Warning: Lottaz + McGovern for US/Iran War Mechanism

Provocation, narratative setting, response, engineered sinking, Kaboom

Published: 2024-01-19

Updated 2024-01-19: A two additional sections ‘Update: Obtaining Proper Assessments’ and an Afterward have been added.

---

Hoping One Is Wrong

Pascal Lottaz (Neutrality Studies) has called what is happening rather well. He questions why the US would initiate the escalation when the Secretary of Defense Lloyd is in hospital. His conclusion is that there is a power struggle in the White House and that the war hawks won. Seems reasonable.

But, this is not crucial.

He continues by examining the narratives being spewed by the spokesman for the US DoD, whatshisname the liar, and a few equivalents from the UK. He surmises an attempt to create the war with Iran which idiots like US Senator Lindsay 'end of times' Graham have been having sexual fantasizes about for years. Lottaz spots the narrative trick which will be used. The line is the calling for Iran to keep its proxy, the Houti, under control.

When this fails to happen and the Houti (Anṣār Allāh) respond, which they will, the US+UK will blame Iran.

Then comes Lottaz' historical awareness. Many, many wars have been started due to the sinking of ships, and many of them have been faked or allowed to happen on purpose, advertised as targets. The USS Maine in Havana, the Lusitania (was carrying gun cotton to Europe early in WWI and its journey was advertised), the Gulf of Tonkin event, the non-aircraft carrier sitting ducks left in Pearl Harbor etc. etc. etc..

So, here is the warning. If/When Ansar Allah attack a US Navy ship, if it sinks, we need to be very careful about how it was sunk. Drones will not sink a ship. They may cause fires, but there is no way a little drone with a kilo or two of TNT is going to sink a US warship.

Thus, if a US warship is sunk, immediately think "false flag" or "allowed to be sunk".

The event sequence from there is predictable. Iran will be blamed, the US population will become outraged because of the 100+ sailors who were injured and the few who died. The result is a Graham climax and WWIII.

Well done, Pascal. With the McGovern “false flag” awareness we have a viable trigger for WWIII. Everyone else, you've been warned. I hope I am wrong.

Update: Obtaining Proper Assessments

Luckily, there are principled, knowledgeable material scientists out there to assist with things like working out if a drone flying C4 or TNT could do the damage required to sink a specific ship.

The individual of whom I'm thinking provided expertise to a number of fora, including the UN, for events associated with what peaked in the "Douma Event" during the Dirty War on Syria.

Back in 2018 footage of scenes from a hospital in an outer suburb of Damascus, Douma, of people being doused in water emerged. Then pictures of yellow gas cylinders from nearby locations also suddenly appeared. The allegation launched was that Syria's government (i.e President al Assad) had used chemical weapons (chlorine) against his own people. The US + UK + France immediately launched weapons at Syria as this crossed a "red line" which Obama had publicly stated.

The UN agency which investigates these matters, the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) was undermined and their initial report doctored to suggest that the chemical attack was plausible. In fact, it was not. This was revealed by whistleblowers from inside the organisation leaking the un-edited version of the initial report to Wikileaks and fantastic follow up journalism and serious digging by Aaron Maté.

There were earlier staged events. It was against the event in Khan Sheikhoun on 4 April 2017 for which this academic first provided his expertise to undermine the generated narrative. He was punished for this when the journal to which an article which he had co-authored with other serious material-science experts refused to publish, even after the article had already passed peer review and been accepted. To put that in non-academic language: all of the expert reviewers (other professors) in the discipline agreed that the article submitted was of sufficient standard not only for 'science' but also for this journal. Accordingly, the journal accepted the review and agreed to publish. Then, they did an about face. This is obviously because some individual(s) lent on the journal's editorial board for political reasons. But, the paper's authors' reputations are tarnished anyway, even though the refusal to publish was "without prejudice".

So unusual is this type of behaviour in journals of the standard of 'Science & Global Security' (SGS) that the controversy generated hit the pages of 'Science', the most influential global academic journal.

The scientist to whom I am referring stood by his training and principles to cast serious doubt on the narratives being generated for both of these events (Khan Sheikhoun and Douma). He, and others he trust, may well be of great service again if this article's maritime false flag scenario is attempted.

His name is Theodore A. Postol, Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy in the Program in Science, Technology, and Society at MIT.

Afterword

I was a little reticent to publish this article. It is speculation rather than news analysis. However, history teaches us that wars are very often started by false flag events and that among these events, those involving the sinking of ship(s) are very common.

The question is how do we counter the success or likelihood of such an attempted false flag event?

Countering the success is extremely difficult, for it involves influencing a population to caution them against sliding into an emotional response before a proper assessment of the event, the sinking of a ship in this case, is made. There will be "baying for blood", so this approach to defeating the success of the ploy, after it is up and running, is almost impossible.

Given that, how can the likelihood of the scenario be reduced? This I believe is best achieved by declaring to those who may wish to execute such a thing that there is a significant body of people who already understand that such a tactic may be employed. i.e "We're onto it."

This is the purpose of this article, to declare up front that we know about these underhanded, manipulative, abusive tactics and see right through them.

With this, I justify the speculative nature of the article. It is designed to serve this purpose. The section on Postol, identifying a potential ally of ours in any 'after the event' assessment process, is an additional warning to the pschopaths that they may also be battling Professors, from MIT no less, too.

Peace be with you.

or you can support this work via Buy Me A Coffee or Patreon.

Sources

Theodore Postol, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Prestigious journal pulls paper about chemical attack in Syria after backlash, Kai Kupferschmidt, Science (the extremely influential academic journal), 2019-10-14

Postol on Syrian Attacks: OPCW Guilty of “Deception”, no author, Institute for Public Accuracy, 2019-06-06

September 2019, From the Editors, Science and Global Security, 2019-09

Sources

Waiting for Israeli Hari Kari, YesXorNo, 2024-01-11

US Decided To Have War With Iran! Act 1： Setting The Stage To Play The Victim., Pascal Lottaz, Neutrality Studies, 2024-01-13

When Yemen Does It It's Terrorism, When The US Does It It's “The Rules-Based Order”, Caitlin Johnston, Caitlin's Newsletter, 2024-01-18

Culture

John Williams & Vienna Philharmonic – Williams: Imperial March (from “Star Wars”), Deutsche Grammophon - DG, uploaded 2020-05-04

---

Copyleft: CC0