6 Points To Consider When Analyzing The Charlie Hebdo Attacks
In the aftermath of yet another highly publicized terror attack – this time in France – by Islamic fundamentalists, the Western public is once again experiencing a variety of emotional reactions that they have carefully been trained to experience whenever such events take place at home or abroad.
The xenophobic pro-war right is predictably using the attack as an example of how all Muslims are terrorists and how their total annihilation and implementation of police state tactics are the only solution. On the one hand, the pathetic left-wing attempts to blame the victim for incitement and focuses on the need to become more politically correct, self-censoring, and linguistically minimal. The vast majority in the middle, however, believe the official mainstream version of events, quake in their boots, and move on to the next form of entertainment provided to them by the culture creators without a second thought.
Yet, as is almost always the case, there is much more to the story than is being reported by mainstream outlets. There exist a number of questionable details regarding the Charlie Hebdo attack, as well as the relatively open control over terrorist groups and Islamic jihadists by the French intelligence apparatus, the US, and NATO.
While random acts of violence certainly do occur – some motivated by religious extremism and some not – it is important to examine all of the facts surrounding these acts before coming to a judgment regarding the nature of them. We cannot simply engage in knee-jerk reactions labeling every act of violence as a “false flag” yet we cannot ignore the history of such acts and the prevalence of false flags in recent times.
To be clear, this article is not attempting to definitively prove that the Charlie Hebdo attacks were false flags. It is, however, attempting to provide a brief collection of points that may shed light on the nature of those attacks and possible motivations for them that the mainstream media is largely refusing to cover.
Below are 6 points that should be considered when analyzing the Charlie Hebdo attacks.
1.) Reports suggest the attackers acted as if they had military training. Reports are confirmed that the alleged assailants did receive military training in Syria.
David Blair writes for the Telegraph
They were also fully equipped for their murderous task. Photographs taken at the scene show two men clad entirely in black, their faces concealed by balaclavas. Each one is armed with an AK47 assault rifle.
They wear army-style boots and have a military appearance and manner. One of the men wears a sand-colored ammunition vest apparently stuffed with spare magazines. Some reports suggest that an attacker was also carrying a rocket-propelled grenade launcher.
The men attacked the magazine’s headquarters with clinical precision, killing their victims and then shooting two police officers in the street outside.
Amateur footage shows them using classic infantry tactics. They move along the street outside the office working as a pair: one advances while the other gives cover.
Instead of spraying automatic gunfire, they fire two aimed shots at each target – a pattern known as “double-tap” firing – thereby conserving their ammunition.
The CIA and military-industrial complex connected security analysis organization, Stratfor, also suggested that the attackers were trained militarily. The organization based concluded this “from the way they handled their weapons, moved and shot. These attackers conducted a successful attack, using what they knew, instead of attempting to conduct an attack beyond their capability, failing as a result.”
The attackers indeed received military training. They were fighters in Syria at one time as part of the jihadi proxy army of the United States, France, UK, and NATO.
According to mainstream reports, the attackers spoke “flawless, unaccented French,” despite claims that they are members of the foreign Al-Qaeda in Yemen organization or the widespread belief that the attackers may have been fundamentalist immigrants.
As CBS News reports, “Corinne Rey, the cartoonist who said she was forced to let the gunmen in, said the men spoke fluent French and claimed to be from al Qaeda. In an interview with the newspaper l’Humanite, she said the entire shooting lasted perhaps five minutes.”
Cherif Kouachi, one of the suspected attackers, was no stranger to French law enforcement. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment with 18 months suspended for terrorism charges in 2008 when was convicted of “criminal association with a terrorist enterprise.”
Apparently, the group to which Cherif was affiliated, known as the 19th Arrondissement Network (named for the neighborhood it was based out of), was involved in recruiting French Muslims to fight for al-Qaeda in Iraq. As is typical in Western-backed terrorist operations, the group preyed on poor, disenchanted, struggling, and working-class young men.
After procuring the necessary manpower, the group would then organize for weapons training and provide the necessary travel arrangements.
Although convicted in 2008, police had arrested Cherif in 2005, just days before he planned to travel to Syria.
Cherif fits the profile of a target for terrorist recruits. He was Muslim, had left school, and was working a dead-end job as a pizza delivery man. He was decidedly lower working class.
The narrative now being constructed is that a gullible young man then fell under the spell of charismatic “street preacher” known as Farid Benyettou, who trolled the East Side of Paris. It is implied that Beneyettou, who was also convicted on terrorism charges, played a role in setting up Cherif with the terrorist organization he eventually joined and his subsequent travels to Syria to slaughter innocent people ultimately for the benefit of the geopolitical goals of NATO, France, and the United States.
It should be noted that, during the course of the trial, Beneyettou was responsible for recruitment only. Out of the entire membership of his network, he was the only one not slated to travel to Iraq.
Also noteworthy is the fact that, in 2005, it was revealed that some members of the 19th Arrondissement Network had affiliations with the ad-Da’wa mosque, one of the largest mosques in Paris.
More importantly, all of the suspects were on the terrorist watch list of authorities long prior to their terrorist attack in Paris.
2.) The publication that was attacked has served to promote the strategy of tension in the past.
Whether Charlie Hebdo was merely a media outlet who reveled in irreverence of Islam or whether it is something more sinister, the magazine is no stranger to controversy. As CBS News writes,
Charlie Hebdo has been repeatedly threatened for its caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad and other sketches. Its offices were firebombed in 2011 after an issue featured a caricature of the prophet on its cover. Nearly a year later, the publication again published Muhammad caricatures, drawing denunciations from the Muslim world because Islam prohibits the publication of drawings of its founder.
Another cartoon, released in this week’s issue and entitled “Still No Attacks in France,” had a caricature of a jihadi fighter saying “Just wait – we have until the end of January to present our New Year’s wishes.” Charb was the artist.
To be sure, the magazine has offended other religions and belief systems as well. However, it is interesting to note that, while the magazine and its editors have been allowed to continue operation despite the violent reactions its statements and cartoons have produced across the world as well as in France itself, some religions are apparently considered more equal than others. For instance, in 2009, an 80-year-old columnist for Charlie Hebdo was actually put on trial on charges of “inciting racial hatred” for making a joke that then-President Sarkozy’s son was converting to Judaism for financial gain. Indeed, even the act of “denying the holocaust” is a punishable thought crime in France.
Despite the uber political correctness, however, France has allowed the magazine to continue lampooning Islam and Christianity, obviously acceptable targets of derision and abuse. Of course, religious organizations from both camps have responded with the traditional and typical response of fundamentalists the world over – by attempting to stop the freedom of speech and expression of those not necessarily convinced by the arguments of the converted via the government apparatus and any other available means at their disposal.
To be clear, however, while many Christians and Muslims likely detest the representation of their faith and religious symbols in such insulting ways, the overwhelming majority express their discontent in the same way – by griping to their friends and family, turning on the game, and moving on. Only a minority are actually moved to action, and an even smaller minority to violence, the latter generally encouraged by foundations, NGOs, or intelligence agency-affiliated religious organizations.
In regards to Christianity and Islam, France has largely sided with freedom of speech at this point. Still, Charlie Hebdo has served to act as a catalyst in a number of instances of incitement (though, to be clear, the magazine itself should not be blamed for the reaction of others) of the Muslim communities in France and abroad. Is it possible that the magazine actually serves the purpose of intentionally inciting these types of religious riots and acts of violence from fundamentalists brought into France by the French government and armed by them abroad? Is Charlie Hebdo really a free and independent magazine, or is it actually a tool of the Anglo-Americans in their attempt to maintain the strategy of tension domestically and abroad?
3.) France arms terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda
If the attackers were indeed members of one of the myriad terrorist groups documented to be under the direction and control of Western powers, France itself is to be implicated in the cause and execution of the attacks. As Tony Cartalucci of Land Destroyer Report writes in his own article, “France Armed Terrorists That Struck Paris,”
France, as part of a NATO-led coalition, has been arming, funding, aiding, and otherwise perpetuating Al Qaeda terrorists for years, beginning, on record in Libya with the overthrow of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and continuing until today with NATO’s arming, harboring, and backing of Al Qaeda terrorists including the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS) within and along Syria’s borders.
With the recent attack in Paris likely the work of the very terrorists France has been arming and backing across North Africa and the Middle East, the French government itself stands responsible, guilty of the continued material support of a terrorist organization that has now killed French citizens, including two police officers, not only on French soil, but within the French capital itself.
In his article “Timeline: Where’d Paris Shooters Get Their Weapons?” Cartalucci also provides a timeline of assistance, aid, and arms provided to Islamic terrorists since 2011. He writes,
2011 – France supplying weapons to Libyan rebels, London Telegraph:
A French military spokesman, Colonel Thierry Burkhard, said it had provided “light arms such as assault rifles” for civilian communities to “protect themselves against Col Gaddafi”.
But the decision to arm the rebels is a further move towards direct involvement in the land war on top of the air war against Col Muammar Gaddafi. The Nafusa rebels have come closest to breaking through to Tripoli itself of any of the front lines of the conflict, while three months of Nato bombing have failed to dislodge Col Gaddafi from power.
Le Figaro, the French newspaper which first reported the air drops, said the shipment included rifles, machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, along with Milan anti-tank missiles.
2011 – Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links, London Telegraph:
Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime.
2012 – France to push for arming Syria’s opposition coalition, the BBC:
France’s foreign minister has said he will discuss supplying arms to the Syrian opposition coalition with European partners.
The government plans to push for a relaxation of the EU arms embargo to Syria to enable “defensive arms” to reach opposition fighters.
2013 – Syria crisis: France and Britain move a step closer to arming rebels, the London Guardian:
France and Britain have moved a step closer to arming the opposition to the Assad regime in a radical move aimed at tipping the balance in the two-year civil war while also ignoring European policy on Syria.
The French president, François Hollande, went into an EU summit in Brussels with a dramatic appeal for Europe to join Paris and London in lifting a European arms embargo, but the sudden policy shift was certain to run into stiff German opposition.
2013 – Syrian rebels pledge loyalty to al-Qaeda, USA Today:
A Syrian rebel group’s April pledge of allegiance to al-Qaeda’s replacement for Osama bin Laden suggests that the terrorist group’s influence is not waning and that it may take a greater role in the Western-backed fight to topple Syrian President Bashar Assad.
The pledge of allegiance by Syrian Jabhat al Nusra Front chief Abou Mohamad al-Joulani to al-Qaeda leader Sheik Ayman al-Zawahri was coupled with an announcement by the al-Qaeda affiliate in Iraq, the Islamic State of Iraq, that it would work with al Nusra as well.
2014 – France delivered arms to Syrian rebels, Hollande confirms, France 24:
President Francois Hollande said on Thursday that France had delivered weapons to rebels battling the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad “a few months ago.”
4.) France ordered aircraft carrier to the Gulf in order to “fight ISIS” nearly a full day before the attacks in France.
While certainly not conclusive evidence that the attack on Charlie Hebdo was an “inside job,” it is without a doubt very questionable. After all, it should be remembered that, when the French people and even some of its parliamentarians were hesitant to engage in military action in Iraq, ISIS released a video of an alleged beheading of a Frenchman, which provided justification for French involvement. This was the third video in a series that prompted justification for action from each of the “target” countries.
Undoubtedly, such brazen attacks inside France will drum up even more support for French military action in the Middle East. The fact that the military action was announced a full day before the attacks took place will be no matter to the few members of the general public who discover it.
As Agence France Presse reported on Tuesday January 6,
The deployment of the marine battle group is due to be announced by President Francois Hollande when he gives his annual new year’s speech to the armed forces onboard the Charles de Gaulle on January 14, according to the “Mer et Marine” news site.
The Elysee Palace confirmed to AFP that the carrier would travel to the Gulf on its way to India, where it is due to take part in exercises in mid-April.
“The Charles de Gaulle will be available to participate, if necessary, in all operational missions”, the Elysee spokesman said.
According to Mer et Marine, the Charles de Gaulle carrier will travel to the Gulf with its fleet of air and naval craft, including Rafale and Super Etendard fighter jets and an attack submarine, to take part in the US-led bombing campaign against IS forces in Iraq.
5.) Timing takes place after French government begins to show signs of opposing Russian sanctions and recognizing a Palestinian state.
Timing is everything. This phrase is particularly relevant in the field of propaganda. Because of this, many are now wondering whether or not the attacks were some false flag type event used as an attempt to reign in members of the French government who may be straying off the reservation.
For instance, in December of 2014, the lower house of the French parliament voted to recognize a Palestinian state. While the vote will not likely affect France’s foreign policy, it is a powerful symbol of a changing of the tide in terms of popular opinion regarding the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.
Likewise, the recent statement by French President Francois Hollande that the sanctions on Russia must end, could be seen as a threat to Anglo-American solidarity. Thus, such attacks could serve as a justification for French military action in the Middle East, a reminder to some players in the French government not to show dissension in public.
There is also the potential domestic agenda to be considered. Given the fact that the attacks are being painted as a fundamentalist response to the mockery of Islam, it is likely that the agenda will revolve around the issue of free speech and the police state. With the meme of “I stand with Free Speech” making its rounds across the Internet in response to the narrative of the attack, it is more likely that the attack will be used to increase public support for military action overseas and acceptance of an even greater police state at home. The attacks and their subsequent coverage are likely to be used to engender further hatred and distrust of Islam, thereby injecting the circle of extremism and hate (Christian to Muslim to Christian to Muslim and on and on) with fresh fuel. Convincing Christians that all Muslims are extremists and convincing Muslims that all Christians are extremists will be a goal of radicalization made all that much easier with the Charlie Hebdo attacks fresh in the minds of the French people.
Of course, with the incessant political correctness running rampant across the entire West, it is also possible that the attacks may be used to silence criticism – not necessarily of Islam – but of the policy of unfettered immigration which has contributed to even greater economic troubles and the destruction of French culture.
More at Activist Post>>
Sent by gReader Pro