Is another 9/11 style false flag incoming?

[Charlesiii]

Although difficult to perceive, I believe the illegal war against Iran goes badly for the US and Israel (at least militarily). Trump consistently refers to the war as almost being over, or a great victory, or minimizes significant losses for the US and its apparent inability to protect its allies. I believe the majority of the American people do not support the illegal war, and voted for Trump in large part so as not to become embroiled in such conflicts.

On the home front, independent journalists are exposing the outright corruption of the US government in protecting the Epstein pedophiles and satanic deviants, cannibals and child abusers. This protection has not changed despite Trump's election.

Independent journalists such as Candace Owens are exposing the FBI coverup/sabotage of the investigation into Charlie Kirk's murder, and the high likelihood of government complicity in concealing international involvement in the public assassination of a political figure. This is made more suspicious with Kirk's public opposition to a war with Iran, and efforts post his death to hide his opposition to Netanyahu's policies.

Based on comments and the direction of accounts working closely with government, I am anticipating another 9/11 style mass casualty type event in the near future (before the end of the year, but maybe much sooner). I believe the lies being told about the war going well for the US will be used to blame Iran or one of its allies for such a terrorist attack (as why would Iran need to attack if it was defeating the US militarily?) Independent journalists such as Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson will likely be denounced as having "blood on their hands" for false allegations of "antisemitism", or stirring up dissatisfaction with the corruption and/or negligence of Western governments.

An example of a smaller scale attack where this strategy was used occurred on March 12, when Laura Loomer posted on X:

"Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens all have blood on their hands. This is what they have been pushing for with their rhetoric and attacks on Jews. I hope they are all held accountable."

"Everyone should ostracize them from society."

Laura accused the three of somehow being involved in a violent attack on an Israeli Synagogue.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2032154377213948118

While I believe Nick Fuentes is some sort of foreign or government asset to incite race-based rage, a 9/11 scale false flag attack and a simultaneous assault on independent journalists like Tucker and Candace would be fairly devastating to get Americans and the rest of the world to support yet another destructive war. I'd value opinions or evidence you have seen that indicates there may be such a plot underway.

 

[NightTwister]

False flag?

 

[Cameron143]

What makes the war illegal?

What are America's losses?

 

[Gideon300]

Although difficult to perceive, I believe the illegal war against Iran goes badly for the US and Israel (at least militarily). Trump consistently refers to the war as almost being over, or a great victory, or minimizes significant losses for the US and its apparent inability to protect its allies. I believe the majority of the American people do not support the illegal war, and voted for Trump in large part so as not to become embroiled in such conflicts.

On the home front, independent journalists are exposing the outright corruption of the US government in protecting the Epstein pedophiles and satanic deviants, cannibals and child abusers. This protection has not changed despite Trump's election.

Independent journalists such as Candace Owens are exposing the FBI coverup/sabotage of the investigation into Charlie Kirk's murder, and the high likelihood of government complicity in concealing international involvement in the public assassination of a political figure. This is made more suspicious with Kirk's public opposition to a war with Iran, and efforts post his death to hide his opposition to Netanyahu's policies.

Based on comments and the direction of accounts working closely with government, I am anticipating another 9/11 style mass casualty type event in the near future (before the end of the year, but maybe much sooner). I believe the lies being told about the war going well for the US will be used to blame Iran or one of its allies for such a terrorist attack (as why would Iran need to attack if it was defeating the US militarily?) Independent journalists such as Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson will likely be denounced as having "blood on their hands" for false allegations of "antisemitism", or stirring up dissatisfaction with the corruption and/or negligence of Western governments.

An example of a smaller scale attack where this strategy was used occurred on March 12, when Laura Loomer posted on X:

"Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens all have blood on their hands. This is what they have been pushing for with their rhetoric and attacks on Jews. I hope they are all held accountable."

"Everyone should ostracize them from society."

Laura accused the three of somehow being involved in a violent attack on an Israeli Synagogue.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2032154377213948118

While I believe Nick Fuentes is some sort of foreign or government asset to incite race-based rage, a 9/11 scale false flag attack and a simultaneous assault on independent journalists like Tucker and Candace would be fairly devastating to get Americans and the rest of the world to support yet another destructive war. I'd value opinions or evidence you have seen that indicates there may be such a plot underway.



View attachment 287076

Tucker Carlson is a liar and deceiver, whitewashing Muslim terrorism and blaming the Western world for the crimes of groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda.

 

[Gideon300]

Although difficult to perceive, I believe the illegal war against Iran goes badly for the US and Israel (at least militarily). Trump consistently refers to the war as almost being over, or a great victory, or minimizes significant losses for the US and its apparent inability to protect its allies. I believe the majority of the American people do not support the illegal war, and voted for Trump in large part so as not to become embroiled in such conflicts.

On the home front, independent journalists are exposing the outright corruption of the US government in protecting the Epstein pedophiles and satanic deviants, cannibals and child abusers. This protection has not changed despite Trump's election.

Independent journalists such as Candace Owens are exposing the FBI coverup/sabotage of the investigation into Charlie Kirk's murder, and the high likelihood of government complicity in concealing international involvement in the public assassination of a political figure. This is made more suspicious with Kirk's public opposition to a war with Iran, and efforts post his death to hide his opposition to Netanyahu's policies.

Based on comments and the direction of accounts working closely with government, I am anticipating another 9/11 style mass casualty type event in the near future (before the end of the year, but maybe much sooner). I believe the lies being told about the war going well for the US will be used to blame Iran or one of its allies for such a terrorist attack (as why would Iran need to attack if it was defeating the US militarily?) Independent journalists such as Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson will likely be denounced as having "blood on their hands" for false allegations of "antisemitism", or stirring up dissatisfaction with the corruption and/or negligence of Western governments.

An example of a smaller scale attack where this strategy was used occurred on March 12, when Laura Loomer posted on X:

"Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens all have blood on their hands. This is what they have been pushing for with their rhetoric and attacks on Jews. I hope they are all held accountable."

"Everyone should ostracize them from society."

Laura accused the three of somehow being involved in a violent attack on an Israeli Synagogue.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2032154377213948118

While I believe Nick Fuentes is some sort of foreign or government asset to incite race-based rage, a 9/11 scale false flag attack and a simultaneous assault on independent journalists like Tucker and Candace would be fairly devastating to get Americans and the rest of the world to support yet another destructive war. I'd value opinions or evidence you have seen that indicates there may be such a plot underway.



View attachment 287076

Carlson? Independent? He's owned by Islamists. Tucker Carlson is a liar and deceiver, whitewashing Muslim terrorism and blaming the Western world for the crimes of groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda.

 

[Charlesiii]

False flag?

false flag
/ˌfɔːls ˈflaɡ,ˌfɒls ˈflaɡ/
noun
noun: false flag; plural noun: false flags

1. 1.
   a flag flown to disguise the true identity or affiliation of a ship.
   "Captain Young hauled down his false flag, hoisted the American ensign, and opened fire"
   
   
2. 2.
   a political or military act orchestrated in such a way that it appears to have been carried out by a party that is not in fact responsible.

 

[Charlesiii]

What makes the war illegal?

Well, if you hold as I do, that Japan's sneak attack on Pearl Harbour was illegal, what makes this war any different?

What are America's losses?

$25B, right? So far... And none of the desired outcomes realised (yet).

 

[Charlesiii]

Carlson? Independent? He's owned by Islamists. Tucker Carlson is a liar and deceiver, whitewashing Muslim terrorism and blaming the Western world for the crimes of groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda.

I think you'll find he describes himself as Episcopalian. From your comments, will you be one of those looking to sacrifice free speech and truth at the altar of another war for Israel, by scapegoating those who speak the truth, like Tucker Carlson?

 

[Charlesiii]

The Federal government not investigating this one to find out how and what she knows about this shows it is not working in the interests of the people.

 

[Gideon300]

I think you'll find he describes himself as Episcopalian. From your comments, will you be one of those looking to sacrifice free speech and truth at the altar of another war for Israel, by scapegoating those who speak the truth, like Tucker Carlson?

Carlson has become a mouthpiece for radical Islam. I do not believe in silencing people. I do believe in exposing their lies and their biased propaganda. Episcopalian? He should come out and says that he has converted to Islam.

One example. He claims that the West produced Muslim terrorism. That's a lie. Islam was founded in lies, deception and terrorism. it dates back to the 7th century.

Terrorism is written into the Quran. I'm happy to see these pro Islam apologists speak out. They condemn themselves by their own words.

I don't know where you live, but I can tell you this: Islam is in the process of taking over the Western world. People of influence like Tucker Carlson are either deliberately supporting Islam or useful idiots to promote Islam.

 

[Charlesiii]

Carlson has become a mouthpiece for radical Islam. I do not believe in silencing people. I do believe in exposing their lies and their biased propaganda. Episcopalian? He should come out and says that he has converted to Islam.

Have you got more than just your say-so for this? I know this is the conspiracy forum, but it sounds like this theory needs its own thread!

One example. He claims that the West produced Muslim terrorism. That's a lie. Islam was founded in lies, deception and terrorism. it dates back to the 7th century.

Do you disagree that the West produced and produces Muslim terrorism? Isn't the example of Iran itself a great one? The West usurped Iran's rightful leadership because it was trying to steal Iran's oil decades ago, which effectively resulted in the installation of the Islamic regime that the West is now fighting against.

Terrorism is written into the Quran. I'm happy to see these pro Islam apologists speak out. They condemn themselves by their own words.

I'd argue terrorism is spoken against in the bible, yet some Christians support the genocide in Gaza and the illegal war in Iran. Even if terrorism is written into the Quran, the same argument can be made against Christians who misinterpret God's word to support their evil ways. What counts are a man's actions. Not all Muslims are terrorists, and some of those who claim to be Christians are terrorists.

I don't know where you live, but I can tell you this: Islam is in the process of taking over the Western world. People of influence like Tucker Carlson are either deliberately supporting Islam or useful idiots to promote Islam.

Islam has been deliberately introduced into the Western world to destabilise and control it (over a period of 50 or more years). To properly solve this problem, first we must hold to account those who pushed this agenda. Otherwise, we are just playing into a war that was designed by these agents.

 

[Gideon300]

Well, if you hold as I do, that Japan's sneak attack on Pearl Harbour was illegal, what makes this war any different?


$25B, right? So far... And none of the desired outcomes realised (yet).

The difference is that Iran declared war on America in 1979 and has never made peace. Iran occupied the American embassy for over a year. An embassy is the territory of the country it represents. 900 Americans have been killed by Iran and its contract militias (Hamas and Hezbollah). Iran was in the process of procuring nuclear weapons. Exactly how is not clear. They could have shipped 400 kg of enriched uranium to Pakistan or North Korea and had them make nukes out of it. Or they could have bought nukes from either nation.

Iran's Muslim regime should have been taken down decades ago. The world has sat on their hands and fretted while Iran built up a massive military.

You do realise that Islam has every intention of dominating the world? You do realise that Shia Islam believes that Israel must be destroyed before the Shia (false) "Messiah" can return? You do realise that if Iran can destroy Israel, America is next?

Europe's hand wringing leaders are desperate to avoid upsetting Muslims. They have allowed vast numbers of the followers of a mass murdering paedophile into their nations. And that is why they have refused to take a stand against Iran.

 

[Gideon300]

Have you got more than just your say-so for this? I know this is the conspiracy forum, but it sounds like this theory needs its own thread!


Do you disagree that the West produced and produces Muslim terrorism? Isn't the example of Iran itself a great one? The West usurped Iran's rightful leadership because it was trying to steal Iran's oil decades ago, which effectively resulted in the installation of the Islamic regime that the West is now fighting against.


I'd argue terrorism is spoken against in the bible, yet some Christians support the genocide in Gaza and the illegal war in Iran. Even if terrorism is written into the Quran, the same argument can be made against Christians who misinterpret God's word to support their evil ways. What counts are a man's actions. Not all Muslims are terrorists, and some of those who claim to be Christians are terrorists.


Islam has been deliberately introduced into the Western world to destabilise and control it (over a period of 50 or more years). To properly solve this problem, first we must hold to account those who pushed this agenda. Otherwise, we are just playing into a war that was designed by these agents.

Not all Muslims are terrorists, agree. Almost every terrorist is a Muslim. The Bible does not condone terrorism. The Quran mandates it.

 

[Cameron143]

Well, if you hold as I do, that Japan's sneak attack on Pearl Harbour was illegal, what makes this war any different?


$25B, right? So far... And none of the desired outcomes realised (yet).

War is war. There are war crimes, but I've never heard of war being called a crime.

Also, you are clearly purposely ignorant and don't know what military objectives are. You may not like what's happening, but the objectives and their accomplishment have been clearly delineated. And while there has been a fiscal cost, we may recoup much of it.

I think I will post later why what is happening is actually happening, and why it is necessary.

 

[Charlesiii]

The difference is that Iran declared war on America in 1979 and has never made peace. Iran occupied the American embassy for over a year. An embassy is the territory of the country it represents. 900 Americans have been killed by Iran and its contract militias (Hamas and Hezbollah). Iran was in the process of procuring nuclear weapons. Exactly how is not clear. They could have shipped 400 kg of enriched uranium to Pakistan or North Korea and had them make nukes out of it. Or they could have bought nukes from either nation.

As I understand, the US committed the first act of war by destabilising the Iranian government. In 1953, the CIA orchestrated the 1953 Iranian coup d'état to overthrow the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. "By planning, financing, and executing this coup, the U.S. eliminated a popular leader who had nationalized Iran's oil industry, ultimately reinstalling Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to ensure a pro-Western, anti-communist regime." None of the US criminals behind this coup were ever held to account, and ultimately, it resulted in the takeover of Iran by radical Muslims.

Iran's Muslim regime should have been taken down decades ago. The world has sat on their hands and fretted while Iran built up a massive military.

Agreed, but those trying to steal Iran's oil were the cause of this. Those types should be held to account first, or they'll just keep doing it in other countries (which is what has happened and is still happening).

You do realise that Islam has every intention of dominating the world? You do realise that Shia Islam believes that Israel must be destroyed before the Shia (false) "Messiah" can return? You do realise that if Iran can destroy Israel, America is next?

If that were true, Iran would have been trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Its fake news. Maybe true now, given the unprovoked attack and assassination of the Iranian religious leader who had banned nuclear weapons. World domination rather has been achieved by the US (actually CIA/Deepstate), who have destablised governments all over the world and installed their own sock-puppets. This is the reason these traitors (e.g. in Europe) are all importing Muslims.

Europe's hand wringing leaders are desperate to avoid upsetting Muslims. They have allowed vast numbers of the followers of a mass murdering paedophile into their nations. And that is why they have refused to take a stand against Iran.

In my view, Trump is also supporting paedophiles by not investigating the Epstein files. Perhaps he will be able to explain at his trial?

 

[Charlesiii]

Not all Muslims are terrorists, agree. Almost every terrorist is a Muslim. The Bible does not condone terrorism. The Quran mandates it.

Nope. There are plenty of terrorists who are not Muslims. We just don't tend to call them that.

"A terrorist is an individual or member of a group who uses violence, intimidation, and threats—particularly against civilians—to create extreme fear and achieve political, religious, or ideological goals. These acts are intended to coerce governments, international organizations, or the public."

Think covid. Lots of covid terrorists around, but the government generally smiled on those terrorists because it helped said governments maintain control. There are many other examples of terrorists, but they're just not labelled as such because they work for the government.

 

[NightTwister]

false flag
/ˌfɔːls ˈflaɡ,ˌfɒls ˈflaɡ/
noun
noun: false flag; plural noun: false flags

1. 1.
   a flag flown to disguise the true identity or affiliation of a ship.
   "Captain Young hauled down his false flag, hoisted the American ensign, and opened fire"
   
   
2. 2.
   a political or military act orchestrated in such a way that it appears to have been carried out by a party that is not in fact responsible.

So you think 9/11 was a false flag? Do you have any evidence of this?

 

[Charlesiii]

So you think 9/11 was a false flag? Do you have any evidence of this?

This thread assumes a minimal level of knowledge that 9/11 was a false flag.

If you don't acknowledge this fact, it's highly unlikely you will realise a false flag in planning before it happens (as we are currently seeing the evidence for).

 

[NightTwister]

This thread assumes a minimal level of knowledge that 9/11 was a false flag.

If you don't acknowledge this fact, it's highly unlikely you will realise a false flag in planning before it happens (as we are currently seeing the evidence for).

Assumptions are bad. There's no evidence that 9/11 was a false flag.

 

[Charlesiii]

War is war. There are war crimes, but I've never heard of war being called a crime.

A simple query yielded the below. So yeah, unless you think things like torture and murdering civilians is okay, there are war crimes. If you do think war crimes are okay, then you basically believe in might is right - which is also what Satanists believe.

• Use of force between states is governed by the UN Charter. An armed attack justifying self‑defense (Article 51) or Security Council authorization can make force lawful; otherwise an unconsented interstate use of force is generally unlawful (an act of aggression).
• "War crime" is a distinct category under international criminal law referring to serious violations of the laws and customs of war (e.g., willful killing of civilians, torture, intentionally directing attacks against civilians, using prohibited weapons). Those acts are prosecutable regardless of whether the overall use of force is lawful.
• So: initiating an unlawful war may amount to the crime of aggression for which political/military leaders can be held; specific conduct during a conflict can amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity, or other violations.
• Determination requires facts: the legal justification for the use of force, who ordered it, targets, civilian harm, proportionality, precautions, and whether Security Council authorization or self‑defense applied.
• Accountability routes: International Criminal Court (if jurisdiction exists), ad hoc tribunals, national courts (universal jurisdiction), and the UN Security Council for aggression.
• Protected status: Persons engaged in negotiations (e.g., delegates, envoys, ceasefire or surrender negotiators) are normally hors de combat or otherwise protected against attack while performing those protected functions. Intentionally attacking them can amount to a war crime (e.g., murder or willful killing of protected persons).
• Distinction and intent: IHL prohibits intentionally directing attacks against civilians and other protected persons. To be a war crime, the attack must be intentional or reckless and directed at protected persons or civilian objects, or carried out with knowledge that the target is protected.
• Perfidy/protected emblems: Attacks exploiting trust in negotiations (e.g., feigning intent to negotiate then attacking) may constitute perfidy, which is a war crime.

Also, you are clearly purposely ignorant and don't know what military objectives are. You may not like what's happening, but the objectives and their accomplishment have been clearly delineated. And while there has been a fiscal cost, we may recoup much of it.

I'm ignorant, or Trump is ignorant? Because Trump is the one who keeps redefining what the objectives were/are.