"It isn't, there's no point in doing that, not to mention how illegal that would be. The US govt doesn't need any more scandals of this nature (wiretapping is enough I think)."
Just some random examples I pulled in 5 minutes. I don't believe the argument "...not to mention illegal that would be." or "The US govt doesn't need any more scandals..." has any bearing whatsoever on their decision making process at the level of authority needed to authorize something as a false flag operation for various reasons.
You're right of course, but my main point is they don't need to do much in order to come up with an excuse to do something. I'm sure there are easier ways to get consent for locking down the internet than to create a false flag operation; just use something that already exists (copyright infringement, terrorism, porn, war on drugs, etc.)
Wiretapping scandal became public circa late 2005 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_co...
Random collection of additional federal political 'scandals' since 2005:
1) This goes from 2001 - 2008 so skip to 2006 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scand...
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scand...
Additional 'scandals' with solid link to US Government:
1) http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/gps/
2) http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110218/02143213163/more-h...
3) http://www.thenation.com/article/161057/wikileaks-haiti-let-...
4) http://www.ban.org/ban_news/2010/101022_caught_exporting.htm...
5) http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1026810/us-governme...
6) http://www.elizabethwatson.org/featured/wikileaks-reveals-a-...
Just some random examples I pulled in 5 minutes. I don't believe the argument "...not to mention illegal that would be." or "The US govt doesn't need any more scandals..." has any bearing whatsoever on their decision making process at the level of authority needed to authorize something as a false flag operation for various reasons.