Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 23

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 28

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 34

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 38

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 45

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 49

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 58

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 62

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 71

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/ord.php on line 81

Deprecated: Array and string offset access syntax with curly braces is deprecated in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/libraries/vendor/joomla/string/src/phputf8/utils/validation.php on line 40
NEWS DIGEST: Massive hypocrisy of World/Western leaders

Site Search

The Truth About 9/11

Coming soon!

Coming Soon

Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in /home/lybs0cinwsl2/public_html/att/templates/att2017a/functions.php on line 199

NEWS DIGEST: Massive hypocrisy of World/Western leaders

Pin It
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie: deliberate, continued, and dishonest; but the myth: persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic."   John F. Kennedy  

The farce of Western free speech


Speaking outside Elysée Palace in the aftermath of this week's terror killings in France, former President Nicolas Sarkozy condemned the violence as "an attack on civilization." Coiffured, sun-tanned and nattily dressed, Sarkozy's solemn words made him appear like the embodiment of civility.
That's a quaint turn in etiquette by a politician who is mired in allegations of sleaze and corruption, as well as war crimes.
Sarkozy wasn't too concerned about "civilization" when he and his British allies launched the NATO bombing campaign of Libya in March 2011 in stark violation of a UN mandate. That seven-month onslaught led to the murder of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi - from whom Sarkozy had gladly received hush-hush political donations in the past, before stabbing him in the back.
The illegal French-led NATO blitzkrieg on Libya subverted a constitutional government and resulted in the ongoing destruction of one of Africa's most economically developed countries. Libya has been sacked to become a failed state, over-run by extremist Takfiri militia and tribal warlords, whose warped ideology is shared by the ISIS terror network destroying Syria and Iraq. The same ideology includes the armed adherents who struck this week in Paris, killing more than a dozen people.
So Sarkozy's concern for attacks on civilization is well qualified - although you won't hear it put quite that way in the thought-control Western media. The very extremist forces he helped to unleash from the illegal overthrow of the Libyan state have now killed his own people right in the capital of his republic.
One of the presumed touchstones of Western civilization that was allegedly defiled this week is "free speech" and "freedom of expression." Sarkozy was joined by other Western political figures, from US President Barack Obama, to British Premier David Cameron, in condemning the murderous assault on the Paris-based satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in terms of a war on "our values."
The magazine had previously incensed millions of Muslims worldwide by its publication of images profaning Prophet Mohammed (PBUH). That is believed to have provided the motive for the gunmen who, while fleeing the scene in Paris, shouted: "The prophet has been avenged."
French President Francois Hollande declared the slain journalists and cartoonists as "heroes" who died for the lofty principle of freedom of speech.
But like other presumed Western values, such as human rights, freedom of speech is a much over-rated principle - over-rated by the Western governments and institutions like the corporate-controlled media, who invoke it as a ideological badge of honor that distinguishes them and makes them superior to others.
In practice, however, such Western values are no more than chimera. They are empty slogans whose mere espousal and conceited, disingenuous profession is for propaganda purposes.
What human rights or respect for rule of law did Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama adhere to when they oversaw the destruction of Libya? Or in the ongoing covert destruction of Syria and Iraq (despite belated Western claims of liquidating the terror network that they spawned in the first place for regime change in Syria.)
Insofar that Western governments support free speech, it is more often for expedient political advantage. It is not a universal ethic, as claimed. And, laughably, they are telling barefaced lies to claim otherwise, as they continually do.
A French satirical publication may have been allowed to denigrate Islam, but it would never be allowed to condemn Zionism and all its provable criminality. It is doubtful the magazine in question would print cartoons of Sarkozy, Obama or Cameron with explosives tied to their heads or dropping bombs on Libya. Even though the latter is not satire; it actually reflects the reality of criminal actions and events.
So, Western "free speech" is really just freedom for the powers-that-be to demean and demonize whomever the West requires for furthering its political interests. When free speech legitimately attacks Western interests, exposes hypocrisy and fraudulence, then it stops being a "universal principle." Censorship is then the ironclad order.
French comedian Dieudonné, for example, has been banned from public performances by the French government owing to his farcical arm gesture, known as the "Quenelle." The gesture can be interpreted in many ways, from a vulgar personal insult, to a derisory slur on the ruling class. The French authorities claim that the sign is "anti-Semitic" and a reverse Nazi salute. Dieudonné denies this and instead says the gesture is "anti-Zionist" and "anti-establishment."
The comedian has been banned from travelling to Britain by the London authorities, also as a result of his political parodies. His friend and professional footballer, Nicolas Anelka, was last year banned from playing soccer games in England and fined over $100,000 for signaling the Quenelle after scoring a goal.
Almost a year before the massacre at the Charlie Hebdo magazine this week in Paris, French President Francois Hollande gave notice that there would be zero-tolerance of Dieudonné or anyone else who practiced the Quenelle. "We will act… we will fight against the sarcasm of those who purport to be humorists but who are actually professional anti-Semites," said Hollande.
But hold on a moment. That's just what the French ruling class deems to be the meaning of Dieudonné's Quenelle. On the basis of their prejudice, the artist and anyone who displays the gesture in public is subject to prosecution. That's not just censorship; it is state persecution for having an opinion.
Evidently, it's acceptable to insult Islam, according to Western select use of free speech because it suits political agendas of demonizing Muslim countries so that they can be attacked with Western warplanes or covert terrorist proxies. But it is not acceptable to satirize Zionism or Western ruling classes.

And here is another revealing touchstone. Why is Press TV banned from British terrestrial and satellite television broadcasting? Why is the Iran-based channel banned across Europe and North America? Where is Western free speech in that case? What is the problem?

Press TV is not tolerated. It is banished. Because the truth of Western state terrorism, as practiced by the likes of Sarkozy, Hollande, Obama and Cameron is too much to bear for how it might enlighten and empower public opinion. The truth of Western-sponsored state terrorism as practiced by the genocidal Israeli regime is too much to bear for public discourse; any criticism is shoved down the memory hole under the spurious pretext of "anti-Semitism." The fact that Western leaders should be prosecuted for war crimes is too much to bear. All such views, no matter how intellectually rigorous, morally scrupulous and legally substantiated, must be censored, and those who articulate them must be hounded into isolation.
Western free speech is nothing but a cynical charade by those in power to maintain their unlawful positions of power.
A satirical magazine championed by Western war criminals for its "free speech" to dehumanize Muslims is hailed as "heroic?" While an informative, serious news channel like Press TV is banned. Now that is farcical cartoon.



Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent. Originally from Belfast, Ireland, he is now located in East Africa working as a freelance columnist for Press TV and Strategic Culture Foundation (Moscow).

The West is Manufacturing Muslim Monsters
Who Should be Blamed for Muslim Terrorism?
By Andre Vltchek
In the last five decades, around 10 million Muslims have been murdered because their countries did not serve the Empire, or did not serve it full-heartedly, or just were in the way.
Who Profits From Killing Charlie?
By Pepe Escobar
Islamofascism peddlers are already having a field day/week/month/year. For simpletons/trolls/hordes exhibiting an IQ worthy of sub-zoology, when in doubt, demonize Islam.
In Solidarity With a Free Press: Some More Blasphemous Cartoons
 By Glenn Greenwald
To comport with this new principle for how one shows solidarity with free speech rights and a vibrant free press, we're publishing some blasphemous and otherwise offensive cartoons about religion and their adherents:
Unmournable Bodies
By Teju Cole  
Western societies are not, even now, the paradise of skepticism and rationalism that they believe themselves to be.
Paris Shooting Suspects Under French Radar for YEARS
By Tony Cartalucci
Determining the degree to which this attack was influenced or engineered by Western intelligence agencies will be difficult to establish.
Will France Repeat US Mistakes after 9/11?
By Ray McGovern
All the American public gets is the boilerplate about how al-Qaeda evildoers are perverting a religion and exploiting impressionable young men.
Truly Massive Display of Hypocrisy by Western Leaders:
By Michael S. Rozeff
January 11, 2015 "ICH" - "Lew Rockwell" -   Hypocrites up and down the line. Terrorists themselves. Leaders who have been stoking the furnace of terrorism themselves, creating terrorists, supplying them with arms, tolerating their education in Saudi Arabia. Hypocrites. All those leaders who have been attacking Muslim countries for years on end and supplying arms. Hypocrites. All those leaders who yell “terrorism” when it suits their grander schemes of domination. Now when there is blowback in Paris, they yell “extremism” and use the occasion to continue and enlarge the war on terror.
They use it to strengthen police state surveillance and to frighten the populations under their control. The West’s leaders have created terrorism, intentionally and unintentionally, knowingly and unknowingly, depending on the person and situation, and now they again are seeking to benefit from an attack on western ground. These same leaders stand by while Netanyahu engages in slaughtering Palestinians. They dismember Libya. They supply arms in Syria. They attack and destroy Iraq and Afghanistan. They now bemoan deaths for which they bear responsibility, for it is they who have invaded one Muslim country after another.
“British prime minister David Cameron, German chancellor Angela Merkel and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu are among more than 40 world leaders who linked arms as they led the march to loud applause from the massive crowd.
“Speaking at the march, Mr Cameron said extremist violence would remain a threat for many years to come.
“‘We in Britain face a very similar threat, a threat of fanatical extremism,’ he said.”
Among the unnamed 40 are the hypocrites who have been on the attack.
Hypocrites, including Obama:
“In the wake of terrorist attacks in France and elsewhere, the Obama administration announced Sunday it will host a Summit on Countering Violent Extremism next month.”
These leaders have no moral standing whatever, no moral credibility whatever on this matter or any other. They have long since dirtied their hands with their lies and propaganda. In their foulness, they have given up all respect. These are despicable people who are so low that they use the Paris attacks to jump on a moral white horse and act as if they are pure and defenders of their citizens. Hypocrites. They have no intention whatever of changing their very own policies of extremism and foreign intervention that have brought about attacks such as those in Paris and on 9/11. The West indulged in new forms of colonialism and imperialism in the 20th century and now the 21st. This has to be recognized, admitted and ended. It is leading to an even greater conflagration than anything yet seen.

 [correction, their mown policies of extremism and foreign intervention has not spawned these false flag attacks but are an addition to their political policies and all for the Israeli Eretz Empire which wishes to destroy /eradicate Islam and the Arab world, inciting violence, deep seated racism, bigotry and hatred and demonisation of Muslims, blinding Westerners to the War Crimes their own countries are committing against the Citizens of the Arab and Islamic Nation. Western Citizenry so brainwashed by Zionist propaganda cannot see just which Ethnic Group has actually manipulated and occupied their Governments and owns their Leaders  as well as owning the West lock stock and barrel through their disproportionate control politically as well as economically, bankrupting these countries morally as well as financially- Jews however portray Muslims as the controllers rather than themselves who they like to show as being peace loving civilised and tolerant European Citizens. It appears the French are as dumb witted and ignorant as their US/UK/Canadian counterparts who accept Jewish political and Media Propaganda and racial incitement and war mongering tactics. This is not ‘blowback/backlash’ for French colonial actions in Arab countries or the insults against Islam- NO. this is a FALSE Flag attack to incite violence , hatred, fear and mistrust of ALL Muslims, hoping Europe will ethnically cleanse them out of western Nations and to destroy them even in their own Nations- Cold calculated for maximum cause and effect]

Another term for such  Zionist Masonic deception is known as the Hegelian Dialectic- causing a  chain of Problem, Reaction and Solution, attempting to cause the problem, anticipating the desired reaction in the hope of blaming ‘the perceived enemy, and then coming up with a solution to the very problem the perpetrator himself executed- thus being a false flag attack blamed on an innocent party, frequently used by Israel/Zionists time and time again. Have you also noticed how the Jews have got the French to play on words -use the term ‘je suis Charles’ at the demos as a sarcastic attack  on those at Palestinian demos who chanted ‘we are all Palestinian’ during Israel’s brutal attacks on Gaza. If you dare speak out against Israel, Zionism, Jews or their Holohoax, there is outrage, labelling people anti semitic or imposing fines or jail sentences- But if it is an attack on Islam and Muslims, the French have every right to practice ‘Free Speech’, democracy etc..  but you cannot accuse them of being ANTI SEMITIC AGAINST the Semitic religion of Islam or Semitic Arabs. One special Law for the Jew and another the Arab/Muslim. Even in the 21st Century, the French [and most Europeans/Westerners] have not changed- they are still Colonialists, with a typical imperialist racist mentality towards other nations who are not as squeaky White with ‘Christian/Judaic values like them. Still like the Jews themselves, racist and Supremacist to the core.

What Next, France, Germany, Europe,UK, Canada etc.. are you all going to see more physical attacks against Muslim women, Religious Clerics at Mosques, torching of Muslim businesses and homes, and leaving Pigs Heads on their doorsteps [ironically Pigs are also a religious insult to true Jews] painting  attacks on Muslim children or will you get them to tattoo numbers on them to identify them as Muslims, Nazi Style. How many MORE DEAD tortured, oppressed Muslims do you all want??MORE ISRAELI INSPIRED PERSECUTION and ABUSE OF MUSLIMS!!?
An Orgy of Democratic Hypocrisy
"Free Speech" in the Aftermath of the Attack on Charlie Hebdo
By David North
Charlie Hebdo has facilitated the growth of a form of politicized anti-Muslim sentiment that bears a disturbing resemblance to the politicized anti-Semitism that emerged as a mass movement in France in the 1890s.
The First Question to Ask After Any Terror Attack: Was It a False Flag?
Governments from Around the World Admit They Do It
Governments from around the world admit they’ve used the bully’s trick … attack first, and then blame the victim:

  • Japanese troops set off a small explosion on a train track in 1931, and falsely blamed it on China in order to justify an invasion of Manchuria. This is known as the “Mukden Incident” or the “Manchurian Incident”.   The Tokyo International Military Tribunal found:  “Several of the participators in the plan, including Hashimoto [a high-ranking Japanese army officer], have on various occasions admitted their part in the plot and have stated that the object of the “Incident” was to afford an excuse for the occupation of Manchuria by the Kwantung Army ….”    And see this

  • A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that – under orders from the chief of the Gestapo – he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.  Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building in 1933, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson
Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev admitted in writing that the Soviet Union’s Red Army shelled the Russian village of Mainila in 1939 – while blaming the attack on Finland – as a basis for launching the “Winter War” against Finland. Russian president Boris Yeltsin agreed that Russia had been the aggressor in the Winter War, and Putin
Israel admits that an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this)

  • The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister
The Turkish Prime Minister admitted that the Turkish government carried out the 1955 bombing on a Turkish consulate in Greece – also damaging the nearby birthplace of the founder of modern Turkey – and blamed it on Greece, for the purpose of inciting and justifying anti-Greek violence
The British Prime Minister admitted to his defense secretary that he and American president Dwight Eisenhower approved a plan in 1957 to carry out attacks in Syria and blame it on the Syrian government as a way to effect regime change
The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the
As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960′s, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following
with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.
2 years before, American Senator George Smathers had suggested that the U.S. make “a false attack made on Guantanamo Bay which would give us the excuse of actually fomenting a fight which would then give us the excuse to go in and [overthrow Castro]“.
And Official State Department documents show that – only nine months before the Joint Chiefs of Staff plan was proposed – the head of the Joint Chiefs and other high-level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. The 3 plans were not carried out, but they were all discussed as serious proposals
The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war

  • A U.S. Congressional committee admitted that – as part of its “Cointelpro” campaign – the FBI had used many provocateurs in the 1950s through 1970s to carry out violent acts and falsely blame them on political activists

  • The German government admitted (and see this) that, in 1978, the German secret service detonated a bomb in the outer wall of a prison and planted “escape tools” on a prisoner – a member of the Red Army Faction – which the secret service wished to frame the bombing on

  • The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him “to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident”, thus framing the ANC for the bombing

  • An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army
    ; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author)

  • Senior Russian Senior military and intelligence officers admit that the KGB blew up Russian apartment buildings in 1999 and falsely blamed it on Chechens, in order to justify an invasion of Chechnya (and see this report and this discussion)

  • According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.

  • The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings

  • As reported by BBC, the New York Times, and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the “war on terror”

  • Senior police officials in Genoa, Italy admitted that – in July 2001, at the G8 summit in Genoa – planted two Molotov cocktails and faked the stabbing of a police officer, in order to justify a violent crackdown against protesters

  • Similarly, the U.S. falsely blamed Iraq for playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by a memo from the defense secretary – as one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq war. Even after the 9/11 Commission admitted that there was no connection, Dick Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S. government officials now admit that the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction (despite previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials now say that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was not the state which backed the hijackers)

  • Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”

  • United Press International reported in June 2005:

U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.

  • Undercover Israeli soldiers admitted in 2005 to throwing stones at other Israeli soldiers so they could blame it on Palestinians, as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protests by the Palestinians

  • Quebec police

  • At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence

  • Egyptian politicians admitted (and see this) that that government employees looted priceless museum artifacts in 2011 to try to discredit the protesters

  • A Colombian army colonel has admitted that his unit murdered 57 civilians, then dressed them in uniforms and claimed they were rebels killed in combat

  • U.S. soldiers have
    that if they kill innocent Iraqis and Afghanis, they then “drop” automatic weapons near their body so they can pretend they were militants

  • The highly-respected writer for the Telegraph Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says that the head of Saudi intelligence – Prince Bandar – recently admitted that the Saudi government controls “Chechen” terrorists

  • High-level American sources admitted that the Turkish government – a fellow NATO country – carried out the chemical weapons attacks blamed on the Syrian government; and high-ranking Turkish government admitted on tape plans to carry out attacks and blame it on the Syrian government

  • The former Ukrainian security chief admits that the sniper attacks which started the Ukrainian coup were carried out in order to frame others

  • Britain’s spy agency has admitted to (and see this) that it carries out “digital false flag” attacks on targets, framing people by writing offensive or unlawful material … and blaming it on the target
Inline image
 Painting by Anthony Freda
So Common … There’s a Name for It
The use of the bully’s trick is so common that it was given a name hundreds of years ago.
“False flag terrorism” is defined as a government attacking its own people, then blaming others in order to justify going to war against the people it blames. Or as Wikipedia defines it :
False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy’s strategy of tension.
The term comes from the old days of wooden ships, when one ship would hang the flag of its enemy before attacking another ship in its own navy. Because the enemy’s flag, instead of the flag of the real country of the attacking ship, was hung, it was called a “false flag” attack.
Indeed, this concept is so well-accepted that rules of engagement for naval , air and land warfare all prohibit false flag attacks.

Leaders Throughout History Have Acknowledged False Flags

Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the danger of false flags:
“This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
– Plato

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
– U.S. President James Madison

“A history of false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people! “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler

“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.

“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin

People Are Waking Up to False Flags


People are slowly waking up to this whole con job by governments who want to justify war.
More people are talking about the phrase “false flag” than ever before.



Paris Terror Attack
President Hollande Had Expressed Strong Misgivings About The Sanction Regime Against Russia

France declares an end to the Russian sanctions just two days before the terror attacks

State of the Nation
France, more than any other nation in the European Union (EU), has been coming under increasing criticism and scrutiny from both within and outside of the EU. The Anglo-Amercian power structure has always been quick to reign in any ‘cavalier’ demonstrations of French independence.  President Charles de Gaulle’s resistance to NATO membership is a perfect example of this historical pattern, as were the several assassination attempts on his life and subsequent isolation of France over many years.
French banking giant BNP Paribas was just hit with an $8.9 billion U.S. fine
Fast forward to 2015 and the recent terrorist attacks on the Charlie Hebdo newspaper offices.  This staged attack was clearly executed with deliberate intent to produce specific outcomes within the European Union.  The desired results of those who fabricated this event are becoming more clear with each passing day.  Certainly, French President François Hollande will be re-thinking his commitment to ending the sanctions against Russia that he had expressed just 2 days before the ‘terror event’ in Paris.
BBC News – France seeks end to Russia sanctions over Ukraine
With each passing terror attack, the first two questions which must be asked are who loses, and who gains.
Cui bono?
That’s obvious, especially whenever the terrorists (along with their names and addresses, Facebook pages and hashtags) have been identified before the attacks even take place. The Clash of Civilizations was predicted, and planned, with the penning of Freemason Albert Pike’s letter about three successive world wars planned for the 20th century. But this is the 21st century! What happened?
“The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the “agentur” of the “Illuminati” between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.”[1]
What happened is exactly what the world is experiencing throughout 2014 and now, 2015. That being extreme desperation on the part of the ruling cabal (aka the World Shadow Government) to start a World War III anyway they can.
Who really loses in the wake of these terror attacks on Charlie Hebdo?
France has always been the weakest link in NATO, the military backbone of the Anglo-American Axis (AAA) which is quite determined to initiate a third world war. The hostilities throughout the entire Middle East stand as a glaring testimony to the commitment to perpetual war by the AAA. However, France under a dyed-in-the-wool Socialist president, does not have the bellicose leanings that his predecessor had.
President Hollande was particularly disturbed by the heavy-handed US response to the French contract to deliver two Mistral-class ships to Russia. Not only has France lost many desperately needed jobs during the current recession, they have dishonorably breached a highly public international contract.
While waiting for France’s decision over the long-standing discussion, Russia urged France to fulfill a contract to deliver two Mistral helicopter carriers or return Moscow’s money. With the Russian ruble suffering from a currency crisis, the Russian deputy defense minister Antanoly Antonov stated that Russia would “gladly take back the money” it paid to France, according to Russian state-run news agency Itar-Tass. However, if France chooses to pay the price for the deal with possibly heavy fines, it would hurt its already-damaged economy.[2]
Russia was, and is, not happy about this violation.  And France has consequently lost Russia’s business for the foreseeable future.  France has also had its pride injured after being pressured by NATO to fall into rank around the sanctions.  This insult to French sovereignty is what has motivated Team Hollande to suggest a serious reconsideration of the sanction regime. So has the potential financial loss of $1.32 billion plus fines, should they return the Russian purchase price.
The upshot from this discussion is that France loses more than anyone — obviously — from the Charlie Hebdo massacre.  The tragedy continues to tear at the very fabric of French society, as the following headlines illustrate.
Editor of Britain’s Jewish Chronicle claims people are fleeing Paris
More than 700,000 rally in France after Islamist attacks
France Gripped By Fear After Paris Terror Attacks
Why was the Paris police commissioner killed right after these terror attacks?
Commissioner Helric Fredoun SRPJ Limoges has committed suicide last night in his office with his service weapon.[3]
It appears that the Commissioner Fredoun, who was deputy director of the regional police service since 2012, may have discovered that the actual facts surrounding this bizarre Charlie Hebdo case were far different from those being reported by the press.  Hence, there is now much speculation that he was suicided in order to keep his report from going public.
Terrorist attacks are now occurring with such frequency that it has become difficult to keep up with the facts of each one.  It is also challenging to determine which ones are real and which ones are staged.  Then there is the added challenge of determining the most likely cause of these shocking events, whether they are authentic acts of violence or fabricated hoaxes.
In any event it is clear that President Hollande was getting ready to leave the Anglo-Amercian Axis reservation … in a big way.  The NATO leadership would never tolerate such a departure from their agenda to isolate Russia, once and for all.  They have likewise proven that they will decisively react to the defiance of any nation in a most impressive and terrifying way.
Michael Thomas
January 10, 2015

State of the Nation
[1] WORLD WAR III: Anglo-American Axis vs. BRICS Alliance
[2] France to make a choice between NATO and Russia
[3] Police Commissioner of Charlie Hebdo Event Found Dead
French Leader Urges End to Sanctions Against Russia Over Ukraine

Russia sanctions ‘must be lifted now’ – Hollande
Francois Hollande suggests sanctions on Russia should be lifted
Anti-Muslim Backlash has Begun
As the world now knows, three masked men stormed Charlie Lebdo offices killing 12 employees including four cartoon artists a few days ago. As I write this, they are still at large leaving a trail of damage.
As is the norm now, Muslim organisations have come out condemning the action.  Nevertheless the discourse rapidly focussed on two key areas, which are typically only discussed in the Muslim context.
Free Speech and Propaganda
Reading statements from politicians and emotionally-charged papers defending “free speech”, the fact that free speech is not absolute, is continually ignored.  The right to life is an absolute non-derogable right.  Thus balancing the two rights in the human rights discourse would mean giving way to one when the two are in jeopardy.  This is not something new. Balancing competing rights happens every day in the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights. Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights restrictions may be imposed on freedom of expression “for the respect of the reputations and rights of others”, and protection of national security, public order, health and morals.[1]

As it is there needs to be some pressing questions which need to be answered. Rights, as I discussed last year, is often used as a stick to beat the Muslim minority with. The freedom of expression is an important right.  After all, it is the protection measure for the people against the state and a fundamental mechanism of holding the executive to account, sharing knowledge and challenging ideas. The question is however, at what point does it become hate speech and/or propaganda to alienate a minority and normalise xenophobia? A further restriction on freedom of expression lies in the prohibition of abusive invocation of rights. Article 5(1) states,
“Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognized herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant.”
As such Article 20(2) requires that, “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.”
The French Muslims have been systemically discriminated against, their places of worship desecrated and attacked, their religious manifestations curbed and their faith repeatedly mocked. Freedom is binned when a Muslim woman wears a hijab on the beach. The European Court of Human Rights in its judgement upholding the French ban on the veil acknowledged that the discourse leading up to the enactment of the law banning the veil was in fact Islamophobic thus demonstrating that discrimination against Muslims is strongly institutional.
To foment further discrimination of the Muslim minority through increasingly repugnant anti-Muslim drawings in such a politically charged environment smacks of Goebbels’s strategy to demonise the Jews. Take for instance the paper’s incredibly disgusting image depicting a caricaturised Egyptian protester being riddled with bullets by the Egyptian army.  Mocking one of the worst massacres of protestors in recent history, the writing on the cover translates as “killing in Egypt – the Qur’an is s**t – it does not stop the bullets”. The propaganda image at the very least normalises the killing of Muslims and wanton attacks on the Qur’an, at a time when Muslims were being massacred by the military. It is purely Nazi-esque. In 1946, Julius Striecher, editor-in-chief of the anti-Semitic newspaper Der Stürmer, was convicted by International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. According to the Tribunal,
“Striecher’s incitement to murder and extermination at the time when Jews in the East were being killed under the most horrible conditions clearly constitutes persecution on political and racial ground in connection with war crimes… and constitutes a crime against humanity”.[2]
Were it not for common decency, I would present an open challenge to “satirists” and papers to depict a picture of a Jew holding the Torah while being gassed in a chamber. I for one would condemn such actions. Would the defenders of free speech publish such an image? Or perhaps publish a “satirical piece” on how no one really died in the holocaust? At this point the liberals point to the fact that free speech must be exercised within the confines of the law and in French law anti-Semitism is banned, thus conceding the point that unfettered free speech in society is not possible and a blatant unreflective delusion.
As a matter of “principle” (for free speech purists), one needs to question why the Holocaust is such a “sensitive” issue that it is off-limits for “criticism”, or, in the present context, “satire”.  Why are the “freedom to offend” brigade so deafeningly silent on this topic? If satire involving a religious figure who is central to the hearts of a minority to such an extent that it evokes strong emotions globally is open game, then what is so sacrosanct about the Jewish holocaust that any criticism or expression of suspicion must be gagged through law? If a protestor holding his sacred Book is being shot in Egypt can be depicted in such a repugnant fashion, which “principle” restricts its application to Jewish sensitivities and why is this restriction not universally applied?
Today’s freedom-defending French President François Hollande called the attack “an attack on free speech”. A year ago, celebrating the ban on comedian Dieudonné M’bala M’bala’s performance before France’s anti-semitism laws were breached, Hollande declared the decision a “victory”. Casting doubt over Charlie Hebdo’s claims that they satirise everyone, in 2009, when their cartoonist Maurice Sinet made a snide remark and drew cartoons about Jean Sarkozy’s marriage to a Jewish heiress, he was promptly fired when he refused to apologise on the editor’s orders.
It is clear that some human beings are more entitled to human rights than others.
David Cameron
This hypocritical application of free speech couldn’t be more acute in the British context than Cameron’s statement on the French shooting. Condemning the actions as a sickening attack on press freedom, he said,
“We stand united with the French people in our opposition to all forms of terrorism and stand squarely for free speech and democracy.”
This is of course, rather rich coming from the leader of a government whose laws detain, harass, and monitor journalists.
Cameron’s government is pushing forward with measures which gag dissenting voices, and ban speakers from speaking at universities. In fact, the PREVENT strategy which draws parallels with Nazi Germany and East Germany’s Stasi goes beyond free speech and seeks to discriminate and sanction based on thought, thus violating the absolute right of freedom of conscious and belief!
Cameron couldn’t be more hypocritical even if he tried.
Collective Amnesia and Framing the Discourse
Interestingly, when news of a number of Swedish masaajid being attacked hit headlines, they were described by the media and state officials as “arson attacks” thus given the action a criminal framework (see here, here, and here for example). Where the perpetrator is allegedly a Muslim, the public, papers and politicians in Western nations rapidly deploy their highly politicised “terrorism” linguistic-armoury. Following this, “free speech” and “values” are used to evoke a sense of collectiveness, similar in method adopted by authoritarian demagogues of the past.
Often the broader public, as evident on social media networks, suffer from a collective amnesia. “Only Muslims kill!” “You don’t see Jews and Christian killing when they are offended”. Except they do. The only problem is it is not as comprehensively broadcast daily as it neither serves the purposes of the right-wing and neocons in Western governments. When it is reported, it is done so from a different perspective.
If we continue to use the human rights framework to frame the attacks, then far-right, Christian fundamentalist terrorist Anders Breivik, attacked a much weightier right: the right for immigrants, Muslims and those who support multiculturalism to exist in Norway. In other words, Breivik attacked the fundamental right to life of minorities and those he politically differed with. The same applies to Pavlo Lapshyn, who murdered an 80 year old and bombed masaajid in Britain. His intent was to create a race war and kill “non-whites”, thus denying them the right to life purely on the basis of their skin colour.
On 7th of January of this year, a white man committed a “terrorist” attack in Colorado, US, against the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, one of the oldest civil rights groups in the US. Again, this attack, if framed in the human rights discourse can be viewed as an attack on the freedoms of “coloured” people. The provocation is the existence of “coloured” people in a given area. The same can be applied to far-right, white supremacist attacks on Jews in the US last year, and the several far-right terrorist attacks in the preceding years.
But you will never read a report entitled “far-right, white, Christian terrorist attack on Muslims provoked by their fundamental right to exist”. Nor will you see the level of reporting, national debates, and continued Muslim-reaction baiting we are currently witnessing.
Provocation and Backlash
As is the norm with such events, a backlash has already begun, with #killallMuslims hashtag trending on Twitter. Masaajid and kebab shops have been subjected to French “terrorist attacks”, despite the chorus of condemnation from Muslim leaders. Of course, the Daily Mail and Western media generally won’t class these as terrorist attacks. They are but white, non-Muslims “coming to terms” with what has passed.
And herein lies a more subtle point. When a “provocation” is made against western nations in their own countries, we witness a backlash by the white people; mosques are bombed and Muslims are terrorised, yet there seems to be an inability to comprehend or a refusal to accept Muslim backlash when western nations bomb Muslim lands, exploit their resources and destroy future generations. At its most basic level, both cases are emotional responses to provocation which continue cyclical violence. Yet one is humanised whilst the other, is dehumanised. It is this unceasing hypocrisy which undercuts the Western liberal discourses which will continue to demarcate the dire situation of the Muslim minorities and fuel resentment.
Concluding Remarks
Globally Muslims feel the pain that French Muslims feel when the noble Prophet peace be upon is insulted, for verily he is revered more than the human who gave birth to us. It hurts us when the French racists and xenophobes use the Muslims to pedal themselves to power, curtail their freedoms in the name of freedom, perpetuating an atmosphere of hate. We understand Muslim minority discrimination all too well.
The discourses around such attacks certainly emphasis an important point. The Muslims do not benefit from such actions, neither do the perpetrators spiritually as they break the commands of their faith.  It does however, provide a justification for further persecution of the Muslim minorities, further curtailment of freedoms and further military invasions abroad as the hot pursuit for the ever evasive “Islamist extremism” materialises exasperation. For particular policy-makers and politicians, events like these are a benefit; be it whipping up fear to manufacture consent of an uniformed public, winning the upcoming elections, justifying French military invasion of North Africa, or all three. Indeed the neoconservative and Zionist advisors in Western governments feed off such tragedies and direct their renewed warmongering vigour through their policies.  When the September 11th attacks occurred, Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan university that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel. The neocon David Brooks wrote,
“Sept. 11th really did leave a residue — an unconsummated desire for sacrifice and service.”
Of course this self-sacrifice translated well in the jingoist neocon plans for global hegemony. In the Great Game, such actions play neatly into the hands of those who wish to exploit the vulnerable mood.

[1] Art.19(3)
[2] Judgment of the International Military Tribunal for the Trial of Major War Criminals, Cmd.6964 (London: HMSO, 1946)
Al-Qaeda plotting massacre in Britain, say MI5:
Al-Qaeda is plotting mass attacks on civilians in Britain and other Western countries, the head of the UK secret service MI5 warned.
 In Britain, Spy Chief Calls for More Power for Agency:
Britain's domestic intelligence chief has demanded greater authority for spies to help fight the threat of Islamist extremism, a sign that the attack on a satirical newspaper in Paris is likely to sharpen the security-versus-privacy debate in Western countries.

Fwd AJ/T

More evidence of false flag and cover up.
Just like in the Bombay bombings when  Indian Intelligence Officer Heman Karkare, who had previously exposed the Hindu RSS as having staged previous false flag bombings which they blamed on Indian muslims and Pakistan, was killed after receiving threats from RSS, or like John O’Neil who was killed on 9/11 while preparing to expose US Gov complicity.
Importance: High
 Note that the French Police Officer who was allegedly murdered by the NWO terrorists was a French muslim.
[Israel cannot afford a genuine independent investigation as the TRUTH may come out and the Jews cannot have that now can they!!]

This is getting zero media coverage in the US but a Google search provides a long list of stories in Europe. The official story is that Police Commissioner Helric Fredou, in charge of the investigation into the attack at Charlie Hebdo, suddenly got very very very very very very very very very very depressed and put a bullet through his own head. But many of the reports say the death is suspicious. Yes, and bears do crap in the forest!
 NOTE:  the story will grow legs and walk pretty soon at this rate.  We know it was a Rita Katz HOAX carried out in FRANCE, with FRENCH INTELLIGENCE and POLICE cooperation meaning MOSSAD is fully in charge of FRANCE too.

Add comment

Security code

Related Articles

Copyright � 2012 - ATT Media

All Rights Reserved.