Everyone wants to demonstrate their support for the families of those killed as well as the country of France itself. U.S. flags are flying at half mast, the French national anthem is played before the start of football or basketball games, people are asked to stand in silence in honor to the dead, our president states that he is praying for the families, etc., etc., etc. These responses, although important and appropriate, are scripted. After a few weeks, all will be forgotten and people will move on to the next crisis. People will accept the official narrative, no one will be asking questions, and every year there will be a tribute to those who died.
I remember 9-11 . . . the script was international and similar. Every year, on the anniversary of that day, we stop and pay homage to those victims of the attack.
The problem, for me, is that all attempts to find out what really happened that day and who was responsible is met with resistance, both by governmental officials and by the mainstream media. What better way to honor the memory of those who died than to find answers to the many questions that continue to plague us and go unanswered.
Some have referred to Friday, November 13, as France’s 9-11. If so, learning from our past experience, it is important to begin posing questions and pointing out inconsistencies as soon as possible before the official narrative gets set in stone. It is my experience that once that happens, anyone who questions or expresses doubts is marginalized as a “conspiracy nut.”
Do I look for inconsistencies and conspiracies? You bet your booties I do because I’ve learned that governments lie and misrepresent and sponsor what are called “false-flag operations. “False-flag operations are part of government’s standard operating procedures and have been used by the U.S. on several occasions historically to garner public support for whatever action is on their agenda.
Re: the massacre in France, Professor Michel Chossudovsky reveals four important events which preceded the Paris attacks:
- The French media had already predicted a terrorist attack more than a month before the actual occurrence.
- The head of France’s external intelligence was in Washington for consultations with CIA Chief John Brennan two weeks before the attacks. British and Israeli intelligence was also represented at this meeting.
- On November 5 (one week before the Paris terrorist attacks), the Council of Ministers announced its decision to send France’s aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, to the Middle East, with a mandate to “fight against the Islamic state.”
- On the morning of November 13, an emergency scenario of a multi-site terrorist attack is conducted in Paris, involving first responders, medical personnel, police and firemen.
Although it is premature to state with any certainty that something suspicious was going on, it is enough for me to want to look further. What is clear is that France was preparing for action against the Islamic State prior to November 13. Is this merely coincidence?
Let me share with you some interesting segments written by Dimitry Orlov:
“After the Russian jet crashed in the Sinai, there weren’t any candlelight vigils or piles of wreaths and flowers in various Western capitals. The Russians got their comeuppance for stepping out of line in Syria.
“The French, along with the rest of the EU, are Washington’s willing puppets; therefore, they are innocent, and when they get killed, it’s a tragedy. But the Russians are not Washington’s willing puppet, and are not innocent, and so when they get killed by terrorists, it’s punishment.
“You probably believe that the terrorist attacks in Paris were the genuine article—nobody knew it would happen, and it couldn’t have been stopped, because these terrorists are just too clever for the ubiquitous state surveillance to detect.
“Here are a couple of easy-to-understand tips on telling what’s real from what’s fake:
- “If it’s fake, the perpetrators are known immediately (and sometimes beforehand). If it’s real, then the truth is uncovered as a result of a thorough investigation. So, for instance, on 9/11 the guilty party were a bunch of Saudis armed with box cutters (some of whom are, paradoxically, still alive). And in Paris we knew right away that this was done by ISIS—even before we knew who the perpetrators were.
- “If it’s fake, than you should also expect cute little touches: designer logos for publicity campaigns ready to launch at a moment’s notice, be it “Je suis Charlie” or that cute little Eiffel Tower inscribed in a peace symbol. There weren’t any props to go with the Russian jet disaster. There might also be a few traditional tidbits designed to feed a media frenzy, such as a fake passport found lying next to one of the perpetrators—because when terrorists go on suicide missions they always take their fake passports with them.”
Once the killings had ended, President Hollande immediately identified ISIS as the responsible party and that these acts constituted “an act of war.” This was done before the police and investigative officials had reached any determination regarding those who should be implicated. Hollande was accusing ISIS while the police were still struggling to put the pieces together. Why?
The massacre in Paris is reported to have occurred at 9:16 pm CET. By 11:06 pm Wikipedia had an article up that is extremely detailed, containing statements from a former French president and a complete outline of events at several locations, matters that the press had not by then reported. How did it come about that an article would be up on Wikipedia within two hours of the event happening?
“In a televised statement at approximately 11:58 pm, French President François Hollande declared a state of emergency and closing of borders for the whole of France.”
How could the writer of Wikipedia’s 11:06 pm report know what President Hollande did at 11:58 pm, as if it’s a fait accompli, when he’s writing at 11:06 pm, before it happened? Does this not remind us of the BBC reporting on 9-11 of the fall of Building 7 with Building 7 still standing in the background? How did BBC know that Building #7 was going to collapse before it happened?
What I find interesting is how this all parallels 9-11. Within hours of the attack on the U.S., officials were able to name the perpetrators, 19 Middle Eastern men (fanatics) and their leader Osama bin Laden, a man who was seriously ill with a kidney disorder, receiving frequent dialysis treatment, living in a cave in Afghanistan. The drums of war began beating. The source of these 19 names is unknown and none of their names appear on any of the manifests of the four hijacked planes. So, where did these names come from?
As an aside, we should know that bin Laden’s name never appeared on the FBI’s list of Most Wanted. Why? Because, they admitted, there was no evidence that he had any connection to the 9-11 attacks.
9-11 was used as a pretext for U.S. military intervention in the Middle East. Are the Paris terrorist attacks being used as a pretext and justification to intervene militarily in Syria in violation of international law? According to French President François Hollande, the terrorist attack was “prepared, organized and planned from outside the country by the Islamic State.”
We should take note of an important coincidence that has occurred once again. Regarding 9-11, investigators were fortunate to discover the Saudi passport of one of the accused hijackers lying intact in the rubble of the WTC towers. Wow, that must have been an exciting moment when, within all the concrete, dust, and steel, there was this intact passport that verified who it was that committed this act.
Many of you remember the Charlie Hebdo massacre last January. Another fortunate moment in terrorism history when one of the “terrorists” left his ID in the getaway car. The latest magical intervention by God was last Saturday, the day after the massacre of Friday, the 13th. The media reported that a Syrian passport was found at one of the shooting places. In an attempt to save some of the credibility of these made-up stories, the Syrian passport myth was downgraded as having been found on the body of a Syrian refugee and was a forgery.
In a previous article, I stated that we are all pawns and are here mainly to serve the ruling class and their agenda. So, what may the agenda be?
On September 30, Russia, after being invited into Syria by President Assad, began a program of bombing of terrorists, including al-Nusra, al-Qaeda, as well as ISIS. They met with a great deal of success and embarrassed the U.S. and its NATO allies by achieving more in a couple of weeks then the U.S. and “the willing” achieved in a full year.
NATO had lost its prominency in that area and although Russia invited the U.S. to coordinate their efforts in the “war on terror,” the U.S. rejected the offer.
Whereas NATO’s military presence in Syria was illegal, Russia’s was not . . . they had been invited in by Syria’s government. The question of whether or not this massacre was used to gain support and justification to expand NATO’s role in Syria is not far-fetched.
Hollande immediately declared that France was attacked and at war. This opens the door for all 28 NATO countries to come to the aid of France and, according to NATO’s charter, involve itself in military action in Syria. Hollande’s speech to parliament promised more bombing in Syria . . . 50 more planes are being sent to Syria. Where would that leave Russia or Assad? Who would France be targeting, Assad’s forces or the terrorist organizations?
Nevertheless, we must always ask, when such well organized and superbly coordinated terror attacks occur, one should first ask, whom do they serve and why?
Would France be willing to sacrifice 129 French lives to fulfill another agenda? Just as the U.S. sacrificed 3,000 people on 9-11 and sent thousands of men and women to their deaths in Iraq. There is no doubt in my mind the French would have no problem with this.
France was first along with the UK in allying with Washington in fighting the Assad regime in Syria—and shortly after the Charlie Hebdo attack in January 2015, the French air force was joining the US and the British in Iraq. Earlier France had sent troops to Mali and Central Africa—responsible for killing hundreds if not thousands of innocent people.
After all, to the rulers we are nothing more than pawns here to serve their needs and protect them from us using the police and military. When necessary, we must be ready to be sacrificed to fulfill their agenda for world dominance.
As one can see, there are many parts to this disaster that don’t make sense and need further investigation.
GOD BLESS AMERIKA!!
Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.
Source: Intrepid Report