portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article creative global

human & civil rights | imperialism & war

North Korea - Biggest False Flag Since 911

North Korea - biggest false flag since 911, with fake news on corporate media. President of North Korea has been paid off. Pentagon will drop neutron bombs on US cities. Civil war will for resources in US will justify martial law and non-compliant survivors will be used as slave labor to make a "recovery" by 2021. Details below. Distribute freely via Creative Commons.
President Trump and corporate media has been playing every old cold war enemy to instill in fear people across the planet. The US is the creator of terrorist organizations throughout the planet, now they have paid off an old commie "Bush axis of evil" enemy to work with them - North Korea. What does North Korea have to loose - nothing, no infrastructure or resources and a president who doesn't give a shit about his people - just like most politicians here in the USA. Since 911 worked so well with Saudia Arabia, Isreal, and the Pentagon installing so much fear in people that the US gave up its constitution to the Patriot Act. So, the Pentagon and Shadow Government are going do what works - this time harder, much harder.

The US will provoke and take a first strike, sorry about that US base in Japan - the nuclear blast won't make a difference to Fukashima and leaves TEPCO and GE off the hook. "North Korean missles" (actually US neutron bombs) will take out major West Coast Blue cities like Portland, San Francisco, and Los Angeles - for some reason the missles aimed at Seatlle missed and didn't quite make it to San Diego. (Don't worry there won't be an EMP, the Pentagon still needs the infrastructure - that's why they will use neutron bombs on the population.) By the way, a few selected right wing Trumpites, politicians, and other select government officials will get a heads up and for some reason will be out of town that day - just like the Oklahoma City bombing and 911 - special people don't have to be there.

The scenario for survivors will be no food, from radioactive California, and civil war for resources along the West Coast. Since the US will be down a bit, "Russia will nuke" (actually US neutron bombs again) the US Midwest old missle silos, Chicago, St. Louis, New Orleans, and a couple of US Southeast costal cities, like Atlanta and maybe even the Bronx in New York. By the way, Russia missed Washington, DC (but the Pentagon go another small missle to make it look good). At that time there will be enforced Martial Law throughout the US. For some reason it will only take 4 years to "rebuild" under martial law and "all will be well" by 2021, as corporate media will report.

Why should the Bank of England and Global Corporation take another Wall Street bail out when they can take everything, before it all falls out in October (pun intended)? Plus global warming will be down since the major contributor to global warming, US, will be down and out. It will take more loans to rebuild and those who still owe will be forced to pay, like home, student, and car loans. Oh by the way, there was a war so insurance companies didn't have to pay out. Since there are a lot of homeless survivors and being homeless is a crime, you get to help rebuild - as a slave to the new world order. It all works out in the end and Agenda 21 is realised.

That's all folks! Another looney 'toon.

Biggest False Flag Since WWII 12.Aug.2017 19:14


Biggest False Flag Since the artillery barrage on Fort Sumter..

Meanwhile back on planet earth...

the Kims have made a career of shorting the south korean stock market then causing a crisis, then covering their positions, and using the money to buy western goodies for the cronies who keep them in power.

thats all this round is.

NK = Nothingburger What happened to the Iran stuff, 4-5 yrs ago? 13.Aug.2017 13:35


same will happen here

btw NK is far less even of a 'paper tiger' than Iran is/was..... the NK regime (while yes of course their artillery massed on border w/ SK could indeed kill-maim hundreds of thousands if Kim was to go psycho-"scorched earth"-"IDGAF what happens".... but that ain't gonna happen) is puny and insignificant in military comparison to the U.S.

Everyone (besides Tweety Bird and his ilk, natch) with half a brain cell knows that NK has less-than-zero chance vs. USA, or China / Japan for that matter, in some sort of military-diplo standoff.

The NK regime will be permanently erased from the face of the Earth in such a confrontation, and rather rapidly (within hours, faster thank Saddam or Noriega even) to boot.

Trump knows this i.e. 1,000% inherent military superiority dominance of U.S. vs NK, of course. He is just playing rhetorical games (and no, you ignorant ****s, it is not going to be WW III / nuka-cola time) as he does with all major political topics, and will handle it with executive decision accordingly and-or as needed.

so no, not gonna happen.

and the "War On Terror" (largely based on "those ****in' Towelheads" drooling paranoia) certainly doesn't need NK to continue unabated.

Not really a "nothingburger" to the powers that be... 14.Aug.2017 09:51


N. Korea is a one of the discordant notes in the US's quest to rule the world economy utterly and completely. The US empire is kept afloat by military power, as all empire's have been in history. Nuclear weapons in the hands of small nations like N. Korea mean our military can be thwarted, N. Korea could never build the kind of military muscle to counter a US naval armada but a single nuclear strike could destroy or disable the fleet. The ability to blunt US power by "rogue" countries in that way is unacceptable to the US, they believe that one nation with nuclear weapons could cause a chain reaction of other "rogue" nuclear nations countering US military power. It's the old domino theory, which actually has some substance. It's not just the US though, the nuclear club, including Russia and China, don't want any new members, they have their economic stakes in the 3rd world also and don't want to jeopardize it, jostling with each other and the US is bad enough. So it's not "nothing", it's a very real threat to the hegemony of the 1st world over the 3rd. Of course the environmental consequences of nuclear strikes would be catastrophic to humanity, which doesn't seem to come up much in these conversations. One wonders what would be left of the world economy to even rule in the event of some kind of nuclear conflict. Are they really insane enough to use these weapons?

You answered your own question 14.Aug.2017 17:28


erasmus: "Are they really insane enough to use these weapons?"

answer, No they are not. and will not (make use of them).

Your ^^post (while sure, it contains some points of geopolitical/military merit) is pure hypothetical prognostication.

Nuclear weapons remain the deadly, un-openable can of worms they were upon introduction decades ago. After the non-reproducible, global-changing catastrophe of World War II was given a finale with Japan as the example.

and NK remains a Nothingburger. Pathetic little regime which (as previously stated, barring a "scorched earth/IDGAF" last ditch 'blammo' from NK's side which ya _would_ be 100% insane...) will indeed be wiped off the map tout de suite if they really, truly, actually decide they wanna play with the 'big boys'. Pretty simple, cut and dried.

How can you be so sure? 15.Aug.2017 16:54


To: -

How can you be certain the N. Korean regime wouldn't use nukes if it was faced with annihilation from the West? Where do you get this absolute certainty from? I would love to believe that our world leaders aren't insane enough to use nukes, no matter how much pressure they are faced with, but I don't have that much faith in humanity.

I don't disagree that the US could still destroy the infrastructure of N. Korea with a scorched earth blitzkrieg, even if N. Korea had nukes it would still happen. However, nukes raise the stakes to astronomically higher levels, it was one thing to devastate non nuke countries like Iraq or Libya because there was relatively little damage done in return to the US military, but nukes give a small country like N. Korea the ability to cause serious damage to the US military, the cost of destroying N. Korea could be raised to a point it might not be acceptable to the US to take action, if it wanted to.

There is nothing, at this point, in N. Korea that should be motivating the US to rattle it's sabers in this way and making threats of direct military action, N. Korea doesn't have oil like Libya and Iraq do so N. Korea isn't in a position to challenge the hegemony of the petrodollar, which is what caused the US to take military action against them, so why is the US so threatened?

It's like I said, the idea that small countries can possess nukes that make the US think twice about bullying them is unacceptable. How is that "hypothetical prognostication"? All this has been played out recently with other "rogue nations", all you have to do is observe what has been going on and also understand the history of US imperialism. All you told me was that there was no way the bombs will be used but offered no explanation as to why. How does that change anything I wrote? Do you have an alternative analysis? What is it then?

One more thing to add... 15.Aug.2017 17:13


Not to get too conspiratorial but I also have to suggest that maybe N. Korea doesn't really have functional nukes and US intelligence knows this, perhaps Kim Jong is playing the game for his own reasons, maybe this is all a pretext for the US to take direct military action, for all we know a giant oil field has been discovered in the Sea of Japan right off the coast of N. Korea and the US doesn't want N. Korea to become an oil power, especially since the US is already fighting hard in Afghanistan to keep Iran from piping oil to China. OK, I have no evidence for this theory and if you want to accuse me of "hypothetical prognostication" for this one, I'll own it.

RE: "certain the N. Korean regime wouldn't use nukes" 18.Aug.2017 00:28


where did I state they "wouldn't use nukes" (or attempt to)?

I did hint, previous ^^comment above, about the vast force of artillery along the NK/SK border. But sure if Kim was to go "scorched earth" -- as implied in my comment -- there is a possibility they would 'use nukes'.

Yet again, from a military point of view it would be 100% loss for the NK regime. Yes of course a NK nuclear warhead detonation would be vastly deadly and destructive... but aside from taking out a military or civilian target within 5,000 or so miles of North Korea itself, none of their weapons have capability of reaching the U.S. mainland i.e. one of America's large cities. Sure, as previously acknowledged South Korean civilians would be at risk. And naturally, airburst nuclear explosions will be no environmental picnic.

But there won't be dozens or hundreds of such detonations - after the first single NK nuclear strike in anger (against anyone: US / China / Japan / where-whoever), their regime will be extinguished instantaneously. Probably and primarily by conventional (non-nuclear) forces, because the U.S. and whatever other victorious powers certainly will want to militarily occupy NK at the finish of it all, which would be made vastly more difficult after a prolonged or substantial exchange of nuclear weapon strikes. (This latter point is, of course, yet another reason why nukes are a 'bad idea', even from a military strategic and tactical point of view. Nobody -- in their right mind -- "wants" to use nukes. They are quite literally a pain in the ass.)

Again (you assert / ask "why is the US so threatened") the U.S. is not 'threatened'. It is merely a period of elevated-heightened rhetoric; aka saber rattling. There is no geopolitical-economic resource 'prize' at stake here (not for example, as there indeed was from 1990-2003 with the Iraq regime and its risk -- at the end of that time interval -- of creating their own non-U.S.-dollar oil bourse for petroleum transactions, which directly precipitated the subsequent U.S. military invasion and occupation of Iraq.) Just another ***tbox, tinpot little regime trying to draw attention to themselves and/or 'testing' the recently elected U.S. president (who did have pointed rhetoric about regimes such as Kim's during the 2016 election campaign season).