Polls look worse for the campaign of Barack H. Obama with every passing week. But now, many Americans are afraid that Obama, quite simply, will not want to leave. Now a rumor has surfaced, a rumor that a Tennessee State Representative briefly took seriously. According to it, Obama plans a false flag operation, and specifically to stage an attempt on his own life. That will cause riots, and give the government the right to lock the country down, and suspend the election. Naturally most people find that outrageous. Nor can anyone possibly confirm it. But no one can deny it, either. In fact, that theory would explain several disturbing signs, and even has a historical precedent.
The false flag operation rumor in detail
Doug Hagmann, writing in Canada Free Press, first suggested a false flag operation. Hagmann claims to have an “insider” in the Department of Homeland Security, a man he calls Rosebud. Rosebud was a police officer since 1979 before he signed on at DHS after the Nine-eleven Incident. Rosebud told Hagmann that:
DHS is getting ready for massive civil unrest. In fact, Rosebud called it civil war.
DHS takes “marching orders” from the White House, and specifically Obama, his “czars,” and Valerie Jarrett.
DHS officials are fully confident that Americans today will cheerfully surrender their liberty if they perceive a great-enough threat to public order.
Hagmann goes on, with further information from Rosebud. According to this, people working for DHS are infiltrating left-wing groups and inciting them to “[destroy] property and [disrupt] commerce.” At the same time, Treasury Secretary Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke are deliberately destroying the American economy. All this sets up economic chaos, one of three things that will lead to revolution.
Class division is another part of it. Hagmann mentioned this also, if only in passing. But no one needs Hagmann or Rosebud to remind them of Obama saying, “You didn’t build that!” Or Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren saying much the same a year ago, and even talking about marauding gangs. Was that merely over-the-top rhetoric? Or was that a hint of things to foment?
Hagmann dwelt at length on race division. The case of Florida v. Zimmermann (the Trayvon Martin affair) was only the start. And here is the context for the false flag operation: a staged attempt on the life of the putative President, or his wife, or one or both of his daughters. Obama would blame that on “white supremacists.” An event like that, says Hagmann, would set America’s inner cities on fire. With added signs of an imagined insurrection against the government, Obama would have all the excuse, and the sympathy, he would need to lock America down and suspend elections.
Hagmann published his piece on May 8. On May 31, Joe Angione (Conservatively Speaking) published his own summary. Angione concentrated almost entirely on the false flag operation, and left out most of the background that Hagmann gave. There the rumor rested for nearly two months. But then the Constitution Party of Florida reprinted Angione’s article. (With permission or not, CP-Florida will not say.) Then Tennessee State Representative Kelly Kiesling (R-Byrdstown, TN) copied the text into an e-mail and sent it to his constituents. He added this preamble:
God help us, if ANYONE stoops to this level! As I was reading this article I kept thinking that the more we are aware that something like this is remotely possible, the better off we are to recognize it and fend it off…..then the author addresses my very thoughts! The last paragraph in blue summarizes the reason we should pass this one around.
For some reason, the word “treason” comes to mind if this is attempted!
The next day, Kiesling apologized for sending the e-mail.
Signs that support a false flag operation
Firemen work on the burning Reichstag. Item from Record Group 208: Records of the Office of War Information, 1926 – 1951. Photographer unknown.
Alone, the Hagmann piece is not worth much, and the Angione newsletter is worth even less. No government would ever stage a false flag operation against the head of state or his family, if it were not ready to contain the riots that would follow. To get ready for a thing like that takes months of planning, and buying ammunition and supplies at least.
The problem: DHS has been getting ready for massive civil unrest. Or so says Susanne Posel at The Activist Post. Why is DHS ordering riot gear, and millions of rounds of ammunition? Why the experiments on using drones (unpiloted aircraft, fixed-wing or helicopter) over American soil? Why is the Transportation Security Administration now patrolling railroad stations and bus stops in Los Angeles? And are units of the US military really going to “assist” city police, and in so acting, break the Posse Comitatus Act?
Nor is Doug Hagmann the only man to quote “insiders” on plans by Obama to stay in office “by any means necessary.” The blogger calling himself Ulsterman published this interview on July 19, twelve days before Rep. Kiesling reprinted the Angione letter. Ulsterman quotes a “military insider” thus:
MI: Approximately two years ago…not quite two years ago…I received information pertaining to an election contingency plan. For 2012. After the 2010 elections there were particular operatives…specific to the Obama administration and Democratic Party leadership…indicating an overwhelming need to secure a second term for President Obama. That document’s title was…(pauses)
WSI: He can be trusted – I give you my word. Please proceed.
MI: That document’s title was “By Any Means Necessary”. It was unofficial – but we know it came directly from channels specific to the administration. We confirmed that.
UM: What channels? Who are you talking about?
MI: We believe it to have been authored by Mr. [Cass] Sunstein[, "Regulatory Czar"]. Reviewed and approved by Valerie Jarrett. Preparations for implementation are being done in part by Mr. Leo Gerard coordinating with…with high ranking officials within the Department of Justice, Homeland Security…and…the U.S. military.
Four days later, Ulsterman published this interview. It offered more of the same. No one mentioned any false flag operation. But they talked more about plans for civil unrest.
What would a false flag operation look like?
Again, no one can confirm the rumor of a false flag operation with the putative President, or his family, as the putative target. But dictators throughout the world have kept power, or seized it, by first persuading the people that they alone stand between the people and a dangerous, or at least hateful, enemy. And they always seem ready for any outbreak of unrest, or an outrageous act of vandalism. Nor do they stop short of an attack at the heart of the government. Adolf Hitler burned the Reichstag, the most famous false flag operation of the twentieth century. Or else he mis-prized the crime after one lone arsonist, and not a Bolshevik cell as the Nazis claimed, set the fire. Either way, the incident turned into worse than a miscarriage of justice. (False flag operations can happen in a diplomatic context, too. Otto von Bismarck provoked Napoleon III to war by editing the Ems Telegram to make it look far more rude than it really was.)
Dictators get away with false flag operations because:
People are not ready to believe that their government would attack itself or any of its officers, least of all the head of state.
The press never investigates the official story, and often overlooks inconsistent evidence and signs that prefigure the event.
The entertainment industry has toyed with the false flag operation premise for decades. In 1967, ABC-TV produced a pilot for a new series, Shadow on the Land. It depicted a United States of America that few would recognize. Its head of state carried the title of Leader, and the only books that anyone could buy had titles like “Our Struggle” and “Handbook for Children.” The back-story included a false flag operation that provoked rioting in the inner city, after which the new Internal Security Forces “restored order.” (And locked the country down, and painted a black “X” in tar over the Constitution during the opening montage.) The plot of this pilot featured another false flag operation, to knock out a power plant and black out the American Southwest. The series failed, probably because TV viewers were as complacent then as the mainstream media are now.
Today, a federal department charged with civilian law enforcement has ordered a large amount of ammunition and equipment for fighting riots. Riots that the local police cannot handle have not broken out since the Rodney King affair. Why should the federal government look forward to riots now? (And furthermore: the putative President, during his 2008 campaign, called specifically for a “civilian national security force” at least as powerful as the Army.)
Cass Sunstein, whom Ulsterman’s “military insider” names as author of a blueprint for a putsch, has a reputation for contempt for the people. His book Nudge shows his philosophy of government and what it ought to do. If anyone in the Obama administration would be mixed up in a false flag operation, Cass Sunstein would be.
CNAV cannot investigate a rumor like this. Larger press organs can. Why don’t they? The press need not be “in on” any conspiracy, either. A lazy press is as dangerous to human liberty as a complicit one.
CNAV does not expect the larger press to investigate every rumor. But it should investigate evidence that might support one. Had an independent news organ investigated the Reichstag Fire, it might have learned whether a lone Dutch arsonist, or a brownshirt cell in Berlin, had set it. Adolf Hitler would never have been able to scare the German people with a lurid tale of a Bolshevik arson cell. And he would never have gotten his Enabling Act that made him Führer. Full-blown false flag operation or not, Hitler would have failed.
DHS might have a good reason to order 4.5 million rounds of ammunition, and 150 suits of riot armor. The TSA might have a credible threat lead as a reason to patrol train stations and bus terminals in Los Angeles. But if the media will not even talk about these things, people will suspect the worst. What if the Bush SecHomeSec had ordered 4.5 million rounds of ammunition and 150 suits of riot armor, experimented with drones over US soil, and had federal officers patrolling city bus and rail stations (when most city transit authorities have their own police!)? Many Democrats in Congress, and mainstream reporters, would now be pestering DHS every day until they got an answer. (The American left were the first to charge that Nine-eleven was a false flag operation.)
One, or even two, such signs are easy to ignore. Three or more demand an explanation. Ian Fleming explained it this way:
Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and the third time it’s enemy action.
It might not be proof positive, but it is a hazard. A real false flag operation would give just this sort of vague advance warning, that a lazy press and a complacent people might easily dismiss. If these signs have a reasonable explanation, someone needs to find it and show it.