What wouldn't Harper do to win?

"False Flag": describes covert operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by entities, groups, or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them.

Usually the purview of the "tin hat" contingent, more and more I am hearing people who appear otherwise to be completely well-balanced speculate about the role such an event might play in the upcoming election.

Wait! Don't click away. Let's look at a bit of context.

- Back during Desert Storm, there were widely publicized reports of Iraqi military invading Kuwait and taking babies from incubators in a hospital and throwing them on the floor to die. This was later proved completely false and merely an exercise in opinion control by the George H. Bush administration.

- In Australia there was the story that refugees were throwing their children overboard from boats carrying them to Australia. This time the story was orchestrated by Harper's new campaign guy, Lynton Crosby. This was another public opinion control exercise, and just as false as the US one. 

- Agents provocateur have had a role in several large protest/riot events recently. These individuals are reported to have tried to incite riots at peaceful protests. See here, and here, and here, and here, and here.

- There was that couple in BC recently tried for terrorist offenses as part of an RCMP "Mr. Big" sting operation. According to defense evidence, the RCMP harassed the couple (down-on-their-luck drug addicts recently converted to Islam) to plant bombs to blow up a Canada Day celebration. See here

- On October 20, 2014, Harper rose and responded to an obviously set-up CPC backbench question in the House of Commons, saying that there had been a terror attack in Quebec very shortly after Martin Rouleau ran over two soldiers in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu.The speed with which he imposed his narrative of terrorism on the situation seemed dodgy at the time.

- Questions remain about the Parliament Hill shooting. Where did Zehaf-Bibeau get the car and the gun? How did he know about the security levels on Parliament Hill? He, like the BC couple, was a mentally ill, homeless drug addict who had recently converted to Islam. Was he the subject of another Mr. Big operation that went wrong? Did he go rogue, or did everything go as planned? Remember, it set the stage for C-51. Harper has milked the terrorist angle for all it's worth ever since. One has to wonder...

Canada's "terror threat level" rose the day BEFORE the Ottawa shooting. The government insists the risk of terrorism on Canadian soil is high, but the messages are mixed.

Jason Kenney, Canadian defense minister, would like us to believe the risk is very high indeed.

Others say the risk is minimal. After all, these guys are on the other side of the world and have no planes.  There are much more convenient targets.

There are many in social media who are speculating that if things are looking really dark for the Conservatives' chance for re-election, we may see another "terrorist" event. It would be a most fortuitous thing for Harper, to be able to point his finger and say, "See? You need me to protect you!"
Don't forget, he has recruited an incredibly ruthless campaign advisor. Harper, himself, is incredibly ruthless.

As crazy as "false flag" operations may sound, if we recognize that the world is a pretty crazy place, and there are some people who will do anything to obtain their goals, the idea may deserve at least an open-minded consideration. If there is a "terrorist" attack in the days right before October 19th, we should all look very, very carefully at the details and not blindly accept the government line.

I do not readily accept conspiracy theories. Having watched the machinations of this government over the past 9 year, however, beginning with the attempted bribe to dying Chuck Cadman for his vote, and continuing on through all manner of intrigues that died quietly as the news cycle rolled on relentlessly, I really begin to wonder if there are, in fact, any bounds to what that man would do to maintain power.