Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
illuminated

false-flag operation

286 posts in this topic

first of all this will show how deceitful the government is and was

operation northwoods is a plan for the government to attack its own cities to justify a invasion of cuba

but because of kennedy it did not happen

doesnt this sound familiar kind of like 9/11 right?

wiki for operation northwoods

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

other information

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/northwoods.html?q=northwoods.html

i think its obvious that 9/11 wasnt a terrorist attack and that it was more for the land and the riches that land has i.e. the oil.

youtube video

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i know ... sadly this is nothing new :(

They do this all the time... make false-flag operations so they can have excuses for their actions (key word is excuses) and take a moral high-ground later on...

for example - "We were defending our country", "We were enforcing democracy", "We were defending human rights"

They are singling out individuals to take the blame (called scapegoating) and so on (example - Lee Harvey Oswald)

This is an old technique... during WW2 Hitler ordered to burn the Reichstag building and accused the communists

They let the japanese attack Pearl Harbor (they knew its gonna happen), so they can have an excuse for an offensive, the use of A-bomb etc.

They orchestrated 9/11, so they can have an excuse for their presence in Pakistan etc ("We are just looking for Osama Bin Laden", "We must fight terror")

They accused Sadam of WMD, so they can have an excuse for their presence in Iraq (oil)

They are fighting the taliban in Afganistan (opium)

They are enforcing democracy in Kosovo (strategic location)

...

and so on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See my signature for a copy of the original Operation Northwoods document from the George Washington University National Security Archive. I think this is one of the most important pieces of information in understanding that false flag terrorism can be very real… even in the United States.

What if Bush had been president rather than Kennedy in 1962?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See my signature for a copy of the original Operation Northwoods document from the George Washington University National Security Archive. I think this is one of the most important pieces of information in understanding that false flag terrorism can be very real… even in the United States.

What if Bush had been president rather than Kennedy in 1962?

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happened, you can bet it was planned that way." - Franklin D. Roosevelt

I can't believe I quoted FDR, but his quote is as true today as it was then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Afghanistan has treasures way beyond the poppy fields. If they knew this then it is self explanatory why it became such a target. Perhaps Iraq was primarily a stategic target and the oil and removal of Saddam was a bonus.

False flags are an ingenius way of getting what you want. Hardly ethical but when you have all the money and resources you can redefine ethics.

http://www.kold.com/global/story.asp?s=12645196

I've even heard that the Gunpowder plot was a false flag mission and that some of Bushs' ancestors had an active role in it.

Even now, few understand that plot: Guy was no fox but a dupe ensnared by the chief minister himself in a madcap scheme to blow up King and Parliament. The real plot was royally successful: to invent a pretext for war with Spain. This fraud was the foundation of the British empire.

In 1898, the American century was ushered in by a similar anti-Spanish hoax: the bombing of the USS Maine in Havana harbor. And on 9/11/2001, plotters embedded in the US government, working on a Project for a New American Century, faked the pretext for a Clash of Civilizations - and a neo-fascist world order.

http://www.waronfreedom.org/peaceweek/guyfaux.html

Edited by SlimJim22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Afghanistan has treasures way beyond the poppy fields.

http://www.kold.com/global/story.asp?s=12645196

One trillion US dollars in minerals to be precise ... a thousand billion - 1.000 x 1.000.000.000 ... :o mind blowing

Copper, gold, iron and cobalt for starters ... just look below

14minerals-graphic-popup.jpg

Hahaha i see now why the russians were so eager to get into Afganistan during the 80s ... and now the US

And lets not forget that 93% of the opiates (heroin, opium, morphine) comes from Afghanistan !

More land is now used for opium in Afghanistan, than for coca cultivation in Latin America !

Perhaps Iraq was primarily a stategic target, and the oil and removal of Saddam was a bonus.

Yeah many reasons... and lets not forget Sumerian secrets ;)

US forces maintain military bases on ancient Sumerian ruins ... including "Camp Alpha" where Babylon city ("Gateway of the gods") used to be

coincidence? ;)

False flags are an ingenius way of getting what you want.

Hardly ethical but when you have all the money and resources you can redefine ethics.

nicely put :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny, only a few years ago people would have laughed this off. Seems opinion has shifted quit a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah... opinions shift because what we know evolves

Edited by SolarPlexus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny, only a few years ago people would have laughed this off. Seems opinion has shifted quit a bit.

Yeah, I also have noticed a shift in opinion. Hate to think where thats going........ :hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I also have noticed a shift in opinion. Hate to think where thats going........ :hmm:

I hate to be a pessimist but the crap we know as lies proving true points to a ummm a pessimistic future and that's no bull. Things are out of control and very few will profit. I see it and it scares me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always found it interesting that this was ever declassified. I'd expect it to have been destroyed immediately for "National Security" reasons. AND no debunkers on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always found it interesting that this was ever declassified. I'd expect it to have been destroyed immediately for "National Security" reasons. AND no debunkers on this?

It's a good point. I can only think that even where conspiracies are concerned there is a code of conduct prohibiting such a thing. Then there is the question of how big a paper trail for such a thing exists. Also, if you're inclined to believe conspiracies you will believe more than one. Perhaps they need to give us enough genuine stuff to keep us satisfied and from looking under more rocks. Infighting and rival factions is the only other reason I can think of. As black ops have developed the secrecy aspect may have become more sophisticated or subtle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always found it interesting that this was ever declassified. I'd expect it to have been destroyed immediately for "National Security" reasons. AND no debunkers on this?

What's to debunk? There's no doubt it's real. It's a real operation conjured up by a high ranking military officer over 40 years ago that never happened. Sometimes members of the government think up crazy stuff that never sees the light of day because cooler heads and common sense prevails.

But say Operation Northwoods is definitive evidence that the government could have carried out 9/11. Please tell me how they did it. I open that question up to any "truther" here. How did the government pull off 9/11? Give me details of what happened and how it happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think its obvious that 9/11 wasnt a terrorist attack and that it was more for the land and the riches that land has i.e. the oil.

Can't wait until we start taking all that crazy Iraqi oil!

You realize we've been over there for 9 years and we haven't taken any oil yet, right? Now we have plans to pull out. So when will this hostile take over of the oil fields take place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait until we start taking all that crazy Iraqi oil!

You realize we've been over there for 9 years and we haven't taken any oil yet, right? Now we have plans to pull out. So when will this hostile take over of the oil fields take place?

Yea they did they sent halliburton over there.You dont remember the truck drivers dying/geting blown up and getting taken hostage.I knew a dude that went to iraq.A truck driver.

Edited by Chuck87

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea they did they sent halliburton over there.You dont remember the truck drivers dying/geting blown up and getting taken hostage.I knew a dude that went to iraq.A truck driver.

Okay.

This is supposed to be evidence that we've taken possession of Iraq's oil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay.

This is supposed to be evidence that we've taken possession of Iraq's oil?

Yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes

Ah.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay.

This is supposed to be evidence that we've taken possession of Iraq's oil?

Who is in control of Iraqi oil is a better question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't wait until we start taking all that crazy Iraqi oil!

You realize we've been over there for 9 years and we haven't taken any oil yet, right?

Haha, what??

U.S. checking possibility of pumping oil from northern Iraq to Haifa

The United States has asked Israel to check the possibility of pumping oil from Iraq to the oil refineries in Haifa. The request came in a telegram last week from a senior Pentagon official to a top Foreign Ministry official in Jerusalem.

The Prime Minister's Office, which views the pipeline to Haifa as a "bonus" the U.S. could give to Israel in return for its unequivocal support for the American-led campaign in Iraq, had asked the Americans for the official telegram.

Texas oil industry set to profit from Iraq war

The Texas oil industry will be a big winner of a quick end to the regime of Saddam Hussein, industry observers agree.

"Texas is probably in the best position of any area, probably in the world, that can benefit from this," said Mark Baxter, director of the Maguire Energy Institute

Billions in Oil Missing in Iraq

Between 100,000 and 300,000 barrels a day of Iraq’s declared oil production over the past four years is unaccounted for and could have been siphoned off through corruption or smuggling, according to a draft American government report.

Missing Oil in Iraq Undercuts Progress

Government report finds 300,000 barrels go missing each day.

Halliburton

Halliburton is the world's second largest oilfield services corporation.

In the early 1990s Halliburton was found to be in violation of federal trade barriers in Iraq and Libya, having sold these countries dual-use oil drilling equipment and, through its former subsidiary, Halliburton Logging Services, sending six pulse neutron generators to Libya.

After having pleaded guilty, the company was fined $1.2 million, with another $2.61 million in penalties

Bunnatine Greenhouse, a civil servant with 20 years of contracting experience, had complained to Army officials on numerous occasions that Halliburton had been unlawfully receiving special treatment for work in Iraq, Kuwait and the Balkans. Criminal investigations were opened by the U.S. Justice Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Pentagon's inspector general.

Halliburton is the only company mentioned by Osama bin Laden in an April 2004 tape in which he claims that "this is a war [in Afghanistan] that is benefiting major companies with billions of dollars."

... and there's many more where that came from. Please check first, before you make claims ok :)

Who is in control of Iraqi oil is a better question.

Yup, that IS the question!

Cheney's Halliburton Ties Remain

Democrats pointed out that Cheney receives deferred compensation from Halliburton under an arrangement he made in 1998, and also retains stock options.
The Halliburton company has become the object of several controversies involving the 2003 Iraq War and the company's ties to Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney.

Cheney retired from the company during the 2000 U.S. presidential election campaign with a severance package worth $36 million.

[40] As of 2004, he had received $398,548 in deferred compensation from Halliburton while Vice President.[41]

Cheney was chairman and CEO of Halliburton Company from 1995 to 2000 and has received stock options from Halliburton.[42]

Edited by SolarPlexus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm nice post, SolarPlexus. I think that as well as the possibility of simply siphoning off Iraq’s oil, it should also be considered that controlling the flow, securing contracts for the big oil companies and enabling them to have some control over prices are all important in global affairs. Of course U.S. interventions in the Middle East are primarily about oil.

AND no debunkers on this?

I was thinking the same thing. As there have been no Operation Northwoods ‘debunkers’ on this thread, I will just clear up a few of the misconceptions that are commonly held: -

  • Incorrect: Operation Northwoods did not include causing casualties. As well as conducting funerals for mock-victims and fabricating newspaper reports of non-existent casualties, consideration was also given to sinking a boat load of real passengers, blowing up ammunition, starting fires and lobbing mortar shells in military bases and exploding plastic bombs in U.S. cities. These type of events would obviously bring a high risk of casualties.
  • Incorrect: the author of Operation Northwoods was fired for submitting the plan. Lyman Lemnitzer remained as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for over 6 months after the presentation of Northwoods and then transferred to the position of Supreme Allied Commander of NATO (a position formerly held by Dwight Eisenhower). Until his retirement some 7 years later in 1969, Lemnitzer continued to serve at the highest level of the U.S. military as a 4-star General.
  • Incorrect: an Operation Northwoods type plan would never be implemented. The operation was planned at the highest levels of the U.S. military and apparently only rejected at the final stage of approval when it reached President Kennedy’s desk. Unfortunately, it is not possible to confirm that every U.S. President before and since would hold the same approach as Kennedy. If a character more in tune with Lemnitzer were acting as President, the plan could well have gone into action.

But say Operation Northwoods is definitive evidence that the government could have carried out 9/11. Please tell me how they did it. I open that question up to any "truther" here. How did the government pull off 9/11? Give me details of what happened and how it happened.

Sorry TK but this is rather typical of denialists.

You give one piece of the larger information which decisively demonstrates one point and they expect it to explain the complete ins and outs of a whole theory. When this doesn’t happen they then discard that information and move back to first base. Instead of considering all of the individual facts together in one overwhelming case, they want every single piece of individual information to be the smoking gun not requiring of further thought. This approach is inefficient and the reason some people will never grasp that 9/11 was a false flag attack.

At the widest interpretation, Operation Northwoods proves that high level elements of the U.S. government would plan and be prepared to implement a false flag attack. It is necessary to take that one fact and add it to the next and the next and the next, until eventually the bigger picture appears for which there is no denying. You cannot read into one piece of information at a time in isolation and expect it to explain everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's to debunk? There's no doubt it's real. It's a real operation conjured up by a high ranking military officer over 40 years ago that never happened. Sometimes members of the government think up crazy stuff that never sees the light of day because cooler heads and common sense prevails.

It only needed one more person to sign off on it, Kennedy... and we know how his presidency turned out......

Can't wait until we start taking all that crazy Iraqi oil!

You realize we've been over there for 9 years and we haven't taken any oil yet, right? Now we have plans to pull out. So when will this hostile take over of the oil fields take place?

Go read the PNAC document Rebuilding America's Defenses. It will slam dunk any question you have about the advantage of a US military presence in the ME, even specifically Iraq. As well, supply is only 50% of the oil equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first two articles pertain to Halliburton, and Cheney's ties to it, when Halliburton "won" all those government contracts to rebuild Iraq's oil industry. They have nothing at all to do with the US stealing oil from Iraq.

John Gerdes, senior vice president and director of energy research at Dallas-based Southwest Securities Inc., said Texas oil and gas companies are already lining up for hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts to put out Iraqi oil well fires and rebuild the country's oil industry.

Also, these articles are 7+ years old.

The next two articles are 3+ years old and they speak of missing oil. The NYT article says:

The report does not give a final conclusion on what happened to the missing fraction of the roughly two million barrels pumped by Iraq each day, but the findings are sure to reinforce longstanding suspicions that smugglers, insurgents and corrupt officials control significant parts of the country’s oil industry.

The report also covered alternative explanations for the billions of dollars worth of discrepancies, including the possibility that Iraq has been consistently overstating its oil production.

The lower numbers are either due to people within the region stealing it, or Iraq had been misrepresenting how much oil it was capable of producing in the past.

OR:

Some Iraqi officials are downplaying the situation, saying that not all the oil is going missing, but that over enthusiastic oil officials are inflating production figures to show reconstruction progress in Iraq.

They were intentionally misrepresenting the numbers to make it look like the US job was finished.

Nowhere in any of these articles do they even hint that the US is stealing the oil. And why not? According to truthers, we staged a false flag attack on our own country to go over to Iraq and take their oil and make it our own. Shouldn't that have obviously happened by now? We rebuilt Iraq's oil industry, so why didn't we go in with force and just take it over while we were at it? Why would a country hell-bent on taking over a country's oil production just hand that country the keys to a shiny new oil industry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It only needed one more person to sign off on it, Kennedy... and we know how his presidency turned out......

Are you suggesting Kennedy was assassinated because he nixed Operation Northwoods? That's a new one to me. I'd like to hear more evidence of this.

Go read the PNAC document Rebuilding America's Defenses. It will slam dunk any question you have about the advantage of a US military presence in the ME, even specifically Iraq.

1. I have read Rebuilding America's Defenses, and it talks about the transformation to take place over a long period of time, absent a catastrophe like a new Pearl Harbor. The transformation it speaks of is the advancement of information technologies into the military. What does 9/11 have to do with the advancement of information technologies?

2. If this was part of some grand conspiracy to attack it's own country, why in God's name would the US government allow it to be published on the internet? Same with Operation Northwoods. Why can we look these items up today (why are they declassified) if they implicate the US government in 9/11?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.