We've all heard the term false flag, and it seems that people use it far more freely now. But is there a new element to these stories, or is the prevalence of false flag accusations just making it seem like such incidents are solely in the realm of the conspiracy theorist?
The more we hear about false flags, the less we tend to believe that they're taking place. We have shock jocks calling almost every terrorist incident some kind of cover-up; we have the Twitter mob reacting to every shooting, every international or foreign policy decision as if it were a staged event to seize power. And here's the problem: False flags do happen, and they are happening more and more, but because of the deluge of accusations, the majority of the public now just cast such claims aside with little thought.
Let's consider the Russia collusion story and examine it through the false flag lens. To do this, we need to look at several aspects.
First, what are false flags and what factors indicate that something untoward is happening? Second, can we demonstrate that these factors have been used in the past as a verifiable false flag? Third, do governments actually engage in false flag operations? And, fourth, do these factors apply to the Russiagate story?
Let's start by looking at where the term false flag came from. It's deeply entwined with another term in common use: true colors. Many years ago, ships used their flags to signal what country they represented and what kind of ship they were -- navy vessel, trading ship, that kind of thing. Upon seeing another vessel’s flags, a captain could decide if this was likely to be a friendly encounter or better to turn sails and flee. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this system of trust was abused.
Looters, pirates, and sometimes even navy ships would hoist a "false flag" to allow them to get nearer to a vessel they intended to harm, lulling their prey into a false sense of security. But here's something strange: In almost every recorded case, at the last moment, the attacking ship would lower its false flag and raise its true colors before entering the fray. It seems strange that pirates and brigands had a sense of honor to show their true colors in advance, but they did. Clearly, something has evolved since those times.
If the Russia collusion story really is a false flag operation, it is the modern kind, where no true colors are raised as a matter of honor.
So what makes a situation a false flag? It's certainly not just secret action. In fact, historian Richard Dolan, a UFOlogist and Cold War researcher, has put together seven points to identify a false flag. He points out that not all the elements are necessary, but a genuine false flag would contain at least some of these factors.
As Dolan says, false flags are just a form of propaganda, a language of deception to persuade people toward a particular position. Perhaps in the Russia collusion story, this position would be that Donald Trump was actively aided by the Russians to steal the presidency.
What used to be called PSYOPS has now been rebranded Military Information Support Operations, or MISO, which in government parlance is described: "Planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals in a manner favorable to the originator's objectives."
One such confirmed false flag was carried out by the U.S. government in Operation Mockingbird, which allegedly is now finished. In the 1940s through the 1970s, CIA agents and assets were embedded in the mainstream media to work as journalists, broadcasters, etc., but in the process would answer to the Intelligence Community, helping to spin the news to suit the purposes of the project coordinator. The United States was not alone in this type of operation. The British MI5 security services also did something similar with the BBC, through whom they vetted thousands of people to keep out subversive elements.
In 1954, the government prepared a policy statement that specifically highlighted how it worked in PSYOPS, giving three level indicators, white, gray, and black -- black being a pure false flag perpetrated on the U.S. citizens.
This is still in use today.
But what elements contribute to a genuine false flag? What should we be looking out for?
Dolan suggests the following:
A spectacular, emotional event
Instant media saturation
Case is quickly closed
A scapegoat is identified
Decisive and negative government action
Important anomalies and questions
Outcome, who benefits
As mentioned before, not all of these need to be in place, just most of them.
Let's take measure the Russia story and the subsequent Robert Mueller investigation against these seven factors. Was the story a spectacular emotional event? Well, certainly. Fire and the fury exploded over the reported fact that a U.S. president was controlled by or in hock to the Russians and was now sitting in the White House thanks to nefarious actions -- this is pretty emotional. Point two: It received media saturation almost from day one. Every network ran stories, many times a day, on this, telling us that the presidency had been hijacked by bad-faith Russian actors, leading to point three, the case was immediately closed in the eyes of the media and politicos -- no brooking of dissent among the broadcasters.
The fourth point, about the scapegoat, is a little harder to nail down. Certainly, Trump was the enemy in this tale, but so, too, were the Russians. By association, all those millions of people who voted for Trump were easily suckered because of their bigotry and racism, according to many news purveyors.
Point five, about the decisive and negative government action, describes the Mueller investigation. It dragged out for more than two years and left the nation believing that Russia collusion allowed unwarranted calls for impeachment to divide the country on the world stage.
The anomalies and questions are pretty clear. Why did Mueller not look into the source of the dodgy dossier? Why no mention that Fusion GPS was hired by the Clinton campaign? Mueller's refusal to state whether he spoke to two of the biggest characters in this play, Joseph Mifsud and Christopher Steele, about their involvement, with plenty of unanswered and perhaps unasked questions.
And finally, who benefits, the outcome? If, in the eyes of America, the president is guilty, the Democrats won a sizable victory.
A serious researcher, Dolan claims most false flags won't include ALL the elements he outlines, but in this case, it seems plain that each one was hit, and hit hard.
Has America witnessed one of the biggest false flag operations of all time? And, more importantly, we have to ask ourselves if it worked. Or is it still in play?
~
Read more from Mark Angelides.
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
