Were the Hamas Attacks in Israel a False Flag?
activistpost (78)
By Scott Lazarowitz
The October 7th Hamas attack on Israelis has been referred to as "Israel's 9/11," which gives us good reason to believe that it was probably another false flag psy-op.
Some people really do believe it was a false flag, i.e., that the Israeli regime allegedly knew that it was being planned and let it happen.
As Paul Craig Roberts notes, how could Israel's Mossad intelligence agency not know this was being planned? Don't Israeli intelligence and military have the most sophisticated and comprehensive monitoring and surveillance of the Israeli sheeple and of Palestinians and of Hamas?
The planning allegedly was going on for 2 years. Really?
And there were warnings from other countries or intelligence agencies, including Egypt who had warned the Israelis of a terrorist attack being planned, warnings ignored.
In any event, the official narrative of "surprise" attack is just not believable. A possible motive for a false flag op as reported by Jonathan Cook is a planned expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza to Sinai which is controlled by Egypt, an ethnic cleansing plan allegedly under way since at least 2007, according to Cook.
Many people dismiss such allegations as "conspiracy theory." But would it really be that surprising that government-employed losers would intentionally allow a terrorist attack to occur, and for the sake of implementing a plan of ethnic cleansing of an entire population whose presence is inconvenient?
After all, government bureaucracies generally attract psychopaths. The worst of the worst, as F.A. Hayek had noted.
And now we are learning that there is a high probability that many of the Israelis killed on October 7th were killed by the Israeli military (IDF) itself, possibly as high as 80% of the Israeli deaths, according to Scott Ritter. And Ron Unz described the IDF as possibly "trigger-happy Apache pilots". It has also been difficult for Israeli authorities to distinguish between many killed Israeli and Palestinian bodies.
But there is some history that is important here. The fact that Israel contributed to the creation of the Hamas organization is quite relevant to the allegation of false flag ops.
Justin Raimondo noted that the Israelis promoted the organization that later became Hamas for the purposes of discouraging Palestinians from supporting the Palestine Liberation Organization and Yasser Arafat as well as to cause blowback.
In a conscious effort to undermine the Palestine Liberation Organization and the leadership of Yasser Arafat, in 1978 the government of then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin approved the application of Sheik Ahmad Yassin to start a “humanitarian” organization known as the Islamic Association, or Mujama. The roots of this Islamist group were in the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood, and this was the seed that eventually grew into Hamas – but not before it was amply fertilized and nurtured with Israeli funding and political support.
Begin and his successor, Yitzhak Shamir, launched an effort to undercut the PLO, creating the so-called Village Leagues, composed of local councils of handpicked Palestinians who were willing to collaborate with Israel – and, in return, were put on the Israeli payroll. Sheik Yassin and his followers soon became a force within the Village Leagues. This tactical alliance between Yassin and the Israelis was based on a shared antipathy to the militantly secular and leftist PLO: the Israelis allowed Yassin’s group to publish a newspaper and set up an extensive network of charitable organizations, which collected funds not only from the Israelis but also from Arab states opposed to Arafat.
...
This “blowback” principle applies to Hamas not only insofar as Israel was involved in funding and encouraging Mujama, but also, after the consolidation of Hamas as an armed group, due to Israeli military policy. The much-touted “withdrawal,” which amounts to Israel giving up Gaza while strengthening its hand elsewhere in the occupied territories, has been grist for the radical Islamist mill, as has the Wall of Separation and the attempt to quash the vote in East Jerusalem. Israel’s relentless offensive against its perceived enemies – first Fatah, now Hamas and Islamic Jihad – has created a backlash and solidified support for fundamentalist extremist factions in the Palestinian community.
And see this and this.
Besides the Israeli regime helping to foster an Islamic extremist terrorist group, Hamas, Al-Qaeda was also partially trained and funded by CIA.
See "MI6 'halted bid to arrest bin Laden'" on the Guardian and "Mainstream Media Finally Reports on U.S. Funding of Terror" on The New American for info.
Those examples of government-employed buffoonery have been a decades-long part of Western governments' history of exploiting the more primitive Islamic cultures toward the end of Western regimes' foreign policy goal of "creating monsters to destroy" to justify the expansion of the national security (sic) state and all its tax-funded largess.
Another example, in 2017 Islamic State or ISIS claimed responsibility for the London stabbing attack that killed 8 and injured 48 people. According to British historian Mark Curtis, author of Secret Affairs: Britain's Collusion with Radical Islam, one of the 3 attackers had allegedly been "trained by U.K. and U.S. ‘liaison’ officers,” as part of a "covert" op in Libya, as other terrorists get trained to fight in Syria against the regimes the U.S. and U.K governments don't like. Western regimes train would-be terrorists, who then go on to commit acts of ... terrorism. And on and on.
So Western government bureaucrats, especially in the U.S. and U.K., have a history of radicalizing Muslims. As I wrote in this 2017 blog post,
In this article, Curtis states that the Manchester bombing was blowback from “overt and covert actions of British governments.” And Nafeez Ahmed in this article says that the “terrorists who rampaged across London on the night of 3 June were part of a wider extremist network closely monitored by MI5 for decades. The same network was heavily involved in recruiting Britons to fight with jihadist groups in Syria, Iraq and Libya.”
You see, this government bureaucrat-type of idiocy, attempting to manipulate and control hostile factions in society, seems to result in blowback.
Do bureaucrats never learn from their past mistakes? Or do "intelligence" and "national security" bureaucrats just like blowback?
Why would bureaucrats like blowback? Because of the bureaucrats' extravagant government budgets at taxpayer expense. As I have maintained especially in this article, the involuntary, confiscatory income tax is the biggest enabler of government criminality ever. Removing the involuntary income tax is an "existential threat" to said government "security" apparatchiks.
Other examples of murderous Western government actions that have resulted in catastrophic blowback include President George H.W. Bush's 1991 starting a whole new war of aggression against Iraq, even though Iraq was not a threat to the U.S.
In 1991 the U.S. military bombed and destroyed Iraqi civilian water and sewage treatment centers and then imposed sanctions on the Iraqis, which prevented the Iraqis from rebuilding, which forced the Iraqi civilian population to have to use untreated water, which led to skyrocketing disease and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents by the mid-1990s, and then hundreds of thousands more by the year 2000.
The September 11th attacks in 2001 were clearly blowback from the decade of violence, bombings and murders by U.S. military in Iraq and the U.S. government's other invasions, occupations and support of repressive regimes leading up to that time.
So, my question is, was the George H.W. Bush regime starting a whole new war in the Middle east in 1991 intentionally to cause the blowback of a 9/11 nature? Are bureaucrats that insane?
What do you think is going to happen when you bomb and destroy people's water supply and sewage treatment centers? (Which the Israelis are doing to Gaza right now, by the way.)
Another example of that insane motive could be that after 9/11, and after the younger President George W. Bush followed in his father's warmongering footsteps by starting another war of aggression in Iraq as well as a war in Afghanistan, during the mid-2000s the Bush administration helped Iraq and Afghanistan concoct new Constitutions.
Not a Constitution promoting freedom and individual rights, mind you. Nope. The new Iraq Constitution, still in place, declared Iraq to be an Islamic state under repressive Sharia Law. Why would the Bush administration agree to this?
The new Afghanistan Constitution was the same, although since 2021 Afghanistan now has no Constitution and an even more repressive society. Thanks, George W. Bush.
Prior to the 1990s, the U.S. government armed Iraq and helped Saddam Hussein gas Iranians during the 1980s Iran-Iraq War. (If only the rulers had listened to George Washington!)
Even further back, there were the hostilities between the U.S. and Iran. American "conservatives," foreign interventionists and neocons are still angry at Iran for taking Americans hostage in 1979 at the time of the Iranian Revolution, which itself was blowback for the CIA's supporting the Shah of Iran's repressive SAVAK police state and torture, which followed CIA's 1953 "Operation Ajax" coup in Iran (that was partly in the name of expropriating Iran's oil for the British).
The U.S.-backed SAVAK police state kept Iranians in fear of their own government, much like what many Americans fear now thanks to the gestapo-like tactics of the Obama/Biden DOJ and FBI in Amerika.
So, did U.S. government bureaucrats, CIA and Pentagon, intend to cause the radicalization of Islam believers in Iran during the 1950s, '60s and '70s?
Iranians living in such repressive conditions in society as imposed by the American CIA-supported SAVAK had to have been a major contributor to the radicalizing of Iranians' Islamic religion, from the 1950s coup leading up to the 1979 Iranian Islamic Revolution.
Since 1979 the Iranian opposition to the repressive Islamic regime, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MeK), during the earlier years following the 1979 Revolution had been involved in terrorist acts of assassinations and bombings, and was listed as an official terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department.
That is worth noting here, because U.S. government bureaucrats and their hangers-on had been caught giving paid speeches on behalf of the Iranian MeK, while the MeK was on the U.S. government's list of terrorist organizations.
Meanwhile, other people mainly non-involved Muslims had been imprisoned for the crime of providing "material support for terrorism," as Glenn Greenwald pointed out in 2012.
But some of the American statist lackeys who were supposedly "providing material support" for the officially designated terrorist organization MeK included, according to Greenwald, "Rudy Giuliani, Howard Dean, Michael Mukasey, Ed Rendell, Andy Card, Lee Hamilton, Tom Ridge, Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark, Michael Hayden, John Bolton, Louis Freeh -- and Fran Townsend," a bunch of neocons, interventionist apparatchiks and "national security" swamp creatures.
And get this. In his subsequent article on the red-faced U.S. government's 2012 de-listing of the MeK as an official terrorist organization, Greenwald notes,
What makes this effort all the more extraordinary are the reports that MEK has actually intensified its terrorist and other military activities over the last couple of years. In February, NBC News reported, citing US officials, that "deadly attacks on Iranian nuclear scientists are being carried out by [MEK]" as it is "financed, trained and armed by Israel's secret service". While the MEK denies involvement, the Iranian government has echoed these US officials in insisting that the group was responsible for those assassinations. NBC also cited "unconfirmed reports in the Israeli press and elsewhere that Israel and the MEK were involved in a Nov. 12 explosion that destroyed the Iranian missile research and development site at Bin Kaneh, 30 miles outside Tehran".
In April, the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh reported that the US itself has for years provided extensive training to MEK operatives, on US soil (in other words, the US government provided exactly the "material support" for a designated terror group which the law criminalizes).
In other words, your tax dollars at work, folks.
More info on the U.S. and Iranian MeK here.
And if the October 7th Hamas attack really was an intentional false flag from the blowback of Israel's "open air imprisonment" of Gazans for 15 years, it could also have been allowed as an excuse for the government to expand even further the police state, the surveillance state cracking down even more on speech and on "disinformation," and on people who question the government's official narratives or who criticize the regime. And I mean in the U.S. not just Israel.
Throughout the history of the West, the U.S., Israel, and other governments, false flag acts of violence have been planned and committed in order to blame the violence on others or effect in some desired central planning outcome.
Washington's Blog, which apparently no longer exists, had this very detailed list (Wayback Machine link) of the many false flag ops admitted to by governments and militaries. For instance,
The British government admits that – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews who were Holocaust survivors attempting to flee to safety in Palestine right after World War II, set up a fake group called “Defenders of Arab Palestine”, and then had the pseudo-group falsely claim responsibility for the bombings...
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)...
The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister...
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...
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”...[Washington's Blog further expands on this item with several more links.]
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...
A Mossad agent admits that, in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddafi’s compound in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist transmissions recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddafi as a terrorist supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter...
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...
Washington's Blog included many more false flag ops by many countries' governments on the long list there.
Israeli rulers allegedly seeking to expel the Arabs from their Jewish State is a possible motive for a false flag op. And possible motive by the Western central-planning regimes in keeping Gaza, Iran, Iraq and other Islamic-based cultures "oppressed," poor, primitive and repressive, and their populations angered and enraged at Western governments' manipulations and false flag ops, in my view, might be so that the U.S. and the West would continue to dominate economically and culturally, as well as for the greedy parasites in those governments to expropriate the oil and natural resources of those lands.
And to justify the continuation of the greedy Western government bureaucrats' extravagant tax-funded budgets and high-off-the-hog largess, of course.
Image: Anthony Freda Art
Scott Lazarowitz is a libertarian writer and commentator. Please visit his blog.
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on SoMee, Telegram, HIVE, Minds, MeWe, Twitter - X, Gab, and What Really Happened.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what's coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.
https://hive.blog/war/@activistpost/were-the-hamas-attacks-in-israel-a-false-flagWere the Hamas Attacks in Israel a False Flag?
activistpost (78)
By Scott Lazarowitz
The October 7th Hamas attack on Israelis has been referred to as "Israel's 9/11," which gives us good reason to believe that it was probably another false flag psy-op.
Some people really do believe it was a false flag, i.e., that the Israeli regime allegedly knew that it was being planned and let it happen.
As Paul Craig Roberts notes, how could Israel's Mossad intelligence agency not know this was being planned? Don't Israeli intelligence and military have the most sophisticated and comprehensive monitoring and surveillance of the Israeli sheeple and of Palestinians and of Hamas?
The planning allegedly was going on for 2 years. Really?
And there were warnings from other countries or intelligence agencies, including Egypt who had warned the Israelis of a terrorist attack being planned, warnings ignored.
In any event, the official narrative of "surprise" attack is just not believable. A possible motive for a false flag op as reported by Jonathan Cook is a planned expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza to Sinai which is controlled by Egypt, an ethnic cleansing plan allegedly under way since at least 2007, according to Cook.
Many people dismiss such allegations as "conspiracy theory." But would it really be that surprising that government-employed losers would intentionally allow a terrorist attack to occur, and for the sake of implementing a plan of ethnic cleansing of an entire population whose presence is inconvenient?
After all, government bureaucracies generally attract psychopaths. The worst of the worst, as F.A. Hayek had noted.
And now we are learning that there is a high probability that many of the Israelis killed on October 7th were killed by the Israeli military (IDF) itself, possibly as high as 80% of the Israeli deaths, according to Scott Ritter. And Ron Unz described the IDF as possibly "trigger-happy Apache pilots". It has also been difficult for Israeli authorities to distinguish between many killed Israeli and Palestinian bodies.
But there is some history that is important here. The fact that Israel contributed to the creation of the Hamas organization is quite relevant to the allegation of false flag ops.
Justin Raimondo noted that the Israelis promoted the organization that later became Hamas for the purposes of discouraging Palestinians from supporting the Palestine Liberation Organization and Yasser Arafat as well as to cause blowback.
In a conscious effort to undermine the Palestine Liberation Organization and the leadership of Yasser Arafat, in 1978 the government of then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin approved the application of Sheik Ahmad Yassin to start a “humanitarian” organization known as the Islamic Association, or Mujama. The roots of this Islamist group were in the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood, and this was the seed that eventually grew into Hamas – but not before it was amply fertilized and nurtured with Israeli funding and political support.
Begin and his successor, Yitzhak Shamir, launched an effort to undercut the PLO, creating the so-called Village Leagues, composed of local councils of handpicked Palestinians who were willing to collaborate with Israel – and, in return, were put on the Israeli payroll. Sheik Yassin and his followers soon became a force within the Village Leagues. This tactical alliance between Yassin and the Israelis was based on a shared antipathy to the militantly secular and leftist PLO: the Israelis allowed Yassin’s group to publish a newspaper and set up an extensive network of charitable organizations, which collected funds not only from the Israelis but also from Arab states opposed to Arafat.
...
This “blowback” principle applies to Hamas not only insofar as Israel was involved in funding and encouraging Mujama, but also, after the consolidation of Hamas as an armed group, due to Israeli military policy. The much-touted “withdrawal,” which amounts to Israel giving up Gaza while strengthening its hand elsewhere in the occupied territories, has been grist for the radical Islamist mill, as has the Wall of Separation and the attempt to quash the vote in East Jerusalem. Israel’s relentless offensive against its perceived enemies – first Fatah, now Hamas and Islamic Jihad – has created a backlash and solidified support for fundamentalist extremist factions in the Palestinian community.
And see this and this.
Besides the Israeli regime helping to foster an Islamic extremist terrorist group, Hamas, Al-Qaeda was also partially trained and funded by CIA.
See "MI6 'halted bid to arrest bin Laden'" on the Guardian and "Mainstream Media Finally Reports on U.S. Funding of Terror" on The New American for info.
Those examples of government-employed buffoonery have been a decades-long part of Western governments' history of exploiting the more primitive Islamic cultures toward the end of Western regimes' foreign policy goal of "creating monsters to destroy" to justify the expansion of the national security (sic) state and all its tax-funded largess.
Another example, in 2017 Islamic State or ISIS claimed responsibility for the London stabbing attack that killed 8 and injured 48 people. According to British historian Mark Curtis, author of Secret Affairs: Britain's Collusion with Radical Islam, one of the 3 attackers had allegedly been "trained by U.K. and U.S. ‘liaison’ officers,” as part of a "covert" op in Libya, as other terrorists get trained to fight in Syria against the regimes the U.S. and U.K governments don't like. Western regimes train would-be terrorists, who then go on to commit acts of ... terrorism. And on and on.
So Western government bureaucrats, especially in the U.S. and U.K., have a history of radicalizing Muslims. As I wrote in this 2017 blog post,
In this article, Curtis states that the Manchester bombing was blowback from “overt and covert actions of British governments.” And Nafeez Ahmed in this article says that the “terrorists who rampaged across London on the night of 3 June were part of a wider extremist network closely monitored by MI5 for decades. The same network was heavily involved in recruiting Britons to fight with jihadist groups in Syria, Iraq and Libya.”
You see, this government bureaucrat-type of idiocy, attempting to manipulate and control hostile factions in society, seems to result in blowback.
Do bureaucrats never learn from their past mistakes? Or do "intelligence" and "national security" bureaucrats just like blowback?
Why would bureaucrats like blowback? Because of the bureaucrats' extravagant government budgets at taxpayer expense. As I have maintained especially in this article, the involuntary, confiscatory income tax is the biggest enabler of government criminality ever. Removing the involuntary income tax is an "existential threat" to said government "security" apparatchiks.
Other examples of murderous Western government actions that have resulted in catastrophic blowback include President George H.W. Bush's 1991 starting a whole new war of aggression against Iraq, even though Iraq was not a threat to the U.S.
In 1991 the U.S. military bombed and destroyed Iraqi civilian water and sewage treatment centers and then imposed sanctions on the Iraqis, which prevented the Iraqis from rebuilding, which forced the Iraqi civilian population to have to use untreated water, which led to skyrocketing disease and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents by the mid-1990s, and then hundreds of thousands more by the year 2000.
The September 11th attacks in 2001 were clearly blowback from the decade of violence, bombings and murders by U.S. military in Iraq and the U.S. government's other invasions, occupations and support of repressive regimes leading up to that time.
So, my question is, was the George H.W. Bush regime starting a whole new war in the Middle east in 1991 intentionally to cause the blowback of a 9/11 nature? Are bureaucrats that insane?
What do you think is going to happen when you bomb and destroy people's water supply and sewage treatment centers? (Which the Israelis are doing to Gaza right now, by the way.)
Another example of that insane motive could be that after 9/11, and after the younger President George W. Bush followed in his father's warmongering footsteps by starting another war of aggression in Iraq as well as a war in Afghanistan, during the mid-2000s the Bush administration helped Iraq and Afghanistan concoct new Constitutions.
Not a Constitution promoting freedom and individual rights, mind you. Nope. The new Iraq Constitution, still in place, declared Iraq to be an Islamic state under repressive Sharia Law. Why would the Bush administration agree to this?
The new Afghanistan Constitution was the same, although since 2021 Afghanistan now has no Constitution and an even more repressive society. Thanks, George W. Bush.
Prior to the 1990s, the U.S. government armed Iraq and helped Saddam Hussein gas Iranians during the 1980s Iran-Iraq War. (If only the rulers had listened to George Washington!)
Even further back, there were the hostilities between the U.S. and Iran. American "conservatives," foreign interventionists and neocons are still angry at Iran for taking Americans hostage in 1979 at the time of the Iranian Revolution, which itself was blowback for the CIA's supporting the Shah of Iran's repressive SAVAK police state and torture, which followed CIA's 1953 "Operation Ajax" coup in Iran (that was partly in the name of expropriating Iran's oil for the British).
The U.S.-backed SAVAK police state kept Iranians in fear of their own government, much like what many Americans fear now thanks to the gestapo-like tactics of the Obama/Biden DOJ and FBI in Amerika.
So, did U.S. government bureaucrats, CIA and Pentagon, intend to cause the radicalization of Islam believers in Iran during the 1950s, '60s and '70s?
Iranians living in such repressive conditions in society as imposed by the American CIA-supported SAVAK had to have been a major contributor to the radicalizing of Iranians' Islamic religion, from the 1950s coup leading up to the 1979 Iranian Islamic Revolution.
Since 1979 the Iranian opposition to the repressive Islamic regime, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MeK), during the earlier years following the 1979 Revolution had been involved in terrorist acts of assassinations and bombings, and was listed as an official terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department.
That is worth noting here, because U.S. government bureaucrats and their hangers-on had been caught giving paid speeches on behalf of the Iranian MeK, while the MeK was on the U.S. government's list of terrorist organizations.
Meanwhile, other people mainly non-involved Muslims had been imprisoned for the crime of providing "material support for terrorism," as Glenn Greenwald pointed out in 2012.
But some of the American statist lackeys who were supposedly "providing material support" for the officially designated terrorist organization MeK included, according to Greenwald, "Rudy Giuliani, Howard Dean, Michael Mukasey, Ed Rendell, Andy Card, Lee Hamilton, Tom Ridge, Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark, Michael Hayden, John Bolton, Louis Freeh -- and Fran Townsend," a bunch of neocons, interventionist apparatchiks and "national security" swamp creatures.
And get this. In his subsequent article on the red-faced U.S. government's 2012 de-listing of the MeK as an official terrorist organization, Greenwald notes,
What makes this effort all the more extraordinary are the reports that MEK has actually intensified its terrorist and other military activities over the last couple of years. In February, NBC News reported, citing US officials, that "deadly attacks on Iranian nuclear scientists are being carried out by [MEK]" as it is "financed, trained and armed by Israel's secret service". While the MEK denies involvement, the Iranian government has echoed these US officials in insisting that the group was responsible for those assassinations. NBC also cited "unconfirmed reports in the Israeli press and elsewhere that Israel and the MEK were involved in a Nov. 12 explosion that destroyed the Iranian missile research and development site at Bin Kaneh, 30 miles outside Tehran".
In April, the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh reported that the US itself has for years provided extensive training to MEK operatives, on US soil (in other words, the US government provided exactly the "material support" for a designated terror group which the law criminalizes).
In other words, your tax dollars at work, folks.
More info on the U.S. and Iranian MeK here.
And if the October 7th Hamas attack really was an intentional false flag from the blowback of Israel's "open air imprisonment" of Gazans for 15 years, it could also have been allowed as an excuse for the government to expand even further the police state, the surveillance state cracking down even more on speech and on "disinformation," and on people who question the government's official narratives or who criticize the regime. And I mean in the U.S. not just Israel.
Throughout the history of the West, the U.S., Israel, and other governments, false flag acts of violence have been planned and committed in order to blame the violence on others or effect in some desired central planning outcome.
Washington's Blog, which apparently no longer exists, had this very detailed list (Wayback Machine link) of the many false flag ops admitted to by governments and militaries. For instance,
The British government admits that – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews who were Holocaust survivors attempting to flee to safety in Palestine right after World War II, set up a fake group called “Defenders of Arab Palestine”, and then had the pseudo-group falsely claim responsibility for the bombings...
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)...
The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister...
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...
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”...[Washington's Blog further expands on this item with several more links.]
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...
A Mossad agent admits that, in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddafi’s compound in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist transmissions recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddafi as a terrorist supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter...
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...
Washington's Blog included many more false flag ops by many countries' governments on the long list there.
Israeli rulers allegedly seeking to expel the Arabs from their Jewish State is a possible motive for a false flag op. And possible motive by the Western central-planning regimes in keeping Gaza, Iran, Iraq and other Islamic-based cultures "oppressed," poor, primitive and repressive, and their populations angered and enraged at Western governments' manipulations and false flag ops, in my view, might be so that the U.S. and the West would continue to dominate economically and culturally, as well as for the greedy parasites in those governments to expropriate the oil and natural resources of those lands.
And to justify the continuation of the greedy Western government bureaucrats' extravagant tax-funded budgets and high-off-the-hog largess, of course.
Image: Anthony Freda Art
Scott Lazarowitz is a libertarian writer and commentator. Please visit his blog.
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on SoMee, Telegram, HIVE, Minds, MeWe, Twitter - X, Gab, and What Really Happened.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what's coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.
https://hive.blog/war/@activistpost/were-the-hamas-attacks-in-israel-a-false-flag
Arabic
French
Spanish
Portuguese
Deutsch
Turkish
Dutch
Italiano
Russian
Romaian
Portuguese (Brazil)
Greek