Regardless of evidence, the two things most Americans will never question:

[Junkdrawer]

1.) Anyone in power would ever commit a false-flag attack to further their agenda.

2.) Anyone in power would ever purposely rig an election.

Oh, there will be a positive cottage industry looking into these things in a minority kind of way, and generations later, some respectable historians will discuss the ideas with appropriate vigor.

But while they're occurring, they're just off the table in terms of legitimate discussion. And that fact, more than anything else, is why they're done.

[NanceGreggs]

1. I think you've hit the proverbial nail ...

... right on the HEAD!

[mattclearing]

2. Never underestimate the power of denial. n/t

[unpossibles]

3. I agree

it amazes me how (some) people will admit to past atrocities and corruption, but never consider that some things don't change, that there are still people who will take advantage of others any way they can.

The atrocities of the past were probably not recognized as such at the time either.

[WilliamPitt]

4. Question in search of an honest answer

Had you ever heard the term "false-flag attack" before 9/11?

I ask because a lot of people her chuck around a lot of terms like this. I'm wondering how grounded they are in the facts behind the term, when they happen, how they happen, if they happen, intelligence procedures, military undertakings of same, etc.

I'll be honest and say I hadn't heard the term before the 9/11 theories started to rise. At this point, I would not feel qualified to say this or that was a "false-flag attack." It'd be like me talking about petroleum distillate processing after going to the gas station to fill up.

So...

[Junkdrawer]

6. From Douglas Adam's "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy"...

....The history of warfare is similarly subdivided, although here the phases are Retribution, Anticipation, and Diplomacy. Thus:

Retribution:
I'm going to kill you because you killed my brother.

Anticipation:
I'm going to kill you because I killed your brother.

Diplomacy:
I'm going to kill my brother and then kill you on the
pretext that your brother did it.

[WilliamPitt]

7. I love that book

but you didn't answer my question.

[Junkdrawer]

8. And so the answer is: I knew the concept, as for the phrase, I can't say..

:shrug:

[WilliamPitt]

9. Thanks n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Anybody who had read Clancy or Marcino knows of it

because they have used it for literally years... any war gamer worth his or her salt also knows it and Larry Bond even used planes in one of his books well before 9.11

As a writer of military sci fi I have been familiar with the term, and yes we have done it, but the problem is we have done it in very small and tactically important targets... not anyting like 9.11

What many people don't like or want to recognize is that our children, for OBL is our product, learned well from our trade craft book...

[DrDebug]

13. Reichstag

I think that was the first one. Then again there are still many people who do not believe that Göring did it. So it's still in denail.

[existentialist]

22. Machiavelli

I think anyone who has read Machiavelli's The Prince will agree that he sets forth several examples of such actions, and even advocates them. I don't recall his use of the term "false flag", but maybe I'm just forgetful.

Maybe that's where the present administration picked up their ethics.

[DrDebug]

23. That's because it works

Let's say the Reichtag didn't happen. It would mean that in the 1934 election in Germany the nazi would have had about 20% of the votes instead of 40%, so even though Hitler was the president, the parlement would have been a socialists/communists coalition. There would still be functioning democracy. So what would have been odds of WWII happening?

[Junkdrawer]

21. A different take on your question....

As Americans, we're taught from Grade 1 that our government is good and only foreign governments can possibly be bad. So none of us are taught to be skeptical consumers of government information. We are taught to respect authority.

Ya know, the German people were also so inclined once. Perhaps that's why we're suckers for Fascism? :shrug:

[OneBlueSky]

5. 3.) Anyone in power would allow or mastermind a terrorist attack . . .

on the United States of America . . .

[Junkdrawer]

14. I think of that as a sub-case of 1.), except that...

in a wierd kind of way, 9/11 can be both an Al Qaeda attack and a false-flag attack at the same time.

[indepat]

10. If the Dems were in control, RW pundits would be questioning these

every minute of every day and millions upon millions would be clamoring for the truth and punishment of the guilty.

[Junkdrawer]

16. There's something to be said for that, but...

Limbaugh et al were accusing Clinton of murder and selling out to the Chinese on a daily basis but the American public (myself included!) didn't buy that either.

[The Witch]

20. "Joe Wilson outed his own wife" is proof of this.

It's ok to suspect foul play if it's someone on the left.

[enid602]

12. believe

How about chemical warfare? Will our citizens believe that our government authorized that? There's compelling evidence which was presented by Italian TV on Tuesday, and is now hitting the major US newspapers. We read a lot about torture as well. Not a big jump from chem warfare and torture to LIHOP/MIHOP and BBV.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Problem is, we did not use chemical agents

WP is classified as an incendiary and it is kosher for limited applications under the laws of land warfare (we broached those by the way, but language matters)

MK-47 is also considered an incendiary, though a banned one by most conventions,

now what you saw at Fallujah falls in the category of atrocity to war crime, but you need to be careful not to call WP a WMD, it is not... and that will only take credibity away from you... and by the way, you realize how many militaries use WP? EVERYBODY, see them tracer rounds are WP rounds, and that is just one example

[enid602]

17. chem

According to these reports, we did not use the WP in the prescribed manner, but rather released it in heavy concentrations in bombs so that it had the effect of melting flesh. Sure, we can say that 'technically' we did not use chemical warfare or WMD, but those photos are nonetheless damning.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. That is where you enter the realm of a war atrocity or war

crime, but be careful with the language... and you are doing well, we did not use it in the prescribed ways (which still kills people ok), and for this use it had to be authorized at the very least by at the lowest a battalion commander... I am betting regimental and above.

[enid602]

24. Blair

I read where Blair (suspecting that we would try something like this) made Bush promise unconditionally and repeatedly that he would NOT employ such tactics in Fallujah, as it would damage him at home in the UK. I would thing the ultimate authorization to use the WP would have had to have come from the top.

[Junkdrawer]

19. Something needs to break the dam of denial...

..and what a flood when that dam breaks, huh?

[Junkdrawer]

25. .

[pmegan]

26. The problem with historians

I was talking to a friend recently about how we'll probably never know any of this stuff, but that it will be up to the historians in a hundred years to figure out what happened.

And then we talked about the evidence problem. As in, there probably won't be any. All of the electronic records, deleted emails, etc. The default "shred it" reaction to all paper trash that exists in most offices these days.

On the plus side, the neocons are so incredibly incompetent, they probably write detailed memos on parchment and seal them in lead cases about the shenanigans they get up to.

[Junkdrawer]

27. Actually, there are volumes of evidence. What's lacking is the will...

to objectively hear the evidence. That's where historians have the advantage - there's absolutely no fear that someone will ridicule you (or worse) for objectively examining a 100 yr. old event.

[sepia_steel]

28. But

1.) Anyone in power would ever commit a false-flag attack to further their agenda.


In all the polls, a majority of Americans believe we were deliberately misled into Iraq.