Middle East Meltdown: Escalation via False Flag?

What would be a red rag to a bull?

If you want a war, you want a reason to have a war. Ideally, that reason should be sound enough that no one opposes it. They don't all have to actively agree with it. Minimization of opposition to that reason is more powerful than actively winning everyone over, which is harder and more costly to achieve.

In the case of 9/11, there was zero opposition to the declarations and actions of the USA. Russia was actively helping with intelligence and assistance in the burgeoning “war on terror”, as were other nations. People wanted to help with the retribution. It took over a decade for people to question, never mind wake up. Most are still asleep. The 9/11 reason for war was effective, almost perfect.

The reason doesn't have to be actually legal if you are the global hegemon or its sanctioned co-entity, sponsored ally, vassal or proxy.

People claiming and citing international law as a check, balance, counter force or referential standard that actually impedes the actions of the global hegemon are making noises that do not concord with observable and fully documented actual historical behaviour and outcomes.

Iran: The Fix

We have already clearly stated that WW3 has been on for a decade plus, is a hybrid war, includes Ukraine, Palestine et al and now Iran. WW3 is about Empire and unipolar versus multipolar order; it is the logical extension of USA unipolar superpower doctrine extant since WW2.

We will publish more on this soon.

War with Iran has begun using false pretext. We are working on a very clear take on this demonstrating how there's no legal basis to attack Iran at all under any aspect of international law, as a matter of VST's documentary record.

Right now, the false pretext Israel is operating under is transparent, despite being pseudo legitimized by the corrupt IAEA vote claiming (falsely) that Iran is in violation of its NPT commitments.

Note: War is not a Presidential decision. It is congressional. This means Vance's framing is duplicitous in that it's a pre-conditioning for a means of congressional bypass (think “SMO” or “CTO”) or there is a compression of process in play.

This all indicates an active, escalatory false pretext trajectory i.e. there is an active work stream tasked with building more and more false pretext with which to legitimize what is being done and what is going to be done to Iran.

This trajectory is clearly visible and happening, but what is its pinnacle?

A false flag event, likely as extreme as a nuclear release (in the form of a dirty bomb rather than a full-on nuclear warhead detonation) will occur and be instantly blamed on the Iranians. This will constitute ultra high speed claims of unassailable and uncontested justification for a nuclear strike on multiple Iranian locations. This false flag could happen anywhere in the Middle East, Europe or even on US soil.

The threshold logic for this has two basic elements:

1. Iran's ability to fight against IS first and foremost turns out to be greater than anticipated and IS actually suffers more than can be openly admitted and more than can be handled, putting it onto a short survival timeline before undeniable, publicly visible state and military failure (despite present and even ramped up censorship and narrative/propaganda output). This includes Iran's internal resistance to political collapse being higher than expected (see Russia regime change failure via Ukraine).

2. An observable and escalating international opposition to USIS illegal combat operations against Iran that tracks towards nuclear-backed ultimatum to cease fire, combined with practical temporal and logistics constraints across the entire USIS military regional capability. In effect, if RU/CH/PAK make serious oppositional moves in diplomatic and military circles against present illegal combat operations, this element will be satisfied/triggered.

Together, past a crucial threshold known directly only to USIS-UK but potentially inferable to outsiders, these elements will, if exceeded, result in a nuclear false flag event.

The narrative will be:

“This is proof that an Iranian element DID have nuclear offensive capability after all and the malicious intent to use it against the USA. Israel tried to warn the world and no one believed Israel until this happened. There's only one way to deal with this, and this nuclear event now fully justifies defensive retaliation of equal form (nuclear) with greater force and scale as both punishment and necessity due to Iran's ‘illegal’ nuclear facilities being underground.”

None of this will be real or true. It will be the most overt false flag in history, involving the inflicting of civilian casualties via a nuclear agent that drives de facto notions of “equivalency of response”, which will be an invented construct pushed by those behind the event.

The perpetrators will not be just Israel or the Mossad. It will be a joint venture consortium of USIS-UK actors but the narrative/information space that accommodates the “false flag noises” will be restricted to/stop out at “Israel did it to drag the unwitting USA into it”, exactly like the stop that exists right now to give USA “plausible deniability” for whatever that's worth (it's not really necessary and those who matter don't buy it anyway).

An entirely united front across USIS, EU, UK, CAN, AUS, NZ and some ME vassals will be presented across all their governments and major media, without any serious, consequential internal challenge (think MH17 type narrative blaming Iran within two hours of the event, plus the whole October 7th “we support Israel's right to self defence” narrative, on crack).

Why do we expect this?

If you simply integrate the scale and rate of events and narrative to date, on a trajectory that already passes through and is contingent on totally false pretext for Israel's attacks with zero interventional opposition, we get to the above logic sequence.

This includes all of this direct messaging (and a lot more in the last week) that's occurring in radically compressing time frames:

Force importation

British and US reinforcements of air and sea assets were mobilized within the last two days, indicating that force sustainability calculations must demand extra assets. This speaks directly to Israeli military capability versus opposition and overt and covert objectives, not just the “show of force” use of reinforcement.

It is extremely likely that the force importation from Britain's Mildenhall airfield carried British and US special forces. Where would they be deployed and what would their tasks be? Just look to the Ukraine lesson and merge it with the Mossad's regional operations: USIS-UK regional insurgency operations to cement Iranian collapse via any means.

This isn't just about Iran, it’s about solidifying ALL regional progress to date while locking out the competition for a generation or more. USIS needs the force to secure Palestine and break whatever constructs stop the ethnic cleansing necessary to start the formal takeover and rebuild into Greater Israel, which will include Third Temple objectives that inherently trigger Muslim resistance unless pre-emptive psychological suppression is in place via the gigantic show of force-based results in the defeat of Iran and the crushing of Palestine.

There is more force on the move including US air refuelling tankers.

Unchecked, unhinged, coordinated linguistic shifting

Trump says “We” (tweets above), Ted Cruz says “we are at war with Iran” (gist) in practical terms. All without any due process in Congress and no objections from Congress or demands to follow process.

Ted Cruz on Carlson

Intelligence abandonment

DNI Tulsi Gabbard has been sidelined by Trump (“I don't care what she says”) in place of some other unnamed intelligence briefing source (see Ritter's meltdown from 25:54 Scott Ritter, Ask The Inspector).

---

We could keep piling on more contributory tweets, clips etc, but the above adequately describes the circumstantial drivers of our expectation that this could go to the false flag described.

There is a huge amount at stake in terms of unipolar power with timing and events being on an observable critical path, from certain USIS perspectives.

We'll describe some of this in coming posts.

Things are moving fast and we intend to keep posts shorter, focused and subject to recursive, higher speed, iterative evidence checking/validation.

We know how this sounds.

VST is a placeholder to test its authors’ world view. None of VST's catalogue was written to make anyone feel good, or clever or smug or scared or anything in particular. It's all a test of what's known, knowable, true and predictable as a result.

Predicting an extreme false flag is a publishing gamble or more likely a nightmare, if you give a shit about such things. If we did, none of VST's content would exist.

If we're wrong, what's lost? Nothing.

We just took our graph plot out to where things really go bang and declared it. Either things never go that far or there wasn't an intent to commit such an act. So, we're wrong.

We are speculating and extrapolating based on the blending of past and present events and knowledge. That's not the worst crime under the circumstances and it's not “out there”. Both the USA and Russia accused each other of preparing false flag events within the two weeks preceding the start of the Russian SMO. The USA said that Russia was preparing the false flag to justify its impending invasion. In actual fact, Russia invaded without any need for a false flag event whatsoever. Its rationale was what it put in documents and statements for years before: NATO expansion, neutrality, DPR/LPR, Nazism, and Zelensky's own noise about “we should become a nuclear weapon possessing nation” finally sealed Ukraine's fate. The USA made the claim that Russia would generate a false flag to justify its invasion. That was totally wrong and yet no one has said “the USA State Department was and is clinically insane for saying it had undisclosed intel of a Russian false flag that Russia doesn't even need to commit.” By that referential standard alone, nothing in this post is any less credible than what Ned Price claimed with literally zero evidential basis (even circumstantial) to the world in February ‘22, only after Russia had made its claim against the USA.

If you think the global state of affairs now is bad, VST expects a hell of a lot worse across the whole of the West and the Middle East for about two decades. Compared to that, a nuclear false flag (followed by a tactical nuke strike in Iran) represents a short duration, limited scope event to cement a path to other things in the business of empire. Compared to what we think the decline of empire and the associated long term struggle for those stuck in the West will entail, that spike would be small beer in real terms but a massive psychological shock that serves a huge cognitive warfare purpose across the whole Empire and the globe. Of course, if the USA glasses one to three Iranian cities with tactical nukes, millions of people will die.

When in the hell did the USA give a flying fuck about dead people?

It's not about Trump. He’s just another meat puppet figurehead of a strategic, constant agenda.

Exactly like we said he was.

This is about Empire.

Après moi, le déluge