False Flags Are Just a Conspiracy Theor … Admitted Fact

Presidents, Prime Ministers, Congressmen, Generals, Spooks, Soldiers and Police ADMIT to False Flag Terror

In the following instances, officials in the government which carried out the attack (or seriously proposed an attack) admit to it, either orally, in writing, or through photographs or videos:

(1) Japanese troops set off a small explosion on a train track in 1931, and falsely blamed it on China in order to justify an invasion of Manchuria. This is known as the “Mukden Incident” or the “Manchurian Incident”. The Tokyo International Military Tribunal found: “Several of the participators in the plan, including Hashimoto [a high-ranking Japanese army officer], have on various occasions admitted their part in the plot and have stated that the object of the ‘Incident’ was to afford an excuse for the occupation of Manchuria by the Kwantung Army ….” And see this.

(2) A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that – under orders from the chief of the Gestapo – he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.

(3) Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building in 1933, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.

(4) Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev admitted in writing that the Soviet Union’s Red Army shelled the Russian village of Mainila in 1939 – while blaming the attack on Finland – as a basis for launching the “Winter War” against Finland. Russian president Boris Yeltsin agreed that Russia had been the aggressor in the Winter War.

(5) The Russian Parliament, current Russian president Putin and former Soviet leader Gorbachev all admit that Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered his secret police to execute 22,000 Polish army officers and civilians in 1940, and then falsely blamed it on the Nazis.

(6) The British government admits that – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews attempting to flee the Holocaust to seek safety in Palestine, set up a fake group called “Defenders of Arab Palestine”, and then had the psuedo-group falsely claim responsibility for the bombings (and see this, this and this).

(7) Israel admits that in 1954, an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this).

(8) The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.

(9) The Turkish Prime Minister admitted that the Turkish government carried out the 1955 bombing on a Turkish consulate in Greece – also damaging the nearby birthplace of the founder of modern Turkey – and blamed it on Greece, for the purpose of inciting and justifying anti-Greek violence.

(10) The British Prime Minister admitted to his defense secretary that he and American president Dwight Eisenhower approved a plan in 1957 to carry out attacks in Syria and blame it on the Syrian government as a way to effect regime change.

(11) The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s through the 1980s and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism.

As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security”so that “a state of emergency could be declared, so people would willingly trade part of their freedom for the security” (and see this) (Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred). And watch this BBC special. They also allegedly carried out terror attacks in France, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the UK, and other countries.

False flag attacks carried out pursuant to this program include – by way of example only:

(12) In 1960, American Senator George Smathers suggested that the U.S. launch “a false attack made on Guantanamo Bay which would give us the excuse of actually fomenting a fight which would then give us the excuse to go in and [overthrow Castro]“.

(13) Official State Department documents show that, in 1961, the head of the Joint Chiefs and other high-level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. The plans were not carried out, but they were all discussed as serious proposals.

(14) As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in 1962, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.

(15) In 1963, the U.S. Department of Defense wrote a paper promoting attacks on nations within the Organization of American States – such as Trinidad-Tobago or Jamaica – and then falsely blaming them on Cuba.

(16) The U.S. Department of Defense even suggested covertly paying a person in the Castro government to attack the United States: “The only area remaining for consideration then would be to bribe one of Castro’s subordinate commanders to initiate an attack on Guantanamo.”

(17) The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war.

(18) A U.S. Congressional committee admitted that – as part of its “Cointelpro” campaign – the FBI had used many provocateurs in the 1950s through 1970s to carry out violent acts and falsely blame them on political activists.

(19) A top Turkish general admitted that Turkish forces burned down a mosque on Cyprus in the 1970s and blamed it on their enemy. He explained: “In Special War, certain acts of sabotage are staged and blamed on the enemy to increase public resistance. We did this on Cyprus; we even burnt down a mosque.” In response to the surprised correspondent’s incredulous look the general said, “I am giving an example”.

(20) A declassified 1973 CIA document reveals a program to train foreign police and troops on how to make booby traps, pretending that they were training them on how to investigate terrorist acts:

The Agency maintains liaison in varying degrees with foreign police/security organizations through its field stations ….

[CIA provides training sessions as follows:]

a. Providing trainees with basic knowledge in the uses of commercial and military demolitions and incendiaries as they may be applied in terrorism and industrial sabotage operations.

b. Introducing the trainees to commercially available materials and home laboratory techniques, likely to he used in the manufacture of explosives and incendiaries by terrorists or saboteurs.

c. Familiarizing the trainees with the concept of target analysis and operational planning that a saboteur or terrorist must employ.

d. Introducing the trainees to booby trapping devices and techniques giving practical experience with both manufactured and improvised devices through actual fabrication.


The program provides the trainees with ample opportunity to develop basic familiarity and use proficiently through handling, preparing and applying the various explosive charges, incendiary agents, terrorist devices and sabotage techniques.

(21) The German government admitted (and see this) that, in 1978, the German secret service detonated a bomb in the outer wall of a prison and planted “escape tools” on a prisoner – a member of the Red Army Faction – which the secret service wished to frame the bombing on.

(22) A Mossad agent admits that, in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddaffi’s compound in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist trasmissions recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddaffi as a terrorist supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter.

(23) The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him “to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident”, thus framing the ANC for the bombing.

(24) An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army admit that, in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and see this video; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author).

(25) In 1993, a bomb in Northern Ireland killed 9 civilians. Official documents from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (i.e. the British government) show that the mastermind of the bombing was a British agent, and that the bombing was designed to inflame sectarian tensions. And see this.

(26) The United States Army’s 1994 publication Special Forces Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces – updated in 2004 – recommends employing terrorists and using false flag operations to destabilize leftist regimes in Latin America. False flag terrorist attacks were carried out in Latin America and other regions as part of the CIA’s “Dirty Wars“. And see this.

(27) Similarly, a CIA “psychological operations” manual prepared by a CIA contractor for the Nicaraguan Contra rebels noted the value of assassinating someone on your own side to create a “martyr” for the cause. The manual was authenticated by the U.S. government. The manual received so much publicity from Associated Press, Washington Post and other news coverage that – during the 1984 presidential debate – President Reagan was confronted with the following question on national television:

At this moment, we are confronted with the extraordinary story of a CIA guerrilla manual for the anti-Sandinista contras whom we are backing, which advocates not only assassinations of Sandinistas but the hiring of criminals to assassinate the guerrillas we are supporting in order to create martyrs.

(28) An Indonesian fact-finding team investigated violent riots which occurred in 1998, and determined that “elements of the military had been involved in the riots, some of which were deliberately provoked”.

(29) Senior Russian Senior military and intelligence officers admit that the KGB blew up Russian apartment buildings in 1999 and falsely blamed it on Chechens, in order to justify an invasion of Chechnya (and see this report and this discussion).

(30) As reported by BBC, the New York Times, and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the “war on terror”.

(31) At the July 2001 G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy, black-clad thugs were videotaped getting out of police cars, and were seen by an Italian MP carrying “iron bars inside the police station”. Subsequently, senior police officials in Genoa subsequently admitted that police planted two Molotov cocktails and faked the stabbing of a police officer at the G8 Summit, in order to justify a violent crackdown against protesters.

(32) The U.S. falsely blamed Iraq for playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by a memo from the defense secretary – as one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq war. Even after the 9/11 Commission admitted that there was no connection, Dick Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S. government officials now admit that the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction. Despite previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials now say that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was not the state which backed the hijackers. (Many U.S. officials have alleged that 9/11 was a false flag operation by rogue elements of the U.S. government; but such a claim is beyond the scope of this discussion. The key point is that the U.S. falsely blamed it on Iraq, when it knew Iraq had nothing to do with it.).

(33) Although the FBI now admits that the 2001 anthrax attacks were carried out by one or more U.S. government scientists, a senior FBI official says that the FBI was actually told to blame the Anthrax attacks on Al Qaeda by White House officials (remember what the anthrax letters looked like). Government officials also confirm that the white House tried to link the anthrax to Iraq as a justification for regime change in that country.

(34) 2 months after 9/11, high-level government officials in Macedonia decided to “justify” their entry into the “war on terror” by catching and killing “terrorists”.  According to the New York Times, Macedonian police investigators admit that the officials launched a plan which included “luring foreign migrants into the country, executing them in a staged gun battle, and then claiming they were a unit backed by Al Qaeda intent on attacking Western embassies”. The plan was carried out shortly afterwards, with seven immigrants killed in 2002. Photos of the dead immigrants, posed with planted evidence – “bags of uniforms and semiautomatic weapons at their side” – were released to Western diplomats.

(35) According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.

(36) The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings.

(37) Police outside of a 2003 European Union summit in Greece were filmed planting Molotov cocktails on a peaceful protester.

(38) Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”

(39) Similarly, in 2005, Professor John Arquilla of the Naval Postgraduate School – a renowned US defense analyst credited with developing the concept of ‘netwar’ – called for western intelligence services to create new “pseudo gang” terrorist groups, as a way of undermining “real” terror networks. According to Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh, Arquilla’s ‘pseudo-gang’ strategy was, Hersh reported, already being implemented by the Pentagon:

“Under Rumsfeld’s new approach, I was told, US military operatives would be permitted to pose abroad as corrupt foreign businessmen seeking to buy contraband items that could be used in nuclear-weapons systems. In some cases, according to the Pentagon advisers, local citizens could be recruited and asked to join up with guerrillas or terrorists

The new rules will enable the Special Forces community to set up what it calls ‘action teams’ in the target countries overseas which can be used to find and eliminate terrorist organizations. ‘Do you remember the right-wing execution squads in El Salvador?’ the former high-level intelligence official asked me, referring to the military-led gangs that committed atrocities in the early nineteen-eighties. ‘We founded them and we financed them,’ he said. ‘The objective now is to recruit locals in any area we want. And we aren’t going to tell Congress about it.’ A former military officer, who has knowledge of the Pentagon’s commando capabilities, said, ‘We’re going to be riding with the bad boys.’”

(40) United Press International reported in June 2005:

U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.

(41) Undercover Israeli soldiers admitted in 2005 to throwing stones at other Israeli soldiers so they could blame it on Palestinians, as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protests by the Palestinians.

(42) Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually undercover Quebec police officers (and see this).

(43) A 2008 US Army special operations field manual recommends that the U.S. military use surrogate non-state groups such as “paramilitary forces, individuals, businesses, foreign political organizations, resistant or insurgent organizations, expatriates, transnational terrorism adversaries, disillusioned transnational terrorism members, black marketers, and other social or political ‘undesirables.’” The manual specifically acknowledged that U.S. special operations can involve both counterterrorism and “Terrorism” (as well as “transnational criminal activities, including narco-trafficking, illicit arms-dealing, and illegal financial transactions.”)

(44) The former Italian Prime Minister, President, and head of Secret Services (Francesco Cossiga) advised the 2008 minister in charge of the police, on how to deal with protests from teachers and students:

He should do what I did when I was Minister of the Interior … infiltrate the movement with agents provocateurs inclined to do anything …. And after that, with the strength of the gained population consent, … beat them for blood and beat for blood also those teachers that incite them. Especially the teachers. Not the elderly, of course, but the girl teachers yes.

(45) At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence.

(46) Egyptian politicians admitted (and see this) that government employees looted priceless museum artifacts  2011 to try to discredit the protesters.

(47) In 2011, a Colombian colonel admitted that he and his soldiers had lured 57 innocent civilians and killed them – after dressing many of them in uniforms – as part of a scheme to claim that Columbia was eradicating left-wing terrorists. And see this.

(48) Rioters who discredited the peaceful protests against the swearing in of the Mexican president in 2012 admitted that they were paid 300 pesos each to destroy everything in their path. According to Wikipedia, photos also show the vandals waiting in groups behind police lines prior to the violence.

(49) A Colombian army colonel has admitted that his unit murdered 57 civilians, then dressed them in uniforms and claimed they were rebels killed in combat.

(50) On November 20, 2014, Mexican agent provocateurs were transported by army vehicles to participate in the 2014 Iguala mass kidnapping protests, as was shown by videos and pictures distributed via social networks.

(51) The highly-respected writer for the Telegraph Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says that the head of Saudi intelligence – Prince Bandar – recently admitted that the Saudi government controls “Chechen” terrorists.

(52) High-level American sources admitted that the Turkish government – a fellow NATO country – carried out the chemical weapons attacks blamed on the Syrian government; and high-ranking Turkish government admitted on tape plans to carry out attacks and blame it on the Syrian government.

(53) The Ukrainian security chief admits that the sniper attacks which started the Ukrainian coup were carried out in order to frame others. Ukrainian officials admit that the Ukrainian snipers fired on both sides, to create maximum chaos.

(54) Burmese government officials admitted that Burma (renamed Myanmar) used false flag attacks against Muslim and Buddhist groups within the country to stir up hatred between the two groups, to prevent democracy from spreading.

(55) Britain’s spy agency has admitted (and see this) that it carries out “digital false flag” attacks on targets, framing people by writing offensive or unlawful material … and blaming it on the target.

(56) U.S. soldiers have admitted that if they kill innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, they then “drop” automatic weapons near their body so they can pretend they were militants

(57) Similarly, police frame innocent people for crimes they didn’t commit. The practice is so well-known that the New York Times noted in 1981:

In police jargon, a throwdown is a weapon planted on a victim.

Newsweek reported in 1999:

Perez, himself a former [Los Angeles Police Department] cop, was caught stealing eight pounds of cocaine from police evidence lockers. After pleading guilty in September, he bargained for a lighter sentence by telling an appalling story of attempted murder and a “throwdown”–police slang for a weapon planted by cops to make a shooting legally justifiable. Perez said he and his partner, Officer Nino Durden, shot an unarmed 18th Street Gang member named Javier Ovando, then planted a semiautomatic rifle on the unconscious suspect and claimed that Ovando had tried to shoot them during a stakeout.

Wikipedia notes:

As part of his plea bargain, Pérez implicated scores of officers from the Rampart Division’s anti-gang unit, describing routinely beating gang members, planting evidence on suspects, falsifying reports and covering up unprovoked shootings.

This is not limited to the United States, or to police forces.

(As a side note – and while not technically false flag attacks – police have been busted framing innocent people in many other ways, as well.)

(58) A former U.S. intelligence officer recently alleged:

Most terrorists are false flag terrorists or are created by our own security services.

(59) The head and special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office said that most terror attacks are committed by the CIA and FBI as false flags. Similarly, the director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan – Lt. General William Odom said:

By any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.

(audio here).

(60) Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the “benefits” of of false flags to justify their political agenda:

Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler

“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin

Postscript:  Unmarked Israeli fighter jets and unmarked torpedo boats attacked – and did everything they could to sink – a U.S. ship off the coast of Egypt in 1967 called the USS Liberty.

The attack started by targeting communications on the ship so that the Americans couldn’t radio for help. The Israelis then jammed the ship’s emergency distress channel, and shot at escaping life rafts in an attempt to prevent survivors from escaping.

Transcripts of conversations between the Israeli pilots and Israeli military show that Israel knew it was an American ship.

Numerous top-level American military and intelligence officials – including Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – believe that this was a failed false flag attack, and that Israel would have attempted to blame Egypt if the Israeli military had succeeded in sinking the ship. Indeed, President Lyndon Johnson dispatched nuclear-armed fighter jets to drop nuclear bombs on Cairo, Egypt.  They were only recalled at the last minute, when Johnson realized that it was the Israelis – and not the Egyptians – who had fired on the Liberty.

The following actions are arguably an admission that Israel intended to frame Egypt for the attack, and didn’t want the Liberty’s crew to be able to tell the world what really happened: (1) using unmarked jets and boats, (2) destroying the Liberty’s communication equipment and jamming the Liberty’s emergency distress channel, and (3) trying to sink the ship and destroy all liferafts.

See this, this, this and this.

This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Carl_Herman

    Great documentation, GW; thank you for keeping this in public attention. As a teacher, and as makes common sense, key points MUST be repeated until they have a life of their own. And obviously, the facts of false flags need repetition because the .01% criminals who do them are able to continue in power.

  • justquitnow

    I worry that as we run out of real enemies, the MIC will manufacture them.

    • wunsacon

      I see what you did there. 😉

    • Brockland A.T.

      The post suggests that for the most part, they have all been manufactured since before the MIC was the MIC. Wars of choice would be harder to push with the right electoral system hanging over politician’s heads, ready to chop the psychopaths before they start.

      Proportional Representation – Get the government you want, today!



      • justquitnow

        I’m all for fixing the election system. It’s old, its gerrymandered, it’s corrupt, and it’s out of whack with modern America. I was talking about foreign enemies really…like ISIS.

        • Brockland A.T.

          The American Deep State made ISIS.


          Sure, some foreigners have it in for America, or rather have uses for America most Americans want nothing to do with, (so requires breaking a few heads and twisting a few arms from or in the shadows) but Israel and Saudi Arabia are counted as allies, not enemies. Go figure.

          If the American people weren’t so insulated from real democracy, getting past the popular will to be informed and nobody’s pawn, domestic or foreign, would be a lot harder to pull off.

      • this is really just parliamentary style legislature. It’s not really an improvement if your goal is liberty.

        • Brockland A.T.

          Do you have an alternative? Particularly one that is accessible and can be achieved within a reasonable timeframe?


          There are two main systems of governance on the go; representative democracy and direct democracy. Ideally they should compliment one another, in practice they are played against one another in an institutionalized divide-and-conquer game of Elitists versus the People.

          Representative democracy, such as parliamentary democracy, is suited for large diverse populations where the People can’t all get together at once and decide things. They rely on representatives and experts to do that which they cannot themselves and everyone participates. Not voting, for example, means nothing if there is no quorum requirement and is just an indirect vote for whomever wins.

          Rep dem works when the representative mandates are circumscribed by republicanism, a parliamentary form setting forth the ground rules in a constitution, as the what laws and policies may or may not be pursued. The People ideally choose appropriate representatives with limited mandates within the ground rules, and if anyone wants to change the ground rules, they are ideally bound by open constitutional formulae to make such changes democratically. The bankster class does not play by the rules, obviously.

          Direct democracy is grassroots democracy, where people do get together and decide policy within participatory and deliberative formats. The obvious form of part dem is political parties. Less obvious is deliberative democracy, because it ain’t the fakey TV debates and talking head punditry. Deliberative democracy is practiced on an even smaller numbers; boards of directors behind closed doors, in politics, academia and business where rational decisions have to be made and the consequences of failure not at all abstract.

          Any representative system is prone to regulatory capture, and the cost of apparatus makes it difficult to quit and form a new party unless a good portion of the political skills and capital defects, not to mention those with the keys to the party bank account.

          The main flaw is coordination, the democratic reform trilemma bridging representative and participatory forms. The democracy gap is fostered and exploited by those of our elites who are corrupt.

          “Democratic theorists have identified a trilemma due to the presence of three desirable characteristics of an ideal system of direct democracy, which are challenging to deliver all at once. These three characteristics are participation – widespread participation in the decision making process by the people affected; deliberation – a rational discussion where all major points of view are weighted according to evidence; and equality – all members of the population on whose behalf decisions are taken have an equal chance of having their views taken into account…

          … However, the more participants there are the more time and money is needed to set up good-quality discussions with clear, neutrally presented briefings. Also, it is hard for each individual to contribute substantially to the discussion when large numbers are involved.”


          Participatory forms on a local scale have to default to representative forms on a large scale. The main check on the potential for representative abuses, is to limit the mandate of representatives. Although the U.S. adopted some of the lessons of the Iroquois democracy, they threw out some of the important participatory checks that closed the democracy gap and gave the representative system legitimacy.


          Attempts to step around the networks of party partisans aren’t going to get very far without proportional representation. People will always tend to form factions and as time goes on, will promote the viability of factions (political parties) and networked insiderists (secretive societies). Participatory forms such as ‘wise democracy’ may be another attempt to corral the aggregate of individuals who are not political partisans.


          Europe has more flexibility because their component states are pro rep, and popularly are coming to realize, the EU as it stands is an attempt by anglo-zionist ruling elites and Euro quislings to end run and circumvent indigenous democracy, the EU democracy gap.

          The system itself needs to change, incrementally enough for liberty to begin to have a say. Today’s partisan insiderists are idiotlogs pursuing idiotology; they don’t care about liberty for all as a system empowering everyone, but winning power just for themselves and imposing their ideas, parsing themselves into ever smaller cliques of powerful individuals with commensurately smaller brainpower.

          Majority rule democracy over the long term is to free politics what communism was to the free market; there is no way to value ideas according to their fair market value and objective worth. The American system may not implode quite as quickly as the Soviets, but then the Soviets were double-blind from the get-go.

          Russia is pro-rep. Reluctantly so, but nonetheless is democratically far more advanced than the U.S.. It has paid substantial dividends.

          From being on its knees in the 1991 to challenging U.S. hegemony in 2016, Russia has outpaced authoritarian China in political-economic-social development. That’s the power of a great nation, the the ruling elite willingly acting as one with an accurately informed People to make the nation great, not trying to kill people off as the anglo-zionists prefer to rule.

          • yeah, it’s called a Republic. The decentralization of power to the local level, counties being primary. Then, delegate are appointed and sent up from the local level to all other levels of government. The government power to do thing is reduced as the ladder climbs to the point that at the Federal level the government has very little power at all. Most political power is local. A Republic, a novel idea I know. Of course that was the original idea for America.

          • Brockland A.T.

            That’s nice, so, you’ve been there and lost it; what have you learned?

            How do you intend to restore, then keep, the Republic?

            The majority-rule regulated check-and-balance of the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches is played like the devil’s own dueling banjos by Deep Statists. Its not possible for The People to make meaningful collective decisions on governance save to reinforce oligarchy and tyranny at popular expense.

            “The deliberations of the Constitutional
            Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious
            citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended
            in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. The answer
            was provided immediately. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin
            Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”
            With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A republic, if you
            can keep it.”


            The weak link was the electoral system, which favours elitist politics and secrecy games over genuine democracy. Its probably safe to say most Americans want the rights and freedoms guaranteed by their Constitution; they want the Republic. They aren’t getting it; why not?

            The heirs to 1787 didn’t keep the Republic, losing it little by little every generation just as surely as land was stolen from the Indians. Some people may have said, “Hey, you aren’t keeping the Republic,” to which others smugly replied, if they bothered to, “Things are going just right; this is Uhmurica.”

            The right-libertarian tendency is to blame democracy for the inevitable slide into oligarchy and tyranny, but some have different take on the libertarian spectrum.

            For some (left-of-centre?) libertarians, the most logical thing to assume is that an abusive oligarchy is the aberration leading to the abomination of tyranny, and the more natural state is in fact, democracy.

            Republic versus democracy is logically fallacious in the form of a faulty comparison. Yet many right-of-centre libertarians cling to it, not noticing that among themselves, charismatic leaders are informally policed through democratic accountability according to their perceived adherence to the ideals of the Constitutional Republic.


            Democracy is a process of collective decision making. The rationally healthier the democracy, the more stable and rational their decision making. Oligarchs use it among themselves, because they are peers in social capital by might – tyranny. The People use it among themselves, because they are peers in social capital by law – Republic.

            This vid, ‘Republic versus Democracy’ explains the faulty comparison even as it makes the case for it. Ask yourself, who makes the laws and enforces the laws and sets the governing agenda. Was it democracy that destroyed the American (and Roman) Republics, or the lack of it? Who makes and enforces the bad, – unpopular – decisions?


            Did The People assassinate leaders like John Kennedy, or did a cabal of elitists supplant that more genuine elite of popular natural leaders Kennedy has come to represent arising from The People to serve The People?

            Genuine democracy, is not ‘majority rule’ as the video claims. Democracies have failed, but in the case of the Greeks and Romans, it was because their forms of democracy were imperfect and failed to evolve sounder mechanisms of quorum and franchise. Once ancient elitists found ways to game that system, they were loathe the change the rules. Amerindian democracies were overcome by guns, germs, steel and cultural adulteration such that ‘election’ to some of their activists became a dirty word; so they use ‘selection process’ and they have an interesting take on oligarchy.


            Proportional representation is a form of collective decision making according to a body of law that is of the people, by the people, for the people, – a republic. Democracies have always thrived as a system of law and custom, not anarchy.

            Take that hill and hold it against all comers, or go home ’cause you’re not even in the game.

            Proportional representation – an idea whose time has come. Get the government you want, today!


          • I find it amusing that anarchist make the point that small governments grow into big governments. While historically accurate, it ignores the fact that all historical anarchies have done the same thing. All anarchies in history have developed states, and those states have grown. So to make the argument that a small decentralized republic cannot be kept, is to ignore the historical reality that non government cannot be kept either. At least from a historical perspective.
            Of course I was not making a historical argument but a theoretical one.

          • Brockland A.T.

            Your response is puzzling and appears to be some kind of red herring combined with a strawman. First accusing me of being an anarchist – when I’m advocating good governance. Then sidestepping my main argument with some blather about a small decentralized republic, hoping no-one will notice.

            Again, if you want to make and keep a Republic, the People have to want it, and be able to enforce what they want. The only way to do that peacefully is through education and processes of real democratic oversight of the government. Proportional representation at its best, allows for political parties while not precluding independents and ensures a broad spectrum of public opinion has a say in the care and maintenance of a republic.

            The degree of centralization only matters insofar as it provides for democratic expression. A decentralized republic is not antithetical to democracy, and models of participatory democracy prioritize local governance – decentralization. One could say a decentralized republic strongly compliments democratic expression.

            Democracy is a group decision making process for formally making and enforcing group rules; its not in and of itself a system of government, but a key component of any governing system. All systems of government have a democratic component; its only a question of the true extent of the franchise and mechanisms of enforcement.

            You appear to be making, while trying to avoid appearing to make, a fallacious black versus white comparison, to argue ‘car versus engine’ and condemning all engines for getting cars into trouble when in fact cars and engines are complimentary.

            Republic and democracy are complimentary processes and neither accomplishes the true goal of wise rule separated. Those obnoxious to wise rule seek to divide and conquer thus.

            The size of the republic does not matter so long as the democratic process is sound. The health of the democratic process separates republic from tyranny and democracy from the mob. To argue only for republic or only for democracy is to argue for failure.

            Its ironic that some advocates of republic ultimately appeal to people to vote for the Republic – that is, they need democracy. Yet they will slag democracy and will not recognize more genuine forms of democracy like proportional representation, which is light-years more democratic than majority rule electioneering.


            Selling whining about political failure is like every other crony capitalist industry selling treatments, not cures. Its nothing new. Promoting popular failure to institute and maintain fair rules and just order is profitable to a few.

          • I don’t think anarchist is an accusation. I have far more respect for their views then the outright Stalinist/Trotskyites we have running around these days. Oh and by the way “good governance” is usually code for some agenda that is not really good at all. If you really want “good governance” then Jefferson is right on. “Government is best that governs least.” So according to Thomas freakin Jefferson my remark about a small decentralized republic is not a sidestep at all but is exactly on point.

          • Brockland A.T.

            The trouble is, a small decentralized republic may be desirable, rational, and necessary, it can’t get past the electoral chokepoint without being mowed down by insiderism rigging the ‘winner take all’ electoral system in their favour.

            Plus, would-be champions of Constitution and Republic are (in a symbolic sense) leading the charge with muskets in an age moving beyond even machine guns and missiles, because of a strange belief that repeating firearms (democracy) is somehow dishonorable.

            Proportional representative democracy offers electoral systems that allow citizens more direct participation in government. There are fewer insulating layers between the needs of the people and the, um, ‘needs’ of the elites. If a party betrays its constituents, constituents can more easily form a new party. If no party satisfies, independents can step in with a real chance of winning where their cause has popular support.

            Its ironic that the American people, arguably the population most capable of republican government, can’t get it, because they don’t believe in democracy. Understand that a sound democratic process is integral, not antithetical, to good government in the genuine sense of the words good government, answerable and accountable to the public good.

            Recall the jury lesson in the Youtube Republic versus Democracy video. Ironically it escaped the commentator that that is what a true democratic process is; a jury over elected representatives – the government. The quorum for a life-or-death verdict is not 7-5, but 12-0.

            Under majority rule electioneering, minimum support as low as one can carry the day against the other eleven. The rest of the jury can hang as long as such a one gets what it wants. Where that one is a neocon Deep Statist, the desired outcome is definitely NOT justice and certainly minimal interference from better heads to prevent injustice.

          • I agree with you about elections, and that is why the only elections allowed in a Repulic are the most local ones. Sheriff, Mayor, Council member, County Supervisor and the like. I don’t think there is any perfect solution. Taking away the power of the legislature to legislate and make it a supervisory function only would help. Hard to grow the state if you can’t make any laws.

          • Pooh Bear

            Interesting thread. The constitutional system we have is workable if the states would do their part. The opinions of activist supreme courts over our history have rendered opinions that were not legitimately refuted by the states as unconstitutional. It is time for small steps to be taken to nullify federal law and get the states weaned off the federal government dime. The issues, for example, of abortion and same sex marriage are not federal issues and should be left to the states. I suggest listening to some of KrisAnne Hall’s podcasts, subscribing to Tom Wood’s Liberty Classroom or checking out the Tenth Amendment Center. We have lost our way over the past 200 plus years and it may take that long to get back to where we started, if that’s what we want and it isn’t too late.

          • I am all for nullification. It is used far too little.

          • tionico

            return the selection of Senators to the states… they won’t all be in the same place so convenient gto the lobbyists, AND they’d be directlyb accountable to the state lawmakers for faithfully represeinting that state at the national level.

            Then, reduce the number of voters represented by each member of the lower chamber to some manageable number, make district boundaries as short as possible (onstead of today’s gerrymandered insanity) and have those reps spend most of their time in their home districts… MEETING WITH and getting to know their people. Then, when there is a bill advancing to the floor for a vote, do that by teleconferenceing, or some sch technology. There is technjology to record every vote. Discussions on issues could easily be conducted remotely as well.. teleconferenceing is only one way. Oh, and change the rules to allow ONLY ONE ISSUE PER BILL. No more sneaking in a billion dollar bridge to nowhere in Alaska in a school finding bill….. and no more two thousand page bills, either. Limit them to 200 pages or so. And make it MANDATORY that before anyone can VOTE on a bill they HAVE to have read it. If I were president I’d instruct the COngress to do that.. one issue per bill, and I WILL read every page of a bill before signing it. If they send me two thousand pages and I can’t read it before the time passes to sign, it won’t get signed.

            Do these tings, and watch things come round to something better.

          • Brockland A.T.

            The trouble is, politicians may be stupid, but those in power are not so stupid as to sabotage their own chances of a lucrative political career. Add to that, their lackeys and partisans whose gravy train also depends on gaming the system as it is, and of course, the lobbyists of the Deep State, who likewise don’t want any popular accountability.

            Much has been written about why Americans don’t vote. Its not because they’re stupid or apathetic, its because the system is counter intuitive to common sense and makes it hard for people with commitments to like, say, real day (and/or night) jobs, to participate. Sites such as Washingtons’s Blog try and keep people abreast of the important issues, but how many have time to read even this one blog every day in addition to local news and keep up with their social networking. So much is so easily missed.


            60% of eligible Americans don’t vote. Of the 40% that do, roughly another 20% may as well have stayed home because their candidate didn’t win. That means 20% of America’s brainpower is running the country, skewed towards a partisan outlook that seems to eschew reason itself in addition to the Constitution.

            There are minor reforms at the state level, such as Oregon mentioned in the link, that introduced mail-in voting and increased participation to 80% in the state. Then there are states like Florida, of infamous Bush-Gore recount fame.

            There are 50 states in the United States.

            Reforms can take place sooner, if at all, under the banner of proportional representation; itself admittedly a major reform. The voter inclusiveness mandated by pro rep is probably the only way an idea such as yours might see any kind of popular audience. The odds of some uber-rich patron identifying, understanding then sponsoring key technical reforms, is very unlikely to happen. Such a person would sooner game the flaw. Although the vitriol spewed at Donald Trump suggests no small fear of a wild card getting lucky.

            In the meantime, its important to be at least somewhat informed not only of the technical issues, but the theoretical context as well.


    • sdkeller72

      It’s time to wake then because the MIC has been manufacturing our enemies for decades now.

  • Tim Hadfield

    and, still, nobody will believe it. preferring to remain asleep.

    • Douglas Kelly

      Not many will believe it, I’ve found. But rather than being asleep, my experience is that they are in denial and seem to believe our (US) government would not do such things. These are the incredibly naive people who actually think there’s very little corruption in the institutions we’ve been taught to respect — from Congress and the Pentagon to local law enforcement.

      As Napoleon said, “History is lies agreed upon.”

      But then, that’s why these false flag actions work so well.

  • You know what the police ask you when you have been caught “Is this the first time you did this or just the first time you got caught?” This is merely what is being admitted to, imagine what has not been admitted to.

  • Rob.Chauval

    After the Israeli attack on the Liberty it was discussed at a political level in Washington to sink it themselves. The military for once said NO WAY and stopped it.. The politicians wanted to bury this “problem” dead and were quite happy to kill any survivors..

  • Actually, the Nuremberg testimony was usually tortured out of the Nazi high command. The other quotes from Hitler & Co are out of context. Horrible as it may seem, revisionist scholars and historians, (such as Weronika Kuzniar), now understand these quotes as portrayals of opposition tactics, not submitted as Nazi party policy. To repeat these over and over out of context is highly disingenuous. The Victor always rewrites history, (in this case to cover-up for their own crimes i.e. Dresden et al.) The Germans have suffered enough Zionist Hollywood propaganda. Time to set the record straight.

  • You should say “Jews attempting to flee arrest and detainment,” not “flee the Holocaust,” which has been proven to be a gargantuan lie. Or maybe you have to say that in order to not be targeted by the Jewish ruling elite yourself.

    • krosst

      You are correct no Jews were ever fleeing a holocaust that never happened !

  • krosst

    I know 2 & 3 are false; forced confessions through touture.

  • John McCarthy

    http://www.reocities.com/larryjodaniel/21.html There has been zero response to these letters sent to two US Senators and the Attorney General providing irrefutable evidence of conspiracy on the part of members of the National Security Council re Treason In Wartime and blatant disregard for Presidential Directives issued during NSC meetings during wartime.

  • reason.com

    And yet, if one were to suggest or even hint at some modern events (take your pick – 9/11, Boston Bombing, Sandy Hook, Paris attacks, etc.) being more than what the official story states, then immediately are heard cries of “conspiracy, tin-foil hat crazy.” Even if you present a factual, well-reasoned argument, the general response consists of little more than ad hominems. It’s a testimony to the power of mind control disseminated through the media and government conditioning centers known as public schools. Truly frightening and tragic that people are so easily fooled by those in purported authority. It only reaffirms the quote: “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they’ve been fooled.”

  • Jo Garcein

    this is only a few af the false flags, afganstan, iraq, libya, syria, isis….

  • Dave Dave

    Interesting that you didn’t mention the false flag operation I’m the most aware of, the Bay of Pigs Fiasco in 1961

  • Edward Huguenin