The Evil Empire's Playbook: A History of American False Flag Operations
- th1sandth8tcom
- Jul 12
- 17 min read
Resources:
***
Throughout its rise to global dominance, the United States has perfected a disturbing pattern: exploiting crises—both real and manufactured—to justify military interventions that serve corporate and geopolitical interests rather than genuine national security. From the mysterious explosion of the USS Maine to the phantom attacks in the Gulf of Tonkin - from the fabrications about the sinking of the Lusitania to the lies about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - from the utterly heinous Operation Northwoods to the GrandDaddy of all False Flags - 9/11 - the American empire has repeatedly used false flag operations—real or manipulated—to to feed the empire’s neverending quench for power and wealth. American foreign policy has repeatedly followed the same playbook: crisis, blame, media amplification, and military action that enriches the same players while expanding imperial reach. This is the playbook of an empire that wraps its imperialism in the flag while spilling blood for profit. Understanding this pattern isn't conspiracy theorizing—it's pattern recognition based on declassified documents, congressional testimony, and historical analysis. As new crises emerge and familiar voices beat drums for war, recognizing this playbook becomes essential for any citizen hoping to distinguish genuine threats from manufactured consent.
The template for American crisis exploitation was established in Havana Harbor on February 15, 1898, when the USS Maine exploded, killing 266 American sailors. Without investigation, without evidence, and with remarkable speed, the American press and government blamed Spain despite the fact that the official conclusion stated “There is no evidence that a mine caused the explosion or that Spanish forces were involved.” Instead "Remember the Maine, to Hell with Spain!" became the rallying cry that launched the Spanish-American War.
The media campaign was orchestrated by newspaper magnates William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, who understood that war sold papers. Hearst allegedly told his photographer in Cuba: "You furnish the pictures, and I'll furnish the war." Whether apocryphal or not, the quote captures the essence of what followed - a disgusting onslaught of yellow journalism that helped fuel the lie and thus the war.
What followed was pure imperial expansion. The United States "liberated" Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines—transforming overnight from a continental republic into a global empire. When Admiral Hyman Rickover conducted a thorough investigation in 1976, he concluded the explosion was most likely caused by an internal coal bunker fire, not Spanish sabotage. But by then, the American empire had been built on the lie.
The Maine established the formula that would be refined for over a century: mysterious incident + immediate enemy identification + media amplification = public consent for predetermined policy goals. It was a formula that would be refined and repeated for over a century.
The Perfection of Deception: Gulf of Tonkin (1964)
If the Maine represented imperialism's birth through crisis exploitation, the Gulf of Tonkin incident marked its coming of age into systematic deception. The event demonstrated how the U.S. government had learned to manufacture consent not through staging attacks, but through deliberate misrepresentation of ambiguous incidents.
The Political Context: The timing of Gulf of Tonkin carries extraordinary significance. Just nine months earlier, President Kennedy—who had signed National Security Action Memorandum 263 ordering withdrawal of 1,000 advisors from Vietnam—was assassinated in Dallas. Kennedy had privately told aides he planned full withdrawal after the 1964 election, a position that directly opposed Pentagon, CIA, and defense contractor interests in escalation. Within weeks of Johnson taking office, Kennedy's withdrawal orders were rescinded and Vietnam policy completely reversed. Now the new administration needed justification for the war Kennedy had refused to fight.
The Setup: On August 2, 1964, North Vietnamese patrol boats engaged the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin. This first incident was real—though the U.S. ship was conducting intelligence operations in North Vietnamese waters, making the "unprovoked attack" characterization simply false. But it was the phantom second attack that would change history.
The Phantom Battle: Two days later, during a dark, stormy night on August 4, the Maddox and USS Turner Joy reported being under attack again. Sonar operators heard torpedo sounds, radar detected enemy vessels, and the ships fired into the darkness for hours at targets they couldn't see.
The problem: none of it was real. Declassified NSA documents, released in 2005 under the Freedom of Information Act, prove definitively that no North Vietnamese attack occurred on August 4. The "torpedoes" were sonar echoes from the ships' own propellers. The "enemy vessels" were radar ghosts created by atmospheric conditions. The "muzzle flashes" were lightning strikes on the horizon. Modern pop culture has titled this clandestine fuckery as ‘The Fog of War’.
The Cover-Up in Real Time: Even as the phantom battle unfolded, those on the scene expressed doubts. Captain John Herrick, commander of the task force, cabled Washington that same night: "Review of action makes many reported contacts and torpedoes fired appear doubtful. Freak weather effects on radar and overeager sonar men may have accounted for many reports. No actual visual sightings by Maddox. Suggest complete evaluation before any further action is taken."
The cable reached Washington at 1:27 AM. By that time, President Johnson had already decided to address the nation about the "unprovoked attacks" and seek Congressional authorization for military action.
The Deliberate Deception: This wasn't a case of fog-of-war confusion—it was calculated misrepresentation. Johnson privately acknowledged the uncertainty, telling an aide: "For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there." Defense Secretary Robert McNamara received multiple cables expressing doubts about the second attack but chose to present Congress with absolute certainty about "unprovoked aggression."
Years later, McNamara would admit the devastating truth: "It didn't happen."
The Political Machinery: Within hours of the phantom attack, Johnson appeared on national television declaring: "Aggression by terror against the peaceful villagers of South Vietnam has now been joined by open aggression on the high seas against the United States of America." Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution with only two dissenting votes, granting Johnson unlimited authority to "take all necessary measures" in Southeast Asia.
The Ultimate Revelation: The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution became the legal foundation for a war that would consume 58,000 American lives and millions of Vietnamese. It was based entirely on an attack that never happened, presented by officials who knew it never happened, to a Congress and public that trusted their government to tell the truth about matters of war and peace.
The Historical Pattern: The Gulf of Tonkin incident revealed a crucial evolution in crisis exploitation: you don't need to stage dramatic attacks when you can weaponize confusion, amplify uncertainty into certainty, and rush to irreversible action before facts can interfere with predetermined objectives. Less than a year after removing the president who opposed escalation, a phantom attack provided the perfect justification for unlimited war powers.
The template was perfected—ambiguous incident plus deliberate misrepresentation plus media amplification plus political urgency equals unlimited war powers. And it happened precisely when the military-industrial complex needed it most: after the inconvenient president was gone and the compliant one needed justification for profitable war.
Perhaps no document better reveals the American government's willingness to kill its own citizens for political gain than Operation Northwoods. Proposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and approved by Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer, this plan called for:
Hijacking American planes and blaming Cuba
Sinking a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay
Orchestrating terrorist attacks in Miami and Washington
Assassinating Cuban refugees and blaming Castro
Faking the deaths of American citizens
The goal? Justify an invasion of Cuba. The plan made it all the way to President Kennedy's desk, where he rejected it and subsequently fired Lemnitzer. Within a year, Kennedy was dead, and many of the Northwoods planners remained in power.
Northwoods proves beyond doubt that the highest levels of American military leadership were willing to stage false flag operations against American citizens. The only question is: how many times did they actually do it?
If you want a deep dive and access to a slew of resources on Northwoods, check out my essay linked in the above subheading.
The CIA's 1953 overthrow of Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh showcased another evolution in false flag tactics. Operation Ajax hired thugs to pose as communists, staged riots, and created chaos—all to justify a "restoration of order" that installed the Shah's brutal dictatorship.
This wasn't just about fooling the public; it was about creating reality itself. Stage the crisis, film the violence, control the narrative, achieve the objective. Democracy in Iran died so British Petroleum could live. Although this was more of a coup than an American false flag by strict definition, I figured I would point to one of the many American Backed Coups in this essay.
The European Extension: Operation Gladio's Strategy of Tension
What worked in Iran was soon systematized across Western Europe through Operation Gladio, a clandestine NATO program that represented the full maturation of false flag methodology. From the 1940s through the 1990s, the CIA and MI6 established secret "stay-behind" armies in every NATO country, ostensibly to resist Soviet invasion but actually to conduct domestic political manipulation through false flag terrorism.
The strategy was elegant in its cynicism: CIA-trained operatives would conduct terrorist attacks against civilian targets, then ensure the blame fell on communist or leftist groups. The resulting fear and chaos would drive European populations toward right-wing governments and away from any political parties that might threaten American corporate interests.
The Italian Laboratory: Italy became the primary testing ground for Gladio's "Strategy of Tension." The results were devastating:
The Piazza Fontana Bombing (1969): A bomb exploded in a Milan bank, killing 17 and wounding 88. Authorities immediately blamed leftist anarchists, arresting hundreds and conducting show trials. Only decades later did investigations reveal the attack was carried out by right-wing extremists working with Gladio operatives. The goal: prevent the Italian Communist Party from gaining political power.
The Bologna Railway Station Massacre (1980): Eighty-five people died and 200 were wounded when a bomb exploded in Bologna's central train station. Again, authorities blamed leftist terrorists. Again, the truth emerged years later: the attack was conducted by fascists working with Gladio networks. The bombing occurred during a period when the Italian government was moving toward including communists in the ruling coalition.
The Aldo Moro Assassination (1978): When former Prime Minister Aldo Moro attempted to bring the Italian Communist Party into government, he was kidnapped and murdered by the Red Brigades. Declassified documents suggest Gladio networks had infiltrated the Red Brigades and may have manipulated the operation to eliminate a politician who threatened American strategic interests.
The Global Network: Similar operations occurred across Europe. In Belgium, the Brabant killings—a series of supermarket massacres in the 1980s—bore Gladio hallmarks but remain officially unsolved. In Germany, the Red Army Faction's most spectacular attacks coincided suspiciously with moments when leftist parties gained political momentum.
The Operational Method: Gladio perfected the false flag formula:
Recruit extremists from both left and right, often using former Nazis and fascists as operatives
Conduct spectacular attacks against innocent civilians to maximize psychological impact
Control the investigation through infiltrated security services
Blame the political opposition through coordinated media campaigns
Achieve policy objectives as frightened populations support authoritarian measures
The Nazi Connection: Many Gladio operatives were recruited from former SS and Wehrmacht officers who had worked with the OSS (CIA's predecessor) during World War II. The network was literally run by Nazis, including General Reinhard Gehlen, who had commanded Wehrmacht intelligence on the Eastern Front before becoming a CIA asset. As AJ Gentile, creator of the Why Files, noted on his appearance on Joe Rogan: "So civilians were killed in bombings by the CIA-trained guerrilla army, and they were trained by a Nazi general who was tight with Allen Dulles."
The Official Acknowledgment: Unlike many intelligence operations, Gladio's existence was eventually confirmed by multiple European governments. In 1990, Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti publicly acknowledged the program's existence, triggering investigations across Europe. Parliamentary inquiries in Italy, Belgium, and Switzerland confirmed decades of false flag terrorism conducted by NATO allies against their own populations.
From Coups to Terrorism: The progression from Operation Ajax to Operation Gladio reveals how crisis exploitation evolved from occasional foreign interventions to systematic domestic manipulation across the Western alliance. What began as manufactured coups in distant countries became permanent false flag networks operating in the heart of democratic Europe.
The template was now complete: train secret armies, conduct terrorist attacks, blame political enemies, and achieve predetermined objectives while maintaining the facade of democratic governance. The techniques perfected in Iran and Italy would soon find their way back to American soil, as the methods of empire always return home to roost.
The Suspicious Pattern of "Surprise" Attacks
History reveals a disturbing pattern of "surprise" attacks that conveniently align with pre-existing policy goals, where advance warnings are ignored or incidents are deliberately engineered to justify predetermined military objectives.
Pearl Harbor (1941): The "Surprise" That Wasn't
The attack on Pearl Harbor has been presented as the quintessential surprise assault, yet declassified documents reveal a complex picture of advance warnings, deliberate provocations, and suspicious failures that enabled the attack to succeed – in other words, the US allowed Pearl Harbor to happen in order to justify the complete and utter destruction of Japan and cement the US position as the global superpower of the world.
The McCollum Memo: On October 7, 1940—more than a year before Pearl Harbor—Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum prepared a memo for President Roosevelt outlining eight specific actions to provoke Japan into attacking the United States. The memo stated: "It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado... If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better."
Arranging for U.S. cruisers to be based at Pearl Harbor
Arranging for submarines to be based at Manila
Keeping the main strength of the U.S. fleet in Hawaiian waters
Sending cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, and Singapore
Requiring the Dutch to refuse Japanese demands for undue economic concessions
Completely embargoing all trade with Japan
Extending aid to Nationalist China
Stationing armed forces in territories that Japan would view as encirclement
The Intelligence Warnings: Multiple sources provided advance warning of the attack. U.S. Naval Intelligence had broken Japanese diplomatic codes and was intercepting communications about war preparations. On November 26, 1941, Intelligence reported a Japanese task force had departed Japan but "disappeared" from surveillance. Ambassador Joseph Grew warned from Tokyo that Japan might attempt a "surprise attack on Pearl Harbor." British intelligence, Dutch intelligence, and Soviet intelligence all provided warnings of imminent Japanese action against Hawaii.
The Strategic Positioning: Most suspiciously, Roosevelt ordered the Pacific Fleet to remain at Pearl Harbor despite recommendations from Admiral James Richardson to move it to safer waters. Richardson was subsequently relieved of command after protesting the decision. The newest aircraft carriers—the most valuable ships in the fleet—were conveniently ordered away from Pearl Harbor just before the attack, while older battleships remained as sitting targets.
The Communication Failures: On the morning of December 7, a radar operator detected the incoming Japanese aircraft 137 miles away and reported it to his superiors. The information was dismissed. A Japanese submarine was detected and attacked in Pearl Harbor's waters hours before the air attack, but this intelligence wasn't properly relayed. These weren't random failures—they followed a pattern of ensuring the attack would succeed.
The result was exactly what Roosevelt needed: a devastated but not crippled Pacific Fleet, sufficient American casualties to inflame public opinion, and immediate Congressional authorization for unlimited war against Japan and Germany. American isolationism died at Pearl Harbor, and a global empire was born.
The Lusitania (1915): Passengers as Human Shields - American Entry into WW1
The sinking of the Lusitania represents one of the earliest examples of deliberately placing American civilians in harm's way to create provocative incidents for eventual war justification.
The Setup: The RMS Lusitania was presented to the American public as an innocent passenger liner carrying civilians across the Atlantic. However, declassified British Admiralty records reveal it was actually serving as an auxiliary cruiser, carrying massive quantities of war materials to Britain. The ship's manifest, kept secret for decades, showed:
4.2 million rounds of rifle ammunition
1,248 cases of 3-inch artillery shells
18 cases of non-explosive fuses
Tons of other military supplies
The Warnings: Germany had declared the waters around Britain a war zone and specifically warned that ships carrying contraband would be targeted. On May 1, 1915—the day the Lusitania departed New York—the German Embassy published warnings in American newspapers stating: "Notice! Travellers intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and Great Britain... vessels flying the flag of Great Britain or any of her allies are liable to destruction."
The Deliberate Vulnerability: Despite knowing the ship was carrying munitions through submarine-infested waters, British Admiralty:
Reduced the Lusitania's escort protection
Ordered the ship to maintain normal peacetime speed rather than maximum speed
Directed it through the most dangerous waters rather than safer northern routes
Failed to provide adequate submarine warnings despite having intelligence of U-boat positions
The Strategic Result: When the torpedo struck, the massive secondary explosion—caused by the military cargo—ensured maximum casualties. Of the 1,959 people aboard, 1,198 died, including 128 Americans. The incident created the first major surge of American anti-German sentiment, laying groundwork for eventual U.S. entry into WWI.
The Cover-Up: For decades, the British government denied the ship carried munitions. Only when salvage operations in the 1980s recovered artillery shells and ammunition from the wreck was the deception finally exposed. Passengers had been unknowingly used as human shields for a floating ammunition depot.
The Pattern Revealed:
Both Pearl Harbor and the Lusitania demonstrate the same tactical approach:
Place American assets or civilians in maximum danger
Ignore or suppress warnings that could prevent attacks
Ensure attacks succeed with maximum casualties and emotional impact
Use resulting tragedy to justify predetermined military objectives
Classify evidence of deliberate vulnerability for decades
The "surprise" attacks weren't intelligence failures—they were strategic successes that provided exactly the provocations needed to overcome public resistance to war. In each case, American lives were the acceptable price for imperial expansion disguised as righteous retaliation.
9/11 (2001): While the official narrative stands, the anomalies pile up: NORAD's bizarre failure, the collapse of WTC 7, the missing Pentagon footage, the insider trading, the PNAC's stated need for "a new Pearl Harbor." At minimum, the attacks were exploited with suspicious efficiency to justify pre-planned wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you want a deep dive into the ultimate false flag, here’s my 9/11 dissertation.
The Capitol Question: When False Flags Come Home
The events of January 6, 2021, raise uncomfortable questions about domestic false flag potential. With numerous federal informants in the crowd, suspicious figures like Ray Epps urging people to enter the Capitol while avoiding prosecution, and the convenient timing for expanding domestic surveillance powers—the event bears hallmarks of an orchestrated crisis.
Whether fully staged or merely infiltrated and manipulated, January 6 served the same function as foreign false flags: justifying expanded government power and crushing dissent.
While evidence remains speculative, the pandemic's exploitation follows false flag patterns:
A crisis appears (natural or engineered)
Fear dominates media coverage
Pre-existing agendas advance rapidly
Powers expand, profits soar, dissent is crushed
The original crisis matters less than its exploitation
Whether COVID was intentional or not, its use to reshape society, transfer wealth, and expand control follows the false flag playbook perfectly.
Here’s the conclusion section of my COVID dissertation embedded in the above heading:
So… let’s get things straight. When you combine the fact that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was quite literally the biggest covid lab in the world with prior reports of safety concerns and previous incidents at the lab, alongside the fact that the main WHO investigation led by the unambiguously biased Peter Daszak was completely fraudulent with the head of the WHO admitting they didn’t even look into the lab leak hypothesis AND the head researcher at Wuhan (the Batwoman) claiming that her instinct was that it came from their lab and that an animal-human transmission would occur in Southern China, not Wuhan, the answer is self evident – Covid came from the lab. The real question now shifts from the virus's origin to the reasons behind the cover-up. The media's initial dismissal and censorship of the lab leak theory as misinformation raise alarming concerns about the narrative surrounding the pandemic. Drawing parallels to the opioid crisis, where pharmaceutical companies played a significant role in creating and profiting from the epidemic, it is not unreasonable to consider the possibility that Big Pharma may have had a hand in creating the COVID-19 pandemic. The potential for intentional creation or manipulation of the virus for financial gain and/or increased government control cannot be ignored. As we delve deeper into this issue, it becomes crucial to investigate the motivations behind the suppression of the lab leak theory and to determine the extent of any potential involvement by pharmaceutical corporations. The striking similarities between the opioid crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, in terms of media manipulation and corporate influence, demand a thorough and transparent examination. Only by unraveling the truth behind the origins of this global health crisis can we hope to prevent future catastrophes and hold those responsible accountable for their actions.
The Modern Evolution: Information-Based Crisis Manufacturing
Today's crisis exploitation rarely requires actual explosions. The weapons of mass destruction that justified the Iraq War existed only in PowerPoint presentations and Colin Powell's UN performance. The chemical weapons attacks that nearly triggered direct war with Syria remain disputed. The Iranian nuclear weapons program that has justified decades of sanctions and threats has been perpetually "months away from completion" since 1992.
Modern crisis manufacturing operates through information warfare:
Coordinated Intelligence Claims: Multiple agencies present the same "evidence" simultaneously, creating the appearance of independent confirmation when sources often trace back to the same fabricated or manipulated intelligence.
Media Amplification: Planted stories in major outlets create echo chambers where false information appears validated through repetition across seemingly independent sources.
Think Tank Validation: Policy papers from prestigious institutions provide academic credibility to predetermined military objectives.
Foreign Validation: Allied leaders provide international legitimacy for American actions, often based on intelligence provided by the U.S. itself.
The Iraq WMD campaign exemplified this evolution. "Curveball," an Iraqi alcoholic and known fabricator, provided testimony that German intelligence had warned was unreliable. This testimony was laundered through official CIA channels, presented to the UN by Colin Powell, and validated by Tony Blair's government using the same original source. The media reported "multiple independent confirmations" of the same fabricated intelligence.
By the time the deception was exposed, Iraq was occupied, Saddam was dead, and American oil companies had access to the world's fifth-largest proven reserves for the first time since 1972.
The Evil Empire's Essential Method
False flag operations aren't aberrations in American history—they're essential to how the empire functions. When the public won't support a war, create an incident. When democracy blocks expansion, stage a crisis. When profits need protecting, manufacture an enemy.
From the Maine to the Gulf of Tonkin, from Northwoods to 9/11, the playbook remains consistent:
Emotional Urgency: Crises always demand immediate action before careful analysis can undermine predetermined objectives. "We can't wait for the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."
Media Coordination: Information flows through apparently independent sources that actually trace back to the same government agencies or allied intelligence services.
Silencing Dissent: Questioning official narratives becomes "unpatriotic," "giving aid to enemies," or "conspiracy theorizing"—regardless of factual accuracy.
Historical Amnesia: Each new crisis is presented as unprecedented and unrelated to previous deceptions, even when the same officials use identical rhetoric.
Profitable Outcomes: The solutions to manufactured crises consistently benefit the same defense contractors, oil companies, and geopolitical allies—regardless of actual security outcomes.
Evidence Classification: Details that might expose deception remain classified for decades, ensuring that public understanding comes too late to prevent repetition.
The Current Moment: Iran and the Familiar Drumbeat
Today, the same voices that fabricated evidence for the Iraq War are employing identical tactics regarding Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu, who testified before Congress in 2002 guaranteeing that removing Saddam would have "enormous positive reverberations," now appears before international audiences claiming Iran is months away from nuclear weapons—the same claim he's been making since 1992.
The same think tanks that produced Iraq War propaganda now publish papers about the Iranian threat. The same media outlets that amplified WMD claims now repeat intelligence assertions about Iranian nuclear ambitions. The same defense contractors that profited from Iraq reconstruction now bid for contracts to rebuild whatever Iran becomes after potential military action.
The playbook hasn't changed because it works. Public memory is short, official sources retain credibility despite repeated deceptions, and the profits from crisis exploitation far exceed the costs of eventual exposure.
Breaking the Pattern: A Citizen's Guide to Crisis Recognition
Understanding this history isn't about cynicism—it's about informed citizenship. When the next crisis emerges, when media outlets suddenly speak with unified voices, when questioning becomes treason, when solutions require immediate military action—historical literacy becomes a democratic necessity.
Red flags for manufactured crises:
Intelligence claims that can't be independently verified
Emotional urgency that precludes careful analysis
Media coordination across apparently independent sources
Solutions that benefit the same corporate and geopolitical interests
Suppression of dissenting voices or contradictory evidence
Historical parallels to previous deceptions using identical rhetoric
Essential questions for any crisis:
Who benefits from the proposed solution?
What economic interests align with military action?
Are intelligence sources truly independent?
Why is immediate action required without deliberation?
How does this crisis serve pre-existing policy objectives?
The Ongoing Challenge
The American empire wasn't built through democratic deliberation about competing foreign policy options. It was constructed through systematic exploitation of crises—real, exaggerated, and manufactured—that created public consent for policies serving elite interests rather than genuine security needs.
From the Maine to the Gulf of Tonkin, from Operation Northwoods to Iraqi WMDs, the pattern remains consistent: crisis exploitation in service of predetermined objectives. The methods evolve, the technology improves, but the fundamental approach persists because it works.
The only defense against this manipulation is historical literacy combined with radical skepticism of official narratives, especially when they demand urgent action, expanded powers, or new wars. In the empire of manufactured crises, the first casualty isn't truth—truth is murdered in advance to make the crisis politically useful.
As new crises emerge and familiar voices demand familiar solutions, remembering this history becomes an act of democratic self-defense. The question isn't whether they're lying—history proves they often are. The question is whether citizens will recognize the patterns quickly enough to prevent the next profitable catastrophe.
Comments