Normal I Offer Why Because I Potential Essay
- Length: 6 pages
- Sources: 5
- Subject: Terrorism
- Type: Essay
- Paper: #69223221
Excerpt from Essay :
normal I offer. Why? Because I potential a false flag attack London Olympics worth researching. Okay,'s deal. You write a paper length normal extra credit assignment explained Extra Credit Unit.
Conspiracy theory or terrorism? -- The 2012 London Olympics
There has been a lot of controversy in the recent years regarding conspiracies and how some of the world's most influential individuals are actively engaged in a plot to exploit mankind. False flag attacks are believed to be attempts performed by these individuals with the purpose of justifying their intervention in particular areas that they are interested in. This year's London Olympics represents one of the most intriguing opportunities for certain actors to put their strategies into work, considering that the world's attention is focused on the event and that the number of people present there would surely draw significant responsiveness from an international public concerned in penalizing individuals and groups it considers responsible for a potential terrorist attack.
One of the most interesting concepts regarding the London Olympics is the fact that very little people would express surprise in regard to a terrorist attack happening during the event. This is what individuals interested in false flag attacks count on when they devise strategies meant to confuse the whole world and trick the masses into directing their hatred toward groups that have nothing to do with the event. These people are interested in exploiting the energy present at the event as a result of the fact that there are numerous individuals present there with the purpose of influencing the international public in thinking that it should express particular interest in assisting the authorities capture imagined perpetrators.
Security is very tight in London during these days and the fact that the private contractor that was going to recruit a particular number of guards failed to do so influenced the government in deploying a significant number of troops on the grounds. There are apparently more troops in London today than they are in London, this making it possible for one to comprehend that people would need to feel less distressed with the prospect of a terrorist threat, considering that they are protected by professionals. Even with this, when considering that troops are essentially trained to deal with combat situations, it seems that G4S guards would have been more efficient in this case because they are better prepared to detect abnormal behavior. One can practically say that G4S' failure to complete the contract made it easier for terrorists to perform an attack during the Olympics (Donald). Similarly, when considering that while troops are properly inspected before being released into the field while guards receive little attention (in comparison) before they are hired, it would seem that G4S risks having a great deal of potential terrorists within its ranks (Joseph Watson). In addition to being less experienced in dealing with terrorist threats, the military is also exposed to individuals who might be interested in hurting troops as a consequence of their involvement in conflicts in the Middle East.
One of the most interesting concepts regarding G4S is the fact that it has deep connections with the Israeli authorities. The security firm is apparently in charge of protecting large areas in Israel and in Palestine. The latter contract involves the firm holding Palestinian territories in spite of the fact that they act against the Human Rights Agenda by doing so. The company virtually acts as a military force in spite of the fact that its job would normally involve performing services characteristic to a private security firm. It being the world's biggest security company is apparently enough to prevent international authorities from limiting its actions. "British-Danish security firm G4S has been severely criticized for its operations in the occupied Palestinian territories and in prisons and detention centers in Israel, including those housing children and "administrative detainees" held without charge or trial" (Nieuwhof).
Innovative technology normally used in Israel has been introduced as a result of the London Olympics. This technology apparently enables an operator to take control over vehicles that might be hijacked by potential terrorists (Nieuwhof).
The fact that there is a great deal of terrorist groups that might express interest in performing an attack during the Olympics further complicates matters. What is even more concerning is that any of these groups could perform an attack in London during any other time of year and still be able to murder a great deal of innocent people as a result. This is where interest groups step in and make it possible for the masses to understand that it would be more effective for them to perform a false flag attack as a result of the benefits that they might draw from the event. Terrorists would find it easier to perform a terrorist attack at a time when security levels would be lower and it would thus be relatively irresponsible for them to consume significant resources with the purpose of doing something that they could do during any other period.
A community like the illuminati would certainly benefit from performing a false flag attack during the Olympics, considering that they would virtually enable groups from around the world to get actively involved in a witch hunt regarding the supposed perpetrators. Moreover, previous terrorist attacks during the Olympics have influenced a great deal of individuals to believe that this year's event would also be threatened by a terrorist attack. The Olympic Games have always been perceived as the right place to make a statement and many individuals took advantage of this opportunity to put across their thinking. Germany's 1936 Olympics are probably self-explanatory when considering this topic, taking into account that Hitler used the competition with the purpose of demonstrating his country's power and his ability to manipulate people. "Throughout history, the Olympic Games have been exposed to geopolitical risk -- the Games were interrupted by World Wars in 1916, 1940,and 1944; exploited by Hitler in 1936; and disrupted by anti-apartheid boycotts by African nations in the 1960s and 1970s, and by Cold War boycotts by the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.) in 1980 and 1984, respectively" (Jennings 2).
A former G4S employee came out and shared a lot of dubious information regarding the security company. This individual was actually an undercover journalist using the pseudonym 'Lee Hazledean' and managed to infiltrate the company and to discover a lot of troubling information. There are apparently 200,000 temporary coffins on standby near the event with the purpose of holding bodies that would have to be stored as a result of a major catastrophe. The company also made sure that London would be rapidly evacuated in case of a threat and one official actually claimed that the city would experience a decisive moment if a terrorist attack actually were to happen. When considering that the police have no authority over G4S personnel, it appears that these individuals have the right to override the authorities if they consider that it is important for them to do so (Joseph Watson).
Several individuals in London have complained with regard to the fact that the Ministry of Defense has installed surface-to-air missiles on their buildings. These people consider that this makes their buildings more likely to be targeted by terrorists, taking into account that criminals can virtually use the missiles with the purpose of triggering terrorist attacks. This would make it possible for them to avoid taking in explosives, as these explosives would be available to them on the spot (London 2012: Olympic missile tenants in terrorist fear).
When considering all of these issues, one might find him or herself wondering: What is the actual purpose of the London Olympics when regarding things from the perspective of international influential actors? Iran has boycotted the Olympics and refused to send its athletes there because it considered that the event was sponsored by individuals who have hidden interests and who are actually concerned in using it with the intention of bringing on a New World Order. Further contributing to the tension, "the U.S. Navy has unexpectedly dispatched a fourth aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf, along with a fleet of underwater drones in what is being considered just the latest move in a series of escalations leading towards a potential war with Iran" (War in August? U.S. sends fourth aircraft carrier and dozens of underwater drones towards Iran).
While someone might be inclined to consider that U.S.' actions and the Olympics happening at the same time is a coincidence, it is actually intriguing to look at matters from the perspective of someone who is familiarized with conspiracy theories surrounding both events. It is difficult to determine exactly why the U.S. has not made a move until now, but it is very probable that it is aware that an intervention in Iran would generate significant controversy. As a consequence, it apparently wants a reason that would justify its intervention and that would influence the whole world to think that Iran…