NOVANEWS
I actually hesitated to post this article. Because I hate having to sound like a broken record or like a member of the ‘everything’s a conspiracy’ club.
In fact, at first I didn’t think this one was a false flag, but generally accepted the official narrative of what appeared to be going on in Paris this Friday 13th. But then, as with the Charlie Hebdo attack earlier this year, the case unfortunately began to slowly make itself.
First, questioning the nature of this major terror attack is, as far as I’m concerned, no disrespect to its victims. Second, given the questionable nature of such previous high-profile terrorist incidents as Charlie Hebdo, 7/7, the Boston Marathon, Copenhagen and 9/11, it is both natural and necessary to question the emerging narrative of these brutal attacks.
Whoever carried them out and whoever was ultimately behind them, they are a heinous crime; killing innocent people at rock concerts or on the streets or while they dine in restaurants is the epitome of evil, disgusting and devoid of any possible justification. And, unlike one or two people I’ve seen online, I don’t refute at all that innocent people have been killed, injured or otherwise traumatised by whatever it was that occurred this Friday night in what some journalists are calling ‘Europe’s 9/11’.
But killed by who? And for what?
The most up-to-date news is that around either 129 or 163 people were killed in an attack in central and northern Paris – at the Bataclan Theater and Stade de France, with others ruthlessly shot while they innocently ate in restaurants. The majority of the casualties were those at the Bataclan theatre, where California-based band the Eagles of Death Metal (a side-project of Queens of the Stone Age and Them Crooked Vultures frontman Josh Homme) were playing; I won’t bother with the Friday 13th ‘symbolism’ or the fact that the band’s Jesse Hughes goes by the name ‘The Devil’, as those elements are less relevant to me as they are to some others.
Reports from the scene at the Bataclan theatre describe multiple gunman entering the venue and opening fire on the audience with assault rifles or AK47s (there were also reports of a grenade). This incident appears to have been an absolute horror story, subjecting concert-goers – mostly young people and probably mostly Parisian liberals – to the most horrendous ordeal. Alleged reports from survivors are claimed to indicate one of the attackers shouting “Allahu Akbar” (‘God is Great’), with another explaining “This is for Syria” or, according to some reports, “I’m from ISIS”.
However, Aanirfan points to journalist Julien Pierce, who told CNN that the gunmen did not shout any slogans as they massacred their victims. ‘They didn’t say anything. Not Allah akhbar or something like this. They said nothing. They just shot. They just shoot.’
So are the reports of “Allahu Akbar” and other slogans just a pre-scripted element designed to easily establish a desired narrative? Is the Syrian passport part of the same script?
It is too early to make an entirely well-informed analysis, pending more information. At this point we don’t know who the attackers were, we don’t know identities. But even at this stage, there are some of the usual curiosities, and not just the fact that multiple landmarks in different parts of the world managed to light up red, white and blue remarkably quickly on the night (let’s just assume that could conceivably happen and move on) or that the ‘Pray For Paris’ trending seemed to emerge, fully formed, as the attacks were still occurring. We already know that government/military agencies (in the US, at the very least) have control of multiple social media accounts designed to appear to be accounts of civilians in various parts of the world (that reality is covered in my book, ‘The Libya Conspiracy’).
For example, we are told all eight attackers were killed on the night, leaving – as far as we presently know – no one to be brought to trial. There are also conflicting reports as to the number of attackers. Seven of the attackers were killed after blowing themselves up in suicide bombings. The eighth was shot dead by police. As with 7/7 and the Paris attacks from January this year, there are no surviving attackers. Yet we are told there was possibly as many as seven separate attacks. I won’t re-produce all of the official information here, as you’re probably already familiar with it; if not, I can refer to you James Robertson’s piece on the subject here.
It has to be questioned, however, how likely it is that a well-coordinated, multi-target terrorist attack could be pulled off in a city like Paris, despite all the intelligence operations, all the security, and especially in the light of the Charlie Hebdo attack having occurred only months ago. We’ve been told for months and months that a major terror attack by ISIL was coming to either Paris, London or some other major European city. That’s what we’ve been told over and over again, along with the fact that we’ve supposedly been on high alert for some time. So how did multiple attacks occur on one night, including at one of the most high-profile locations in Paris, the Stade de France and at an event as high-profile as France/Germany football match and at which the President himself was present?
Of course, again, it isn’t entirely inconceivable, and it may be that this was precisely what it is being reported as: a terrorist attack by ISIL-aligned jihadists. However, let’s, just for argument’s sake, come at it from another angle.
There is what some of us regard to be a false-flag ‘check-list’ of sorts, which can be consulted when assessing the official narrative. Among the items on that checklist, as Kevin Barrat succinctly put it on the Veterans Today site, in response to the Copenhagen lone-wolf earlier this year; ‘There will be dubiously-related shootings at two separate locations, like with Merah and Charlie Hebdo. The shooters will be wearing masks, because they will be special forces professionals, not the Muslim patsies…’
In regard to this wearing of balaclavas or ski-masks, this has always struck me as odd in a lot of cases; if you’re a suicide-bomber and you’re going to blow yourself up, what’s the point of wearing a mask? Surely it doesn’t matter anymore if you’re identified or not? Also if you ARE going to wear a mask to protect your identity, why the hell bring along your Syrian or Egyptian passport to the crime scene, since the only purpose THAT serves is to identify you! Yet, as with the London attacks, the 9/11 attack and the Charlie Hebdo massacre, these latest terrorists seem to belong to the same confused club of ‘cover your face, but bring your passport’.
As with the earlier Charlie Hebdo attack, it is difficult not to have suspicions about possible intelligence community and/or special-forces involvement, especially as the attack in January almost certainly was a stage-managed false-flag operation (for the record, we still don’t know why French Police-Commissioner Helric Fredou supposedly committed suicide right in the middle of the attack in January). Intelligence agents or special forces are people that would need to cover their faces; and along with the all the other inconsistencies in the case of the Charlie Hebdo attack, it was also evident from footage that the masked shooters didn’t seem to match the body-build of the alleged suspects and that they *could* be perceived to have been white-skinned. In terms of this Friday’s attacks, there is at least one report that at least one of the Bataclan terrorists appeared not to be Middle-Eastern at all, but white European.
But speaking of the false-flag check-list, the most important item on that list is of course the classic ‘terror drill’ often planned for the same time as the real-world attack occurs.
And, would you believe it, it appears that, just as with 9/11, 7/7 and Boston, there just happened to be another ‘terror drill’ going on in Paris on the precise day of this latest attack; though you wouldn’t have known that from news coverage.
This first became apparent to me via Jeff Cee on his You Tube channel, Free Radio Revolution, in this video. Another You Tube uploader, Sebrena Sana, had initially revealed the French radio broadcast exposing this planned exercise.
And, as with London’s 7/7 bombings, we also have the coincidental involvement/presence of a curious individual in the events. In the case of 7/7, it was the role of Peter Power – the man responsible for the coincidental ‘terror drill’ that just happened to be going on on 7/7 and simulating the exact same scenario as the one that played out. This same Peter Power also happened to have been present for the killing of PC Yvonne Fletcher in London many years earlier in what had been a false-flag killing designed to be blamed on Gaddafi and Libya in order to justify sanctions and demonisation of both Gaddafi and his ‘pariah state’.
Well, in the case of Paris, we have Patrick Pelloux, EMT and contributor to the Charlie Hebdo publication. Mr Pelloux was one of the first people on the scene on Friday night to respond to these attacks.
It is Pelloux who had explained on France Info radio that Paris EMTs were prepared on Friday night because, “as luck would have it”, they’d planned an exercise to train for multi-site terror attacks on the morning of November 13th 2015; echoing Mr Peter Power in London on 7/7, who openly admitted his organisation had been running a terror drill in London on that very morning, involving crisis actors and pre-planned bombing drills. Pelloux has been chairman of a French trade union of emergency physicians since 2008. Curiously, during the Charlie Hebdo shooting earlier this year, Mr Pelloux was near the magazine’s building (but not inside it), so he was one of the first people on the scene after the shooting had taken place. According to the reports, he immediately phoned FrenchPresident François Hollande to tell him what had happened.
In an interview with L’express after the attacks on Friday, Pelloux advised, “We need to give means to the police and the army so they can defend us,” endorsing the deployment of hundreds of armed troops into the streets. He also said, more curiously, “Some people necessarily knew about this project or know the people who are responsible, they have to talk. This information is essential to neutralize the terrorists.”
Now, to be clear, I don’t like to incriminate anyone who hasn’t committed any crime. Mr Pelloux’s proximity to both events doesn’t necessarily mean anything other than coincidence; and neither does the fact that drills may have coincided with supposed real-world terrorism.
It is curious, however, that – just as with Peter Power and London – there appears to have been a convergence between planned drills and real-life attack.
It is also interesting that reports earlier this year suggested that the UK was to conduct counter-terrorism drills that included scenarios involving terror attacks in Paris, this being in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attack.
Coincidences do happen, of course. It’s just curious how often they seem to happen when there’s a major terror incident in a Western location. Concerning the alleged bombs at the football stadium, there is no footage whatsoever of any actual explosions, nor of any victims from the explosions. There is only audio of the alleged bomb going off, which itself sounds artificial as this observer points out. It seems odd that in such a crowded location and such a high-profile event as a France V Germany match, no one filmed any evidence of explosions or even of the aftermath of the explosions, even though 99 percent of those in attendance probably had mobile phones on them.
Similarly, there appear to be only very sanitised images of body-bags or covered bodies and no images of discernibly injured or shot people. That latter point is one I feel uncomfortable making, because I don’t wish to disrespect or make light of the ordeals of anyone who was shot, killed, injured or traumatised; I am simply making a necessary observation if we’re going to look at the matter clearly.
And what of the fact that ISIL appears to have claimed responsibility for the attack?
There are other things to consider too, as James highlights on Crimes of Empire; ‘Around eighteen hours after the attack SITE intelligence began to disseminate an IS claim of responsibility for the attacks which was apparently released in both Arabic and French.The claim is made in French and Arabic messages made in the name of Islamic State France, a non-existent group… The content of the claim is at first glance completely ridiculous and points to a highly “synthetic” event conducted by professionals playing the jihadist maniac role… This is way, way too cute in several respects and this has the signature of Zionists impersonating the maniacs in my opinion, just as the Mohammed Atta “will” found after September 11th had clearly not been written by a Muslim and neither were the Anthrax letters…’
He also questions the narrative of the attacks themselves, pointing ‘to the likelihood of two attack teams, a team of patsies and a team of professionals, some of whom seemingly did not fit the mold of Middle eastern terrorist at all’, also pointing out a witness to the Bataclan attack, who told BFMTV that one of the assailants was white and appeared to be European. “I saw a guy who was pretty small, white and looked like a European. He was just in front of the Bataclan and had a gun resting on his shoulder. Then I saw flashes and heard ‘Bam bam bam.’”
Which isn’t to say necessarily that a group of people loosely affiliated with the ISIL brand didn’t carry out these attacks; but to what extent any of it was coordinated or ‘ordered’ from the Middle East is questionable and hasn’t been established. A great deal hasn’t been established yet, for that matter. We don’t know if these people were French citizens or if they’d come in exclusively from outside, for example. The curiously tell-tale item of the recovered passports suggests Syria, Egypt and Belgium as possible sources for some of the alleged attackers. Again, I don’t know why terrorists bother carrying their passports around, while at the same time covering up their faces. Terrorists in the Middle East – which is where 99 percent of terrorism happens – don’t typically carry around passports or I.D with them to their crimes; this seems to only happen in the West.
In any case, the alleged discovery of the Syrian passport seems destined to play into right-wing propaganda demonising refugees and trying to make out the entire refugee crisis to be an ISIL plot to attack Europe.
There is also a question as to why ‘ISIS’ would bother attacking Paris. The government of France, like that of the UK, the United States and several others, has been pushing consistently for the removal of the Assad government in Syria and has therefore been forwarding the cause of Syrian rebels and jihadists, with any supposed ‘anti-ISIL’ operations likely being the same half-assed pantomime that the United States, Turkey and others have been engaged in. In fact, the previous French government was one of the biggest allies and enablers of Salafist jihadism – ISIL and Al-Qaeda included – as France was the primary driver of the NATO intervention in Libya in 2011, which was a military intervention for the sake of jihadists and aimed at removing the Gaddafi regime and destabilising Libya, Africa and the Middle East. The French-led destruction of Libya wasn’t just about Libya; it was this operation that created the flow of weapons and jihadists to Syria and it was this operation also that created vast, terrorist playgrounds and staging areas in both Libya and Syria.
ISIL shouldn’t be attacking Paris, they should be sending the French state gift baskets and thank-you cards.
_____________________
Of course I don’t refute that there are real terrorists and real extremists out there. It is worth pointing out, however, firstly that even when genuine jihadists/terrorists carry out an attack, this doesn’t negate it being a false-flag operation also involving state actors or handlers (witness the Boston Marathon bombing). And secondly, that even if specific atrocities are genuine terrorist attacks, the broader framework they occur in is *still* ultimately a macro-false-flag operation. Because of course you have to go back to asking yourself where ‘ISIS’ came from in the first place? Who has been arming and funding the jihadists for years? Who has been pouring money into the attempted overthrowing of the Syrian government? Who ensured the overthrowing of the Libyan state and armed and aided the jihadist groups to accomplish that goal? Who removed the Iraqi state apparatus?
And why has the French state been allowing French-born extremists to travel into Syria for years now to wage war against the secular Syrian state?
Iraq, Libya and Syria – three stable and moderately religious Arab states – were methodically and callously turned into terrorist playgrounds, providing vast training arenas and battlegrounds for wannabe jihadists and ‘holy warriors’ to be trained, further radicalised, desensitized and most importantly to get real-world experience of terrorist activity, guerrilla warfare, mass killing and blood-lust on the streets of Libyan, Iraqi and Syrian cities and towns. So naturally when these scores of young men travel from France, the UK or wherever else to Syria or Iraq to take part in the fighting, they are thoroughly brainwashed and heavily desensitized; and then they come back to their countries, bringing that psychological damage and blood-lust with them. The frankly apocalyptic situations engineered in Iraq, Libya and Syria are now serving as great melting pots to produce enough extremists and would-be terrorists to last for a generation. All of which is a manufactured crisis.
Western ‘jihadists’ going over to Middle Eastern countries may also have been fighting and killing native Syrians, Iraqis or Libyans with arms given to them by the French government, a possibility previously highlighted in this piece from France 24. You see, the unfortunate reality is that the chaos and criminality a government supports or exports to other parts of the world for whatever reasons can and usually will come back to bite you in your own house. Whether these radicalised extremists are being *intended* to come back into Western societies and cities in a controlled operation is an additional question; the thought of such people being covertly released into Western cities and societies as agents of chaos like they were in Syria and Libya is horrifying to consider and – assuming what happened in Paris on Friday was genuinely the work of jihadists – we may already be experiencing it now in a horrendous way.
What has to be understood is that this created ‘brand’ of hyper-extreme terrorists are being moved about from arena to arena like chess pieces; Libya, Syria, Iraq, moving in and out through Turkey and who-knows-where-else. Scores of them, let’s remember, were moved INTO Syria in the first place from other places, some having gone from the UK, the US and Australia, many from Libya and other Muslim nations, many from Europe. Curiously, the majority of them have been from France – a point made for a long time by Bashar Assad himself. But even putting that aside, there is the extraordinary level of hypocrisy in Western leaders and governments who in one breath advocate armed terrorism and warfare in Syria or in Libya previously and yet call it an outrage when those same people come back home and commit similar armed offenses in their own country.
Extremist/terrorist networks and sleeper cells in the West are almost certainly being kept in place (with or without their own knowledge) by various Western intelligence agencies in order to be utilized whenever they’re needed for these kinds of attacks.
These attacks are inevitable; they’re going to be happening periodically for their psychological and social effect on Western populations, as well as for various other reasons beneficial to governments, intelligence agencies and (corporate and military-industrial) foreign policies. This state of affairs has its basis the type of operations NATOintelligence engaged in during the Cold War with similar networks of radicalised militants at their disposal to be used both as foreign mercenaries and domestic agent-provocateurs, which are now commonly known as ‘Operation Gladio’. Far from being conspiracy-theory conjecture, Gladio can be regarded as a demonstrable historical fact; a post-World War II program established by the CIA and NATO supposedly to thwart potential Soviet/communist invasions or influence in Italy and Western Europe. In reality it was to become a state-sponsored right-wing terrorist network used for numerous false-flag operations and a wider subversion of democratic societies. The existence of the Gladio program was verified by the Italian government in 1990, when a judge, Felice Casson, discovered the network in the course of his investigations into right-wing terrorism.
Here, for those interested, is a comprehensive resource concerning Operation Gladio.
State-controlled terrorism to accomplish political, domestic or geo-political goals is a demonstrable fact of life. To cite just one recent example, it’s been used in Turkey recently, where alleged ‘ISIL’ attacks have been used to kill or terrorize Kurds, liberals and political opponents of the Turkish government. But Turkey is just following the strategy set by the United States and other Western governments: the creation or utilisation of terrorism to accomplish your own agendas.
In terms of the Charlie Hebdo attack too, it was believed by many that the Israeli Mossad had a good motive for carrying out terrorism in Paris, which was further amplified by Benjamin Netanyahu’s overt presence in Paris in the immediate aftermath (Netanyahu was also in London on the morning of 7/7). A friend of this blog, who goes by the name ‘Intellecteur’ and who lives in France, e-mailed me about the Paris attack and the aftermath in France and one of the things she said was this: “Something “funny” happened more than a month ago and not a single French media has relayed it. Benyamin Netanyahu made some threat to France, saying that ‘terrorism was coming to us’ because the (French) government recently recognised Palestine as a real state. When I heard of it, I talked about it to many of the people I know, but (after the Paris attack) not a single proof/video was there to be found anymore.”
It didn’t take a great leap of imagination for many to posit that France’s recognition of a Palestinian state might have been one pretext (among others) for the staged terror event in Paris in January, possibly involving national and international parties invested in maintaining Israeli state interests. There are various international parties looking to quash Palestine’s bid for statehood. By exacerbating mistrust and tension in France towards the Muslim community, some might argue that the trend of both public and political opinion in France (and much of Europe) might be steered away from any sympathy with the Palestinian cause, particularly now that a brutal Islamist attack is perceived to have hit at the very heart of European liberty.
Moreover, it may also steer public sympathy away from refugees, particularly Syrian refugees, and guide more people to the camp of the Far-Right.
Palestinian terrorism can’t really be regarded in anything like the same way as Islamic State-inspired terror or Al-Qaeda, but then language is powerful and several Israeli commentators, Netanyahu included, wasted no time in likening the January Paris attack to the attacks Israel suffers from Palestinian terrorists. This lazy or deliberately manipulative equating with Palestinian resistance, Hamas or Hezbollah with Al-Qaeda or ‘ISIS’ is frequent and is politically motivated; even this week, when ISIS attacked Beirut, killing some 41 people, US Senate Candidate, Everett A. Stern, reacted with “This is Good News! I hope they killed Hezbollah!”, entirely neglecting the fact that dozens of innocent civilians had been killed or that the attack was carried about by ISIL, who America is supposedly supposed to be trying to destroy. It’s clear from statements like that that many don’t really hate ISIL as much they otherwise profess to.
When ISIL allegedly attacks Paris, there is universal condemnation and calls for action, with half the modern world lighting up buildings in tribute, but when the same ISIL attacks liberal, multi-cultural Beirut, some high-profile Western politicians are openly celebrating.
Because ISIL is incredibly useful; which is why I’ve frequently referred to it as a ‘multi-purpose monster’. Countries like France and others could’ve stopped hundreds of its own citizens traveling into Syria to commit terrorism if it it had wanted to; but it suited their agenda for overthrowing the Syrian government, just as it had done in Libya.
________________________
All of that said, this latest horror in Paris may well have been a genuine, ISIL-only terrorist attack designed to terrorise the French people or bring fear and anxiety to Europe. If so, however, it is in large part a product of a manufactured crisis in the Middle East that is now perhaps coming back to bite its sponsors. That’s assuming it was a genuine jihadist-only attack. If it wasn’t, and if it was something more, then the response might be steered towards a larger-scale assault on Syria; ostensibly to punish ISIL targets, but in reality to further devastate Syrian infrastructure and ultimately take out the Syrian state, as those longstanding plans already exist and have only been delayed by Russia’s recent intervention on the side of the Syrian state.
This attack will also make social, cultural tension in France, and probably in Europe, even worse and will serve to further demonise the Muslim community in Europe; a process that is already pronounced as it is and is also already being exacerbated by the refugee crisis and the accompanying rise in Far-Right politics and rising racism. There were reports of a refugee camp in France already being attacked on Friday night in response to the Paris incidents.
Some people on-line are predictably already blaming ‘refugees’ for this attack, which is utter nonsense. Refugees or asylum seekers have absolutely no motive for carrying out killings or violence in their host country and in fact every reason to not do so. Besides that, where would refugees in France acquire automatic weapons or bomb components? But I knew as soon as the news of this attack broke that the Far Right would go to town and ramp up the anti-refugee hysteria.
Whoever it is – and there are multiple parties and groups – that wants a race war or racial tension in Europe is going to succeed. ISIL have supposedly said that they want to destabilise Europe, but the Far-Right groups and European Neo-Nazis want the same thing, while it is likely that various state forces are desirous of this instability, fear and tension in order to help bring about enhancements to state powers. Events like this horrific attack in Paris can help do away with debates about mass surveillance, privacy rights, militarisation, and eventual compulsory biometric IDs in domestic terms, while in international terms it can help quash talk of Palestinian rights, criticism of Israel’s policies in Palestine, and opposition to heightened Western intervention in Syria. It also reinforces and increases hostility towards European Muslims and draws us closer and closer to what one Jewish businessman predicted will be “the next Holocaust in Europe”.
I also have to say that I’m unmoved by the whole ‘PRAY FOR PARIS’ thing that started trending before the attacks had even finished.
And I say that with absolutely no intended disrespect to the innocent people who’ve been killed or traumatised by these attacks on Friday night; my heart goes out to every one of them and their families. But just like ‘Je Suis Charlie’, this thing has already gone in a tacky direction that makes the entire Paris attack seem like a pre-planned marketing campaign, with celebrities like Kim Kardashian, Harry Stiles, David Beckham, Justin Bieber all getting in on it.
Again, I mean no disrespect at all to the genuine victims, but Paris has one night of terrorism and it brings the world to a halt, while Syria has five years of it, a quarter-of-a-million dead (many thousands of them children), entire cities in ruins, all of it backed by Western sponsors – including France – and I don’t recall the ‘Pray for Syria’ marketing campaign or social media trend.
Apparently suicide-bombings in Damascus, Beirut or Baghdad aren’t such a big deal. And I don’t recall any ‘Prayer for Tripoli’ when the Libyan city, once safe and prosperous, was being set in flames by French and NATO backed jihadists in 2011. If the French state wants to now claim it has a problem with extremists, it certainly hasn’t had any qualms about utilising those extremists for other purposes.
Paris doesn’t need your prayers; Paris is one of the greatest, wealthiest cities in the world and will remain so. I’m so very sorry for all the people who lost their lives on Friday, or who’ve been traumatised by what happened, and I’m very sorry for all their families too. But I’m not at all sure we know who carried out these attacks or why.
