×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules Donate
23
4 comments block


[ - ] boekanier 1 point 13 hoursJun 18, 2025 01:54:30 ago (+1/-0)

a BIG false flag like 9/11?

[ - ] ArcturianDeathTrap 1 point 8 hoursJun 18, 2025 07:22:29 ago (+1/-0)

Rule #2 of False Flagging: You collaborate with foreigners to be the boots-on-the-ground that trip the event, so theres a hard disconnect

[ - ] Crackinjokes 2 points 15 hoursJun 18, 2025 00:28:30 ago (+2/-0)

Everybody's saying that. There's only two possible reasons why you send the old aircraft carrier that you're going to retire next year out to this part of town or the world. Number one you're scared that our defenses won't be good against the hutus and you've got to do something but you don't want to lose one of the new aircraft carriers so you send the old one out. Or number two you fully expect and hope that it does get attacked by Israel to be a false flag so you have an excuse to go after I ran and that's why you send the old one.

It's the same reason Roosevelt moved the aircraft carriers out of pole harbor when he knew they were going to hit Pearl harbor because he wanted them to hit some old chips that were easily repaired but he didn't want them to hit the aircraft carriers which he knew we would need to defeat japan. It's the same reason

it's the same reason they told the world trade centers to take out in their falls flag because the world trade centers were full of asbestos in the calculations about how much it would cost to remove the asbestos was far more than the the worth of the building unless of course you're a Jew and you get an insured for a whole lot more than it's ever worth which is of course what happened.

[ - ] __47__ 0 points 5 minutesJun 18, 2025 15:34:34 ago (+0/-0)

Both are definitely viable. I'd just assume the latter. You would think the US would use the best of the best defending (((the greatest ally.)))