-1 vote

Reverse false flag?

Is this possible? Not trying to incite violence but I am interested in a debate into this even being possible.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


That is the weapon of choice in an oppressive economy.
Jubilee is the real answer, but for some reason the notion of debt forgiveness for all makes people go spastic.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Here's a reverse false flag scenario...

Lift a federal restriction on something like, oh, taking knives on planes.

Put out opinion polls that say people think it will make flyers unsafe.

Use operant conditioning and torture to make hate young women and children. Now dope him up put him on a flight with some kiddie club and a sack of knives.

Allow public outcry over how this just proves that all the pro-knife people are lunatic domestic terrorists.

Pandacentricism will be our downfall.

Are you retarded? You think

Are you retarded? You think libertarian repubs are the only people who read this forum?

Do you know how many government agents troll this site every day just waiting for dumb-ass treads like this so they can plaster it all over the state controlled media and make us look like domestic terrorists?

Right now, some beuracrat is using this insipid post to decide if its a good enough sell to justified drone missiling one of our houses. Have you heard of a thing called the non aggression principal genius? Hint: it's what we are fighting for. The moment some idiot starts shooting these bankster nazi scum-bags, they have exactly what they want. We become "terrorists" and they become "peacekeepers."

We win this through intellectual and political revolution or we don't win period. If you think your going to win militarily, you have a sad wake-up coming. If it comes to a bloody revolt, we all loose, even if we win. You think these control freak NWO nazis won't deploy Neutron bombs, nukes, starvation, mass drone strikes and everything else in their fucked up arsenal to keep their elitest heads out of the noose? You think the dumb fucking troops won't follow their orders like mindless thugs and then blubber about how sorry they are "after" they blow your children to chunks before feeding themselves a bullet? Even if we started to win, they'd go into their underground bunkers and turn the Earth into Venus. Even if we did drag the banksters out and hang them in the end, can you imagine the cost? Millions and millions of people will die, including people you love if this revolution goes hot, so you damn well better keep that in mind before you start giving these central bankers an excuse to start it.

Become a PCO, take over you precinct, then your district then your state. Get you and your pals into every lower electable position until you run them all out and remove their power base.

Dude im not advocating this

Dude im not advocating this AT ALL WHATSOEVER! I was simply just interested in the debate how and even if its possible knowing that the state can pull of false flags because they have this 'right' to watch over us and how the act of violence against initiates the furthering of tyranny, and reverserly if it were to happen to some patriots what the reaction would be then? Or even if the government actually did kill god forbid some patriots or veterans or something and spark a revolution idk I was just simply interested in the topic as a a philosophical question..NVM jeeez..

What is a "False Flag," really?

I guess it depends what you mean here. There would be clear and obvious moral implications with killing someone or a group of someones and then blaming it on someone else. Moreover, the opposition's resources are extensive, our movement is young and foolish, and the possibility of such a thing being discovered would be rather large.

Maybe you just mean some event though - not necessarily murder. In that case, I can't say I'd be entirely opposed. At the end of the day hundreds of people will be dead because of the U.S. government, so a little lying and cheating is honestly fine and necessary. Just like, sometimes (not nearly as often as it happens), war is necessary.

But my thing with all of this is, the government is obviously responsible for a ton of horrific acts, why bother inventing a new one? Not to mention this already demonstrates that people don't care. The government holds the power, they get the "auto-trust" of the average citizen, so it's a lot easier for them to say something that isn't true and just have it be believed. As you can see, being believed even when telling the truth is a very uphill battle on this side of the table.

So I guess it boils down to, well, what did you have in mind? But if you're serious, you probably shouldn't answer that here. Then again, if you were serious, you shouldn't have posted this to begin with.

This would only...

This would only bring us down to their level and make us no better than they are and we are better them. Find a better strategy and maintain your integrity.


I agree with this

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

Yes an opposite false flag

Yes an opposite false flag like a group of people bombing like a group of veterans at a rally and blame it on the government or something to spark a revolution towards liberty, not towards tyranny.

um . . .

do you need to be told on here that that is not a good idea?

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Is that like so-called "reverse prejudice"? LOL!

FF is a technique / tactic so it can be employed by anyone. Please further explain what you mean when you get a chance.

What would the Founders do?

I'm going to need more information--

you mean . . . those who realize that a false flag has taken place . . .

reverse the damage somehow, by using the false flag operation?

Good heavens, I'm in my 60s; I'm going in circles now!


it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Like counter-counter revolutionary?

I have an example to offer but an explanation first.

Revolution is not revolutionary, it is the natural order that is natural when crime is not made legal.

So, in effect, the term Revolutionary, is, itself, a False Flag.

In other words it is, in demonstrable fact, accurately perceptible, natural, in human terms, to be nice, to live and let live, since doing otherwise tends to be asking for trouble.

It is therefore truly a change from the norm, or "revolutionary", to go against that natural law of natural order, to demand some fealty, some payment to, some investment in, crime, to make crime legal, to upset the apple cart, is unnatural, not natural.

Having given up on the authority to define words accurately, to accept that Revolution is Revolutionary in the sense that it takes a Revolution to stop being horrible to each other, to accept such nonsense, to say that it is Revolutionary to think that it isn't a good idea to "provide the means by which we suffer" by investing in inspiring everyone to be at each other's throats, might making right, the survival of the best liars, cheats, sociopaths, psychopaths, pedophiles, rapists, torturers, and mass murderers, to be against that is Revolutionary, and requires a Revolution in thinking, if that is the case, then Counter Revolutionary Forces are forces that are the same forces as any criminal anywhere, where the criminal makes their crimes legal, by gaining fellow criminals to help make crime pay so well.

With all that counter confusion offered I can provide a competitive example of a False False Flag.

What is it when Hugo Chavez, for example, gives oil away to New Yorkers who can't afford the high prices of home heating fuel?

Is that a False False Flag, or a Reverse False Flag, or am I the one confused?


Yes a counter revolutionary

Yes a counter revolutionary false flag to start a revolution not to initiate the take over of tyranny..an opposite false flag I guess?

Confusing on purpose

I don't intent to confuse, so I think it is important to agree on a fixed meaning of words.

Revolution = Destroy Liberty

Revolution = either/or destroy Liberty or promote Liberty

Revolution = Promote Liberty

If an example is The Revolutionary War, in America, starting with The Declaration of Independence, then the third definition is THE working definition. Note: that revolution ended in 1788, and Liberty lost.

If the French Revolution is an example, then there is confusion as to what is, or is not, a Revolution.

If the financing of the Revolution in Russia by Wall Street is the example then the first is THE definition.

If the third definition is THE definition of Revolution, where a Revolution promotes Liberty, then a Counter Revolution destroys Liberty.

"Yes a counter revolutionary false flag to start a revolution not to initiate the take over of tyranny..an opposite false flag I guess?"

A False Flag such as dressing up as Indians and slaughtering white settlers, and then selling the idea of slaughtering Indians to the surviving Settlers, is THE example used to define a False Flag, then that is counter revolutionary.

It is counter to the cause of promoting Liberty (revolution) to dress up as your targets so as to make your targets look very bad so as to then have an excuse to slaughter your targets.

A False Flag such as dressing up as Polish soldiers on the boarder between Nazi Germany and Poland so as to then slaughter German soldiers, blame the slaughter of German soldiers on the Polish people, so as to then invade and take over Poland, while Bolshevik Russians attack Poland from the other side, and blame the slaughter of Poles on Nazi Germany, while both the Nazis and the Bolsheviks are being financed by American Tax Payers through the IRS, the FED, and Wall Street, then that False Flag is already counter to the promotion of Liberty (revolution) if that is the example.

If the False Flag example is demolishing 3 buildings in New York, full of people for 2 of those buildings, blaming those examples of controlled demolition on people from Saudi Arabia, so as to attack Iraq and Afghanistan, to stop two Ex-CIA employees who stopped following orders, to keep one from dumping too much oil on the marketed and driving the price down, and selling oil for legal fraud money that is not produced by the FED, and to keep the other Ex-CIA employee from removing the cash crop of Opium from world markets from Afghanistan then that example of that False Flag is already counter-revolutionary if revolution means to promote liberty against criminals who make their crimes legal.

"Yes a counter revolutionary false flag to start a revolution not to initiate the take over of tyranny..an opposite false flag I guess?"

Can you provide an example of a False Flag whereby the objective of the False Flag was to initiate the take over of tyranny?

The best revolution is peaceful, and the criminals just find out that their crimes don't pay, so they find honest work that does pay instead.

A peaceful revolution could be a Ron Paul type who is not honestly elected by the majority of honest people in America, where those honest people who want peace can't elect Ron Paul because they do not get their votes counted, so those honest productive people are not represented, and they cannot live and let live, because their votes are not even counted by the criminals who run the Nation State, and the False Flag Ron Paul could wave, would be one that Ron Paul says that he will conduct "business as usual", but that is a lie, so the bad guys who control the vote, fraudulently, are fooled by the False Flag, and Ron Paul is elected, and then Ron Paul breaks his campaign promises of Perpetual War, and instead Ron Paul ends The FED, ends the IRS, brings the Troops Home (not in body bags), and this Despotic State at the National (not federal) level is returned back into a Democratic Federated Republic.

Is that what you have in mind?

Here is another example of a False Flag (of the bad kind):



An example of a false flag

An example of a false flag used to initiate the takeover of tyranny was like you said 9/11.. another one is the underwear bomber, some might even say the sandy hook shooting was a conspiracy I dont think that was but if it were that as an excuse to take away our guns...never mind I guess nobody is understanding my question lol just forget it.

Maybe so

"It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford

I do mind.

I may never mind some day, but not yet.

I think the words chosen are instructive in any case, so long as some effort (not too much effort?) is expended in reaching an agreeable, negotiated, understanding.

Call me weird?

A take over of tyranny can be:

Get rid of the old tyrant so as to then become the new tyrant.

Get rid of the old tyrant so as to then have no tyrant.

Stop paying the tyrants everything earned by productive people for being such good tyrants, and tyrants then need to find a real job instead.

What do tyrants do?

They lie.

They threaten.

They injure innocent people for fun and profit.

If the idea is to get rid of tyrants the path to reach that goal can't be to make tyrants out of everyone, figuratively, or literally.

Who is the best liar?

Who is the biggest threat?

Who tortures and murders the most people?

Is this a contest, and if so, who is paid the most for doing the best work?



I know you do mind

"Is this a contest, and if so, who is paid the most for doing the best work?"

I don't think there is any pay here, except the kind you flood the market with:


(My post was in answer to your title "Confusing on Purpose" to which I replied, "Maybe So"...afterall, the people do not understand the banking system...so it is probably confusing on purpose.

(I've been listening to that youtube channel this morning (linked above) I almost hear Josf, except perhaps he does not have the wisdom of Josf’s years.


Missing information

I started looking at the video linked and at time 2:22 or so the speaker misses crucial information.

Do you miss the crucial information too.

This is a test, as I pretend to be the teacher, and you can pretend to be the student.

The speaker also fails to identify the most obvious current example of what will probably happen in America IF total War is not purchased by the Legal Criminals, so that Americans are then paying all that Total War Debt, after that event is followed through on schedule. I'm speaking about Russia. Russia just went through "collapse" of "only" the monetary kind, and that example serves as the best example if it is not a "collapse" that includes total war where America is chosen as the losers by the most powerful among us (the one's writing the purchase orders for World War III), so why not inspect current Russia if the idea is to figure out what America is going to look like while the most powerful among us remove our Legal Money Power from us?

I think the speaker misses a lot of vital information and as a consequence his viewpoint is relatively irrelevant.

Examples: "There is absolutely no reason why..."

The fact that there are very powerful people whose goal is to subject everyone to their exclusive power of will, that Elephant in the room, is again ignored.

What is the cost of absolute abject belief in falsehood without question?

Why can't reasonable people, honest people, productive people, sane people, not see the Elephant in the room?


Could it be that their minds have been invaded, and occupied, by a foreign power, a power that works to destroy them from within?

The Elephant in the room exists, so what explains the lack of capacity to see it, account for it, and then deal with it?

The defenders have to know what they are defending against.

The aggressive ones know this, so why don't the defenders know this fact?

I see know that the speak does tie in the need for mutual defense, but against what? The often repeated line (heard a lot in the Libertarian Party and "capitalist" circles) is non aggressive violence, and the missing element here is another test for you while I pretend to be teacher, in this case, and you can pretend to be the student.

Mission impossible on both counts?


What is missing in the history of America where the speaker goes all the way back in time to The Constitution?

What is missing in identifying the enemies of Liberty when the speaker lists the enemies as those people who resort to violence to impose their will upon non-violent people?

As to the name of what works, already prove to work, is Competitive Voluntary Associations.

Words need to be nailed down, since competitive does not mean antagonism (might makes right), competitive means mutually beneficial competition whereby better is chosen over worse (adaptation).

The speaker appears to understand the competition angle, whereby "experiments" are relatively comparable in search of something.

A Democratic Federated Republic with Trial by Jury based upon sortition - worked.



Here is my test, sir

What is missing in the history of America where the speaker goes all the way back in time to The Constitution?"

Well, I was thinking that he was speaking of a time in the late 1700’s prior to the constitution because the next example was restoring the constitution and the example prior to that was the constitution and to both of the constitutional examples the speaker indicated that restoring the constitution was nebulous, but the example in the middle of restoring things to the way they were in the late 1700’s was a knowable objective..

What is missing in identifying the enemies of Liberty when the speaker lists the enemies as those people who resort to violence to impose their will upon non-violent people?"

The enemies of liberty not mentioned are the legal criminals who may not resort to violence at the start, but rather resort to perverting the law in their favor…but then again, they will resort to violence when need be to preserve their monopoly, and when all else fails, they reboot the system.

My grade, please.

A test that may interest you? http://www.dailypaul.com/277248/i-am-an-advocate-of-a-statel...


1. What is missing in the

What is missing in the history of America where the speaker goes all the way back in time to The Constitution?

There was no mention of The Articles of Confederation. That was missing, and missing that example of a voluntary, competitive, free market of government leads the ignorant confused and wondering if, or what, can work to solve the seemingly unsolvable problem of crime, and crime made legal.

What is missing in identifying the enemies of Liberty when the speaker lists the enemies as those people who resort to violence to impose their will upon non-violent people?

I noticed the missing element while speaking with the people running the Libertarian Party, during my effort to gain access to a Seat in Congress at the National Level. You are right, or I think you are right, but to put it more simply the missing element is deception.

Libertarians and capitalists are fond of pointing out how bad it is to be aggressively violent upon innocent people, but they are not as keen on confessing just how destructive false advertizements can be, like all those false things said by Menger and Rothbard about how wealth doesn't exist without scarcity, and how Stephen Pearl Andrews lost his brains, etc.

Benjamin Tucker points that out well too.

"My grade, please."

I think the judge who grades is not me, that happens on judgment day. I was only pretending to be a teacher.



Teamwork is a method of combining the limited power of individuals into a power that is greater than the sum of the individual parts.

My reply to the OP was diverted to a reply to you, since the suggestion was to "never mind".


OP may not have gotten your reply then...

...sorry about that, I couldn't help myself butting in with all the talk of revolution and me remembering your words to me about Henry Ford's quote. I remember you explained that what I thought of as revolution in Ford's quote, was not what was intended because the revolution would take place before morning and it was more of an ideological revolution which would cause people to change their course of action...like the Liberty Day Challenge. Invent and use a different form of money...leaving the FRN in the dust heap of history while the people still have a chance.

No problem

Anyone interested can find the answers.

FRNs are on the way out, so who decides what replaces those fraud notes?


In the Illuminatus Trilogy

the publisher of a radical newsletter bombs his own office.

A reverse false flag might be something like Glen Blech blowing up his studio to garner support around him as our new leader.

Pandacentricism will be our downfall.

Good Example Chris.

Your example straightened out my thinking. I was thinking that the US govt, working through secret offshore accounts, might funnel money to a US Jewish hospital to build a new childrens cancer wing and then falsify paperwork to credit Al Qaida.

Joη's picture

you mean an actual disaster?

yes, those happen in this universe.

"You underestimate the character of man." | "So be off now, and set about it." | Up for a game?