, incendiary agents, terrorist devices and sabotage techniques.

(21) The German government admitted (and http://www.ndr.de/kultur/geschichte/cellerloch102.html%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DymV%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26channel%3Dsb" target="_blank" title="see this">see this) that, in 1978, the German secret service detonated a bomb in the outer wall of a prison and planted “escape tools” on a prisoner – a member of the Red Army Faction – which the secret service wished to frame the bombing on.

(22) A Mossad agent admits that, in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddaffi’s compound in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist transmissions recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddaffi as a terrorist supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter.

(23) The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him “to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident”, thus framing the ANC for the bombing.

(24) An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army admit that, in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and see this video; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author).

(25) In 1993, a bomb in Northern Ireland killed 9 civilians. Official documents from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (i.e. the British government) show that the mastermind of the bombing was a British agent, and that the bombing was designed to inflame sectarian tensions. And see this and this.

(26) The United States Army’s 1994 publication Special Forces Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces – updated in 2004 – recommends employing terrorists and using false flag operations to destabilize leftist regimes in Latin America. False flag terrorist attacks were carried out in Latin America and other regions as part of the CIA’s “Dirty Wars“. And see this.

(27) Similarly, a CIA “psychological operations” manual prepared by a CIA contractor for the Nicaraguan Contra rebels noted the value of assassinating someone on your own side to create a “martyr” for the cause. The manual was authenticated by the U.S. government. The manual received so much publicity from Associated Press, Washington Post and other news coverage that – during the 1984 presidential debate – President Reagan was confronted with the following question on national television:

At this moment, we are confronted with the extraordinary story of a CIA guerrilla manual for the anti-Sandinista contras whom we are backing, which advocates not only assassinations of Sandinistas but the hiring of criminals to assassinate the guerrillas we are supporting in order to create martyrs.

(28) An Indonesian government fact-finding team investigated violent riots which occurred in 1998, and determined that “elements of the military had been involved in the riots, some of which were deliberately provoked”.

(29) Senior Russian Senior military and intelligence officers admit that the KGB blew up Russian apartment buildings in 1999 and falsely blamed it on Chechens, in order to justify an invasion of Chechnya (and see this report and this discussion).

(30) As reported by the New York Times, BBC and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that in 2001, the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the “war on terror”. luring foreign migrants into the country, executing them in a staged gun battle, and then claiming they were a unit backed by Al Qaeda intent on attacking Western embassies”.  Macedonian authorities had lured the immigrants into the country, and then – after killing them – posed the victims with planted evidence – “bags of uniforms and semiautomatic weapons at their side” – to show Western diplomats.

(31) At the July 2001 G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy, black-clad thugs were videotaped getting out of police cars, and were seen by an Italian MP carrying “iron bars inside the police station”. Subsequently, senior police officials in Genoa subsequently admitted that police planted two Molotov cocktails and faked the stabbing of a police officer at the G8 Summit, in order to justify a violent crackdown against protesters.

(32) The U.S. falsely blamed Iraq for playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by a memo from the defense secretary – as one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq war.

Even after the 9/11 Commission admitted that there was no connection, Dick Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S. government officials now admit that the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction.

Despite previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials now say that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was not the state which backed the hijackers. (Many U.S. officials have alleged that 9/11 was a false flag operation by rogue elements of the U.S. government; but such a claim is beyond the scope of this discussion. The key point is that the U.S. falsely blamed it on Iraq, when it knew Iraq had nothing to do with it.).

(Additionally, the same judge who has shielded the Saudis for any liability for funding 9/11 has awarded a default judgment against Iran for $10.5 billion for carrying out 9/11 … even though no one seriously believes that Iran had any part in 9/11.)

(33) Although the FBI now admits that the 2001 anthrax attacks were carried out by one or more U.S. government scientists, a senior FBI official says that the FBI was actually told to blame the Anthrax attacks on Al Qaeda by White House officials (remember what the anthrax letters looked like). Government officials also confirm that the white House tried to link the anthrax to Iraq as a justification for regime change in that country. And see this.

(34) According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.

(35) The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings.

(36) Police outside of a 2003 European Union summit in Greece were filmed planting Molotov cocktails on a peaceful protester.

(37) Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”

(38) Similarly, in 2005, Professor John Arquilla of the Naval Postgraduate School – a renowned US defense analyst credited with developing the concept of ‘netwar’ – called for western intelligence services to create new “pseudo gang” terrorist groups, as a way of undermining “real” terror networks. According to Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, Arquilla’s ‘pseudo-gang’ strategy was, Hersh reported, already being implemented by the Pentagon:

“Under Rumsfeld’s new approach, I was told, US military operatives would be permitted to pose abroad as corrupt foreign businessmen seeking to buy contraband items that could be used in nuclear-weapons systems. In some cases, according to the Pentagon advisers, local citizens could be recruited and asked to join up with guerrillas or terrorists…

The new rules will enable the Special Forces community to set up what it calls ‘action teams’ in the target countries overseas which can be used to find and eliminate terrorist organizations. ‘Do you remember the right-wing execution squads in El Salvador?’ the former high-level intelligence official asked me, referring to the military-led gangs that committed atrocities in the early nineteen-eighties. ‘We founded them and we financed them,’ he said. ‘The objective now is to recruit locals in any area we want. And we aren’t going to tell Congress about it.’ A former military officer, who has knowledge of the Pentagon’s commando capabilities, said, ‘We’re going to be riding with the bad boys.’”

(39) United Press International reported in June 2005:

U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.

(40) In 2005, British soldiers dressed as Arabs were caught by Iraqi police after a shootout against the police. The soldiers apparently possessed explosives, and were accused of attempting to set off bombs.  While none of the soldiers admitted that they were carrying out attacks, British soldiers and a column of British tanks stormed the jail they were held in, broke down a wall of the jail, and busted them out.  The extreme measures used to free the soldiers – rather than have them face questions and potentially stand trial – could be considered an admission.

(41) Undercover Israeli soldiers admitted in 2005 to throwing stones at other Israeli soldiers so they could blame it on Palestinians, as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protests by the Palestinians.

(42) Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually undercover Quebec police officers (and see this).

(43) A 2008 US Army special operations field manual //medium.com/@NafeezAhmed/why-google-made-the-nsa-2a80584c9c1" target="_blank" title="recommends">recommends that the U.S. military use surrogate non-state groups such as “paramilitary forces, individuals, businesses, foreign political organizations, resistant or insurgent organizations, expatriates, transnational terrorism adversaries, disillusioned transnational terrorism members, black marketers, and other social or political ‘undesirables.’” The manual specifically acknowledged that U.S. special operations can involve both counterterrorism and “Terrorism” (as well as “transnational criminal activities, including narco-trafficking, illicit arms-dealing, and illegal financial transactions.”)

(44) The former Italian Prime Minister, President, and head of Secret Services (Francesco Cossiga) advised the 2008 minister in charge of the police, on how to deal with protests from teachers and students:

He should do what I did when I was Minister of the Interior … infiltrate the movement with agents provocateurs inclined to do anything …. And after that, with the strength of the gained population consent, … beat them for blood and beat for blood also those teachers that incite them. Especially the teachers. Not the elderly, of course, but the girl teachers yes.

(45) At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence.

(46) Egyptian politicians admitted (and see this) that government employees looted priceless museum artifacts  2011 to try to discredit the protesters.

(47) In 2011, a Colombian colonel admitted that he and his soldiers had lured 57 innocent civilians and killed them – after dressing many of them in uniforms – as part of a scheme to claim that Columbia was eradicating left-wing terrorists. And see this.

(48) Rioters who discredited the peaceful protests against the swearing in of the Mexican president in 2012 admitted that they were paid 300 pesos each to destroy everything in their path. According to Wikipedia, photos also show the vandals waiting in groups behind police lines prior to the violence.

(49) A Colombian army colonel has admitted that his unit murdered 57 civilians, then dressed them in uniforms and claimed they were rebels killed in combat.

(50) On November 20, 2014, Mexican agent provocateurs were transported by army vehicles to participate in the 2014 Iguala mass kidnapping protests, as was shown by videos and pictures distributed via social networks.

(51) The highly-respected writer for the Telegraph Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says that the head of Saudi intelligence – Prince Bandar – recently admitted that the Saudi government controls “Chechen” terrorists.

(52) Two members of the Turkish parliament, high-level American sources and others admitted that the Turkish government – a NATO country – carried out the chemical weapons attacks in Syria and falsely blamed them on the Syrian government; and high-ranking Turkish government admitted on tape plans to carry out attacks and blame it on the Syrian government.

(53) The Ukrainian security chief admits that the sniper attacks which started the Ukrainian coup were carried out in order to frame others. Ukrainian officials admit that the Ukrainian snipers fired on both sides, to create maximum chaos.

(54) Burmese government officials admitted that Burma (renamed Myanmar) used false flag attacks against Muslim and Buddhist groups within the country to stir up hatred between the two groups, to prevent democracy from spreading.

(55) Israeli police were again filmed in 2015 dressing up as Arabs and throwing stones, then turning over Palestinian protesters to Israeli soldiers.

(56) Britain’s spy agency has admitted (and see this) that it carries out “digital false flag” attacks on targets, framing people by writing offensive or unlawful material … and blaming it on the target.

(57) U.S. soldiers have admitted that if they kill innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, they then “drop” automatic weapons near their body so they can pretend they were militants

(58) Similarly, police frame innocent people for crimes they didn’t commit. The practice is so well-known that the New York Times noted in 1981:

In police jargon, a throwdown is a weapon planted on a victim.

Newsweek reported in 1999:

Perez, himself a former [Los Angeles Police Department] cop, was caught stealing eight pounds of cocaine from police evidence lockers. After pleading guilty in September, he bargained for a lighter sentence by telling an appalling story of attempted murder and a “throwdown”–police slang for a weapon planted by cops to make a shooting legally justifiable. Perez said he and his partner, Officer Nino Durden, shot an unarmed 18th Street Gang member named Javier Ovando, then planted a semiautomatic rifle on the unconscious suspect and claimed that Ovando had tried to shoot them during a stakeout.

Wikipedia notes:

As part of his plea bargain, Pérez implicated scores of officers from the Rampart Division’s anti-gang unit, describing routinely beating gang members, planting evidence on suspects, falsifying reports and covering up unprovoked shootings.

(As a side note – and while not technically false flag attacks – police have been busted framing innocent people in many other ways, as well.)

(59) A former U.S. intelligence officer recently alleged:

Most terrorists are false flag terrorists or are created by our own security services.

(60) The head and special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office said that most terror attacks are committed by the CIA and FBI as false flags. Similarly, the director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan – Lt. General William Odom said:

By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.

(audio here).

(61) Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the “benefits” of of false flags to justify their political agenda:

“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler

“Why of course the people don’t want war … 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 … 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 to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin

Postscript:  The media plays along as well. For example, in 2012, NBC News’ chief foreign correspondent, Richard Engel, was kidnapped in Syria. NBC News said that Engel and his reporting team had been abducted by forces affiliated with the Syrian government. He reported that they only escaped when some anti-Syrian government rebels killed some of the pro-government kidnappers.

However,  NBC subsequently admitted that this was false.  It turns out that they were really kidnapped by people associated with the U.S. backed rebels fighting the Syrian government … who wore the clothes of, faked the accent of, scrawled the slogans of, and otherwise falsely impersonated the mannerisms of people associated with the Syrian government. In reality, the group that kidnapped Engel and his crew were affiliated with the U.S.-supported Free Syrian Army, and NBC should have known that it was blaming the wrong party. See the New York Times and the Nation’s reporting.

Of course, sometimes atrocities or warmongering are falsely blamed on the enemy as a justification for war … when no such event ever occurred. This is sort of like false flag terror … without the terror.

For example:

  • The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war
  • One of the central lies used to justify the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq after Iraq invaded Kuwait was the false statement by a young Kuwaiti girl that Iraqis murdered Kuwaiti babies in hospitals.  Her statement was arranged by a Congressman who knew that she was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the U.S. – who was desperately trying to lobby the U.S. to enter the war – but the Congressman hid that fact from the public and from Congress
  • Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Ron Suskind reported that the White House ordered the CIA to forge and backdate a document falsely linking Iraq with Muslim terrorists and 9/11 … and that the CIA complied with those instructions and in fact created the forgery, which was then used to justify war against Iraq. And see this and this
  • Time magazine points out that the claim by President Bush that Iraq was attempting to buy “yellow cake” Uranium from Niger:

had been checked out — and debunked — by U.S. intelligence a year before the President repeated it.

  • The “humanitarian” wars in Syria, Libya and Yugoslavia were all justified by false reports that the leaders of those countries were committing atrocities against their people. And see this
We use browser cookies to manage authentication, for analytics, and to ensure you get the best experience on our website.