Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion
This topic is about
The Orphan Conspiracies
FALSE FLAG OPERATIONS
>
Nazis framing communists -- The 1933 Reichstag (False Flag) terror attack and its potential modern parallels
date
newest »
newest »
The McCarthy era comes to mind.
Mikhayla wrote: "The McCarthy era comes to mind."Definitely, Mikhayla.
This article, by author Bob Mayer, references the Nazi's false flag at the Reichstag, and also shows how the Russians under Putin are and continue to use false flag terror attacks...Why We Need To Fear A “Reichstag Fire” also known as a “false flag attack.” https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
Beware a Trump Reichstag Fire http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-...“I alone can fix it.”
- Donald Trump, July 2016
An attack used as a pretext to declare a state of emergency and declare martial law is the oldest trick in the book for would-be dictators. You can be sure if something happens Trump will pull that trick as well. It perfectly fits his MO.
I have a book recommendation that is relevant for this thread. On Tyranny https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
Peter wrote: "An attack used as a pretext to declare a state of emergency and declare martial law is the oldest trick in the book for would-be dictators. You can be sure if something happens Trump will pull that trick as well. It perfectly fits his MO...."I really hope you're wrong, Peter, for the sake of the US and the entire planet...However, I must admit extreme tactics to gain more control and power do seem to fit Trump's character.
Historians find 'proof' that Nazis burnt Reichstag http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...THE first documentary evidence has emerged to support the view that the Nazis started the 1933 Reichstag fire that Hitler used as a pretext to establish a dictatorship.
Reichstag Fire, 1933 and other Nazi False Flag Operations https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUL5v...
How To Deal with Reichstag Fire Fears in the Age of Trump https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-deal-...
I don't think there's any doubt the Nazis stated the fire. As for blaming someone else, this is straight out of Nero's handbook of allocating blame (and in Nero's case, he almost certainly did not start the fire - he was in Antium at the time, and his subsequent behaviour was, for once, exemplary).. Nero was under fire from the senators, much the same as Trump is now, so he needed a false flag, and since Romans had executed their Cristus, it seemed reasonable to blame them. At least the Nazis did not blame the Jews, although I suppose the communists were a more pressing problem.
The 1933 Reichstag terror attack…A Nazi false flag attack"There is enough evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that it was the Nazis who planned the arson and carried it out for their own political ends." -Shirer, William (2011). The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany. Simon and Schuster. p. 192.
Sunday Telegraph: Historians find proof that Nazis burnt Reichstag http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world...
Conspiracy FACT #12: The Reichstag terror attack…A Nazi false flag https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlA1g...
In defense of Trump, unlike Obama and Hilldebeast Clinton (two criminal frauds of the first order), I do not think he would allow Americans to be killed given the same warnings, then create a "false flag" story ignoring their own ignorance, incompetence and intellectual bankruptcy, to cover their asses just to win an upcoming election.
Agent Provocateurs are used often to shut down the opposition at protests quite often. The Reichstag fire is merely the use of a provocateur writ large.
That great paragon of liberal Democratic virtue, Lyndon B. Johnson had his Gulf of Tonkin Resolution predicated upon a fraudulent after action report, in order to draw the US deeper into Vietnam. The arms industries really won out on that one. The great irony is that he never needed to do that due to the existing SEATO agreement.Another great Democrat (and ardent racist and anti-Semite) Woodrow Wilson used several factor to get the US into WW I, due to his political friends being large business owners, such as the Rockefellers, Vanderbilts being worried that there vast European investments would evaporate if there were a Central Powers victory and occupation of those nations whose banks held their money and investments. The Lusitania occurred in May 1915, but it took Wilson two more years to use that and the Zimmerman Telegram as a pretext for going to war. Amazing.
Historically speaking, the liberal Dems seem to ignore or are totally ignorant of history. With exception to George Bush responding to Manuel Noriega's thugs in Panama, and then getting the UN to launch the 1991 Gulf War (the first UN sanctioned/participated war since Korea 1950-53), and Bush 43 responding to terror attacks (no war declared against a foreign nation, but against terrorist organizations, hence no congressional resolution required), every single overseas war we have been thrown into with congressional support since the Spanish American War has occurred with a Democrat in the White House.
Reagan gets a pass on Grenada and Beirut, they were not wars but rescue and peacekeeping missions respectively.
Now, let's see what the new revisionist historians have to say about that. FYI I am not a republican, but I am a professional historian for former professor.
Colin, I thought GWB more or less launched the second Gulf war to oust Saddam. Or are you saying the Dems get Congressional approval?
Colin claims he is not a Republican and was a "former professor" but he sounds like a winger to me. Surprised he didn't call someone a "libtard"
GWB started Operation Desert Shield at the request of the Kuwaiti government which had been invaded and occupied, and the Saudis also echoed their desire for assistance, seeing the growing threat of Saddam Hussein. While in the military I spent 4 years in the Pentagon and Crystal City in the intel business and was involved in the planning from 1990-91 in particular, coordinating with Sec Def and the JCS under General Powell.
In answering Peter I am not a republican, I am a registered independent libertarian type, as I feel that strict party politics is detrimental to proper governance. Spending several years in DC with political types, the shine rubbed all the way off, and I do not trust any of them. I have seen up close and personal the failures of both parties.
Colin, as I understand it, it was GHB who started Desert Shield around 1991. GWB started "Enduring Freedom" I think he called it in this Millennium. There were two Bushes, and both had a go at Iraq.
Ian wrote: "There were two Bushes, and both had a go at Iraq. ."At any cost...
Bush the Ist was asked to help along with the UN aftre the Iraqi invasion. Bush 2nd inherited the intel files on Saddam's chemical weapons stockpile (I was also there) and after years of evidence that he used them against the Iranians in the 1980's and even on his own people in the Kurdish north. Saddam kicked out the UN inspectors under Hans Blix after they located and destroyed a lot of the stored munitions the Bush 2nd plan was to move in, locate and destroy the WMD supplies that may still exist. Unfortunately, after Blix was kicked out in 1996, Saddam had a few years to ship much of his supply to Syria. British intel had photos and video of the trucks moving into Syria which they shared but Clinton did nothing. This is how Syria was able to use gas in the last few years against their internal enemies.
Bush 2nd's plan was less than perfect, but unlike Clinton, he wanted to do something, in case Saddam sold them on the open terrorist market, and he needed not only hard currency due to embargoes on his oil, he needed to appease his own military who did not want another war.
Remember the Saudis and Iran were demanding confirmation that Iraq was no longer a threat, as Iran fought a 9 year war against Saddam. The Kurds were also wanting that assurance, given their experiences under Saddam's cousin "Chemical Ali" and Iraq's continued violations of the No Fly Zones (again a Clinton UN failure to enforce)
Like it was written from the Pentagon's public relations department! :)
James, the original version probably was! I had an indirect contact with a WMD inspector who was removed from Iraq just prior to Bush 2, and he was positive there were no WMD in Iraq, and that Bush 2 should have known. Of course WMD may well have been shipped to Syria as Colin suggests. Basically, Saddam was an idiot, but Bush 2 hardly shone by going in there with insufficient troops and policy to manage the subsequent occupation.
Ian wrote: "James, the original version probably was! I had an indirect contact with a WMD inspector who was removed from Iraq just prior to Bush 2, and he was positive there were no WMD in Iraq, and that Bush..."When warmongers like the Bush clan want wars, they usually get them, Ian.
I do not defend Bush II's actions, but given his level of probable paranoia, I can understand his actions. All the intel I was privy too suggested that Saddam would have been overthrown by his own people in very short time, and he would have been removed even sooner if Clinton had enforced the 1991 Ceasefire Agreement. The Bush invasion simply galvanized the population to defend their country more than out of any loyalty to Saddam.
Underground Knowledge — A discussion group
Books mentioned in this topic
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany (other topics)The Orphan Conspiracies: 29 Conspiracy Theories from The Orphan Trilogy (other topics)
Burning the Reichstag: An Investigation into the Third Reich's Enduring Mystery (other topics)
Another fire was responsible for one of many Nazi false flag operations.
In 1933, the Reichstag, the seat of the German parliament, was set ablaze. Adolf Hitler immediately stated he had evidence that communist terrorists started the fire. Most Germans readily accepted that – influenced no doubt by the month-long, Nazi-sponsored street violence that preceded the fire. The violence achieved its aim of creating a Red Scare, or a fear of communists, within the general populace.
The following day, Hitler and his party persuaded the elderly and senile President von Hindenburg to sign the Reichstag Decree. The decree, which was supposedly a defence against future terrorist acts, suspended almost every major civil liberty afforded German citizens at that time.
Despite the Nazi party’s attempt to blame the fire on a group of communists, the communists were later acquitted by the German government itself.
Most historians agree that members of the Nazi Party were responsible for the fire in the Reichstag. The Hitlerites did this in stealth of course, using one Marinus van der Lubbe, a mentally disturbed arsonist hungry for fame, as their patsy. They’d received a tip-off that van der Lubbe planned to burn the building down. Not only did the Nazis let him do it, they encouraged him and even helped by leaving gasoline in parts of the building.
“All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed.” –Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf