Western media operates as a covert instrument of intelligence agencies. Conflict with Iran is imminent. Who will back down first?
Rapidly unfolding false flag incidents aim to extend the tenures of Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu beyond their expected terms. However, these events primarily expose how deeply Western media now serves as a compromised tool for intelligence operations.
Facing extraordinary threats to their positions, it is logical to expect that both leaders might resort to deceitful tactics to maintain power. Trump, aware that losing control of both congressional chambers could lead to impeachment, has been speculated in prior writings to consider drastic measures such as canceling midterm elections or refusing to accept their outcomes, potentially using a war with Iran as justification. To enact such a legal maneuver would require a crisis on the magnitude of Pearl Harbor or 9/11—America would need to be not only at war but also attacked domestically, a scenario some argue is constitutionally unfeasible. Nonetheless, Trump has a history of flouting norms and stretching limits, so it would be consistent for him and his legal advisers to be plotting something extraordinarily significant under cover of darkness.
A similar pattern applies to Benjamin Netanyahu, who faces seven corruption charges should his trial proceed in Israel. Keeping Israel embroiled in perpetual conflict with Iran and amplifying the perception that this small nation is under siege could effectively prevent his prosecution.
Therefore, despite accusations of conspiracy theories, many suspect that false flag operations—or even multiple staged incidents—may soon emerge both in Israel and Western countries to rationalize warfare. Trump’s statements about resuming bombing following the midterms might be a strategic ploy to disguise plans for an earlier strike against Iran. Launching a large-scale offensive prematurely is undoubtedly perilous, as rising gas prices and American casualties could politically doom Trump before the elections. Yet, this president views himself as far smarter than reality suggests and has dismissed advisers who might challenge his immature and flawed assessments of U.S. military strength in the Middle East. The apparent goal seems to be eliminating any chance Iran could initiate a pre-emptive attack.
How else can any skeptic interpret two recent major “attacks” reported by Western mainstream outlets targeting Israel and the West? The purported terror incident aboard the Dubai flight destined for Israel raises doubts, especially since Iran warned hours prior about an impending false flag operation intended to blame them. While a cockpit altercation involving a stabbing did occur, the narrative of the aircraft losing control only to be saved at the last second by Israeli pilots onboard—who conveniently detained the pilot—resembles a poorly executed Hollywood thriller. The timing and the speed with which Netanyahu and the media labeled this an act of terror are certainly questionable.
A few days earlier, a similar implausible scenario unfolded in the UK at an RAF base, where men were detained on terrorism charges, and Andy Burnham hastily accused Iran. Yet, where is the proof? Did Trump encourage Burnham to stage a false flag when they met at the UN assembly? Despite their arrests, the suspects were released on bail, and no incriminating evidence was found in their vehicles parked near woods suggesting imminent attacks. Were they manipulated or paid to undertake tasks guaranteed to be intercepted? If Iran orchestrated this, it likely would not involve such clumsy theatrics.
A more realistic perspective on both the Israeli hostage flight and the UK airbase terrorism claims is that they were orchestrated by the desperate leaders of the U.S. and Israel aiming to condition Western publics for a forthcoming war—one in which the UK is expected to play a significant role despite its foreign minister’s apparent posturing about restraining Israel’s Gaza actions, which likely served as mere PR.
This outcome seemed unavoidable, especially given the inclination to exploit Western media as complicit partners in a broad distortion of facts advancing elite agendas controlling legacy outlets. A conflict with Iran looms on a scale far beyond previous “incursions.” The essential question remains: who will capitulate first and trigger Hostilities? Yet the old adage endures for truth seekers: never accept the blame assigned by Western media, as the usual suspects rarely wield the real power. Furthermore, consider: why would Iran orchestrate such attacks? What benefit would it bring? The sole beneficiaries are those presenting themselves as victims to validate their forthcoming actions. Past fabrications propagated by the U.S., UK, and Israel—the latter a master at manufacturing fake news, particularly video—are too vast to overlook. As long as Western media embraces its role, what we observe is precisely what their true function is—supported by the fact that almost all operate at a loss.
About the Author
