Obama rescues ISIS

The US president will soon take his leave but, before joining the 100 000 dollar a speech conference circuit, he will have committed another heinous crime in Syria. On the 17th September, his air-force killed some 80 soldiers belonging to the Syrian army in Deir Ezzor. Far from being accidental, this attack was carried out at the very moment when the Syrian national army was being attacked by ISIS.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour

The Pentagon declared that it was an error. But who can believe such a lie? Besides, this official version was modified by the American UN ambassador. She admitted to the Security Council that the US was behind this attack, but she minimised its importance by comparing this “unintentional” error with the “deliberate attacks” carried out by Damascus against civilians. What a bizarre explanation!

The theory of an accident doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. You just have to look at the facts to realise this.

First of all, we have the modus operandi of the attack. According to witnesses, the attack lasted 45 minutes, and successive bombardments were carried out by several fighter jets.  Therefore it cannot be the act of a stray pilot who had misunderstood orders.

Secondly, consider the location of the attack. The position targeted was Jebel Tudar, 4km to the south of the town’s airport. This is a strategic high-point for the defence of the entire zone, where 100 000 civilians are surrounded by ISIS. It’s a fixed position, which has been visibly occupied by the Syrian army for months.

Thirdly, there is the triumphant press release made by ISIS. Indeed, the ISIS propaganda agency “Amaq” confirmed that the jihadist group had taken control of the hill where the supposed “anti-terrorist” coalition had carried out the attack. This superb coordination between the US and their unofficial mercenaries is worth highlighting.

Finally, it is highly unlikely that the US air-force would support the Syrian army. If it were a blunder, this would be the only possible explanation, but it is absurd. NATO forces have never lent air support to the Syrian army. Why would they? This is the question that the Russian ambassador recently asked at the UN. The answer is obvious: the aim was not to help the Syrian army but to help ISIS.

Indeed, attacking the Syrian army for ISIS allows the US to achieve three objectives. By relieving the Aleppo front, this new front in the far east of the country crushes the dream of of recapturing national territory. It weakens the Syrian state. But it also sends a clear message to the Takfiri extremists, who were in a bad position ever since the neighbourhoods in the south of Alep were recaptured. Furthermore, it strengthens Washington’s regional allies in the implementation of the deadly “constructive chaos” policy, at a time when the end of Obama’s term in office could lead to fears of a softening in the Washington line.

We knew that American cynicism was limitless. But they have just a made a quantum leap. This is the first time that the US has directly attacked the Syrian army. This new infringement is a test case, and it cannot be too long before the Moscow-Damascus axis retaliates. This support for the terrorist group shows that the neo-cons do not intend to let go of the Middle East. The fact that this attack coincides with the American donation of 38 billion dollars of military aid to Israel is revealing. Contrary to what one sometimes reads, Washington is not withdrawing from the region. It will continue to spread chaos in the region by arming all sorts of assassins.


Article Translated from French

The original author was Bruno Guigue, a political analyst and author, whose works include Les raisons de l’esclavage (L’Harmattan, 2001) et Aux origines du conflit israélo-arabe, l’invisible remords de l’Occident, (L’Harmattan, 2002).

Source : Agoravox

http://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/obama-au-secours-de-daech-184756


See also: Are we honestly fighting against ISIS? https://geostrategieblog.wordpress.com/are-we-honestly-fighting-against-the-islamic-state-isil/

The true terrorists are the very same people who claim to fight terrorism

While the truth and nothing but the truth should interest us, many people are misled by their (legitimate) hatred of thugs and are duped by the mainstream media. They focus exclusively on what the (mendacious) media highlights.

11 September 2001, the Merah case, the Charlie Hebdo attacks, the Bataclan shooting on the 13 November, the Nice massacre on 14 July, a priest murdered at Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray on 26 July… Let’s take these targets one by one: the Twin Towers (symbol of capitalism), an anti-religious satirical magazine (anti-Muslim but, mostly, anti-Christian), a rock concert with satanic overtones, the day of national celebrations to commemorate the French republic and, finally, a priest, a minister of God. All these targets constitute symbols and were by no means chosen at random.

The media version of each terrorist attack is flawed, tainted by lies. The media routinely buries photographic evidence and statements which contradict their theory (for example: this woman who saw an armed man get out of the lorry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0KCluRZWKs) or they interview a fake hero, such as the man from Nice, Franck, whose statement was entirely false (https://www.facebook.com/panhamza/photos/a.259863080821062.1073741827.258337060973664/691396847667681/?type=3&theater.)

From inside-job to chaos

In each case, not only are we unsure of the identity of the terrorist, but we never move up the chain of command in order to identify the brains behind the attacks. After all, this is really what should interest us if we want to eradicate the problem at its source. Who are the sponsors of terrorism? Who has the power and the network necessary to carry out these large-scale attacks without being caught or convicted?

According to Aymeric Chauprade : “Terrorism is essentially the consequence of state action,  the work of intelligence services which use lunatics and fanatics in order to carry out their operations.” To carry out their dirty work, so to speak. Working on this assumption, it is clear that the French state and its intelligence services (1) acted as accessories to the terrorists in these attacks. And it is highly likely that each case was an “inside-job”. We are currently experiencing the French equivalent of the 11th September 2001. The true terrorists are those who claim to fight terrorism. Obeying the orders of a foreign nation, these people are incapable of protecting the French people and are akin to pyromaniac fireman.

From September 11 2001 to this very day – for we are experiencing the continuation of 9/11 (2) – the message conveyed by the mainstream media is clear: “Radical Islam” has declared war against the “Christian” West. The plot is very simple: it has to be, so that the entire population, anesthetised by the cathode ray tube, can understand it.

If we are to believe the various comments in the main-stream media and on the internet, the enemy, the number one danger, is Islam, which seeks to conquer and destroy. It would appear, therefore, that there is no conspiracy.  This enemy acts quite openly and defies the Christian West which, incidentally, has largely abandoned the Christian faith. Therefore it is ISIL which, for 18 months now, has been terrorising the French population and claiming responsibility for each of the attacks.

Some simple questions: What is ISIL ? Who are the members of ISIL ? What is their aim? Who controls ISIL? Who stands to gain from these serial killings for which ISIL claims responsibility?

To all these questions we have neither precise answers nor conclusive evidence.  And we know just as little about ISIL as we do about recent events. Apparently, the terrorists were all Arab Muslims, followers of Wahhabi ideology. They claim that some were criminals with links to the intelligence services, while others were said to be mentally-disturbed alcoholics or Islamic extremists. Evidently, they were all mere sub-contractors, manipulated and used by the state (3). The very same state which claims to fight terrorism and Islamic extremism, even though for decades it has encouraged the massive inflow of immigrants, most of whom are … Muslims.  Spot the mistake.

If the French state really wanted to fight against Islamic terrorism, it would tackle the problem differently. It wouldn’t encourage immigration from North Africa and the Islamisation of France. It wouldn’t allow the construction of mosques. Its rhetoric and its spin are contradicted by the facts, so this government has no credibility.

Let’s come back to ISIL. According to the criminologist, Xavier Raufer, ISIL “is not a terrorist group” but “a mercenary army”. Answerable to whom? “There is not a single Islamic extremist among the leaders of ISIL”. According to him, ISIL is a secular group controlled from abroad. And it is the foreign element which we find most interesting. ISIL is, objectively speaking, primarily a weapon of destruction in the hands of the international Judeo-Masonry, working for the construction of Greater Israel. Anybody can see that ISIL, Al-Qaida (“CIA Arab legion”, according to W Tarpley) and the Al-Nusra Front (Al Qaida in Syria) are shadowy and amorphous groups which have never attacked Israel. This is perhaps just a coincidence … or perhaps not. After all, which state aims to destroy all the other nations in order secure its domination of the world? Which military power seeks to turn the world into battlefield? Motivated by hatred and vengeance, it pursues its messianic mission. Who would look to turn the Christian West against the Islamic world in order to plunge France into chaos and then do same everywhere else in the world? Once we have examined the world revolutionary movement, that is to say the Talmudic-Masonic conspiracy, asking these questions leads us directly to the answers.

Create a Climate of Fear

Clearly, the objective of this operation, this series of terrorist attacks, is to establish a climate of fear in France. Fear had already set in with the Charlie Hebdo attack. You only have to listen to people in the street talking about how they are scared of going out. This fear, which is building to a crescendo, eerily resembles that of 1793 when the Freemasons Robespierre (his real surname: Rubinstein), Danton, Marat and Duport (the mastermind behind the massacres) were at work. This climate of fear aims to make people accept unpopular government decisions which go against public interest (reform of employment law). This climate of fear, therefore, seeks to impose a Masonic dictatorship (4). It also aims, above all, to trigger a civil war in France.

This is what the French secret service chief, Patrick Calvar, told us last month:

“We are on the verge of a civil war. I think this conflict (desired by the extreme-right in particular) will take place. A couple more terrorist attacks and it will happen.”

In conclusion, we have every reason to fear a civil war between the Christian and Muslim communities or that foreign mercenaries ransack the country as they did in Syria and Libya (in fact, just about anywhere in the world where the American-European-Zionist axis has imposed “democracy and freedom”.) Faced with this situation, what should we do? Most importantly, we should not get involved in a conflict from which we have nothing to gain and everything to lose, for the die has been cast. While waiting to discover the truth about these terrorist attacks we must, more than ever, remain level-headed and we should not heed the media siren calls luring us into a civil war. Remain vigilant and, if you are a Christian, find time for prayer.


(1) According to Roland Dumas, former French foreign affairs minister, the French intelligence services are controlled by Mossad:

https://lacontrerevolution.wordpress.com/2015/12/10/israel-controle-les-services-de-renseignements-francais/

(2)  According to the Kabbalists, the number 911 denotes the eviction of God.

(3) Mind control techniques can be used in this case.

https://lacontrerevolution.wordpress.com/2016/06/11/sortie-du-livre-mk-abus-rituels-et-controle-mental-dalexandre-lebreton/

(4) The Masonic dictatorship, which is the true face of democracy.


Article Translated from French

The original author was Johan Livernette

Source: https://johanlivernette.wordpress.com/2016/07/28/les-veritables-terroristes-sont-ceux-qui-pretendent-le-combattre/#more-3251

Who benefited from the Nice massacre?

Alain Soral grants an interview to Jérôme Bourbon for the French political review Rivarol


Founder and president of Egalité et Réconciliation since 2007, Alain Soral is a talented, loquacious and atypical character who pulls no punches and speaks his mind. Whether one entirely shares his views and his analysis or not, it is always interesting and intellectually stimulating to hear him talk. This is why we are devoting a few columns to him in our summer edition at a time when the international and national situation is especially “intense” while making it clear, as we do for all our interviews, that his views are, of course, entirely his own.


What are your thoughts on the terrorist attack in Nice which took place on the 14 July on the Promenade des Anglais?

I had announced that there would probably be another terrorist attack similar to that of the Bataclan. I had even said that it would not take place during the European Championship but afterwards and that would take place on the beaches. Some have retorted that it wasn’t on the beaches, which proves that they have a poor knowledge of France and its geography.

There are several interpretations of this event: a fatalist interpretation and an interpretation which is more conspiratorial … What is clear, is that there are people who want the “clash of civilisations” to take place. And it has to be said that they are doing everything to make it happen and that it is going to be increasingly difficult to stop it. It is obvious that the oligarchy which governs the country is relying on a confrontation between communities.

Consequently, it is difficult to imagine that the intelligence services and the government are working effectively to prevent terrorist attacks. I even think that this climate of tension and insecurity, which allows them to push ahead despite being totally unpopular, is in their interest. Indeed, the Prime Minister (Manuel Valls) is very open about this when he said there will be more terrorist attacks, that they cannot be prevented and that we have to learn to live with them.

The question which always needs to be asked in such a case, aside from asking where the money comes from (the terrorist sent 100 thousand euros to his family in Tunisia a few days before the attack), is the following: who benefits from the crime? I believe that Israel, to which Valls is eternally attached, is the agent with the most to gain from this conflict of civilisations between Muslims and Christians and encourages it by every possible means.

And France, unfortunately, is today entirely under Israeli domination, governed by its will and its programme. When Netanyahou tells us that we will be subject to further terrorist attacks if we do not support their policy on the Palestinians, that the situations we are facing are identical and that their role is to guide us in this struggle, he is making threats just as much as he making predictions.

As long as our leaders remain completely beholden to Israel we will not be able to fight effectively against immigration or Islamic terrorism, bearing in mind that the two issues are inextricably linked, especially given the recent immigrant phenomenon…

Indeed, we are only now taking action against ISIL because Putin got involved in the Syrian issue, forgetting that the French state had organised and supplied weapons to all those radical Islamic armed groups and supported the immigration policy which allows terrorists to come into the country today.

Now, I don’t believe that our leaders are just stupid and incompetent. They are rather slaves to an ambition and a programme that surpasses them and makes them traitors to the nation and criminals. And this programme is Israel’s. Israel’s two objectives and priorities are Aliyah and Greater Israel. Push Jews in France to immigrate to Israel and justify Israeli expansionism.

Of course, if there were no Muslims in France there would be no radical Muslims to recruit and manipulate. But let’s ask ourselves some questions: why has there been uncontrolled immigration, when it is no longer economically necessary, ever since the government gave immigrants the right to bring over members of their family?

Why is there a desire to turn immigrants into social outcasts, rather than French citizens, by an effort to denigrate France, a job carried out by Trotskyist teachers: France is portrayed as a colonialist country, full of collaborators, slave traders, cowards and bastards…? Why for forty years has everything been done to put us in the situation that we find ourselves in today, a situation which wasn’t inevitable?

Another point: Charlie Hebdo, the Bataclan and Nice are all totally under Israeli control. Verify who Estrosi is, what the Bataclan was and what Charlie Hebdo has become ever since Philippe Val took over… This escalation, I believe, corresponds to a programme.

We learnt that the Tunisian who committed the murderous attack in Nice drunk alcohol, didn’t pray, didn’t go to the Mosque, didn’t observe Ramadan, and wasn’t known by the security services. In this case, can we seriously talk about radical Islam?

When I say radical Islam, I’m using the official term. But one of the French intelligence chiefs recently revealed to us that out of the fifty highest ranking members of ISIL not one of them belonged to the world of radical Islam and that most of them were former Iraqi officers recruited by the Americans. And, pretending to be a slightly dim, he added that the situation was impossible to understand, most likely to avoid coming to the logical conclusion of his reasoning!

In fact, the lower ranks, the so-called djihadis who more or less willingly blow themselves up, are thugs spawned from the SOS-Racisme ideology. They are petty criminals who have come from prison and ended up in the hands of intelligence agents.

From Mohammed Merah to the Kouachi brothers, we systematically find the same profile: psychologically unstable and suggestible post-adolescents; they are very from pious Muslim adults. Here we are clearly dealing with operations similar to what we saw in the US during the 60s with Oswald.

For me, the key reference is September 11 and the Twin Towers: a joint operation between Israel and the American deep-state in order to establish the New World Order. What we are seeing today in France is just the French component of the programme. And as it accelerates, everything becomes clearer and more violent.

Why do you think the programme is accelerating?

At the moment, we see that Erdogan is allying himself with Putin, no doubt because he realises that his submission to the NATO empire could mean that he ends up like Saddam Hussein. We also see the rise of Donald Trump in America, even though he wasn’t the desired Republican candidate, because he’s an isolationist who follows the tradition of Lindbergh. Indeed, we can bet that he will soon be accused of anti-Semitism just like the famous aviator was. We are also experiencing the rebound of the 2008 banking crisis from which we have never recovered, the collapse of the financial system directed and caused by Wall Street.

Faced with this, my analysis has always been the same: the globalist oligarchy has every interest to add an ethnic dimension to the economic and social crisis, relying, admittedly, on a phenomenon which already exists: civilisations which have for a long time now been in competition and, indeed, have been conflict in the past. But, looking at history, the current confrontation between these communities is no way inevitable. Decolonisation was, in a way, the result of secularisation, Marxism even: the pan-Arab movement, Arab nationalism…

It was not inevitable that radical Islam would emerge, any more so than Hamas would take over from the PLO. It was even against the flow of history if the American-Zionist imperial power did not intervene following the collapse of the USSR and the disappearance of the useful communist enemy. All this was artificial, exploited and deliberate. But faced with the determination of the imperial oligarchy and its power, it is going to be very difficult to avoid falling into the trap. The trap of a total war: both civil and global.

Via the television and the press, everything is done to fuel hatred and tension between the communities : when the dolls of dead children are displayed on the Promenade des Anglais with a great show of emotion and without any in-depth analysis, the average French citizen, who has already suffered the effects of thirty years of economic decline and imposed immigration, which he didn’t want and which has given him nothing, other than a loss of cultural standards, social dumping and crime (all you need to do is look at the prison population), the French citizen, I do believe, comes to point where he can no longer accept anti-racism and political correctness.

And when they talk to him today about radical Islam, he doesn’t think about the imperial manipulation of ISIL and terrorism, which has been proven many times ever since Al Qaida, but about the Arab youths of the suburbs – who no longer practise the Islamic faith any more than we practise the Catholic faith – and his legitimate anger makes him forget the proletariat immigrant worker, the good and pious father who was brought up with right-wing social values and with whom we could have many points in common, to the point where all he wants to do is attack “rag-heads” as they do in Gaza.

But the system and those who control it in France have completely manufactured these thugs from the suburbs by means of the liberal-libertarian ideology and institutionalised anti-racism. Their identity is defined by the American ghetto. We have encouraged these young drop-outs to fight in Syria, we trained them in warfare, we armed them. All this is verifiable. We even made sure that they were brought back whereas we could have let Assad’s army get rid of them for us. So what is happening to us is entirely more than predictable, I would even go so as to say it was planned.

It is time to have the courage to say it: there are people who benefit from the chaos in France, and those people are neither of French origin nor are they normal, everyday Muslims. It is chaos that benefits neither the Christian minorities in the East nor those who are in war-torn Arab Muslim countries. Who benefits from this? The financial oligarchy which is concealing a financial crisis behind ethnic conflict in order to divert popular anger, and Israel whose project is to build Greater Israel. These two entities are, indeed, inextricably linked.

Alain Soral was interviewed by Jérôme Bourbon, editor-in-chief of Rivarol


Interview translated from French

Source: Egalité et Réconciliation

http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Qui-avait-inte%CC%81re%CC%82t-au-carnage-de-Nice-40644.html

ISIL Oil Bought by EU Countries

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or Daesh) currently controls eleven oil-fields in northern Iraq and in the region of Rakka in Syria.

Du pétrole de l’Etat Islamique acheté par des pays européens

According to the Andalou News Agency, Jana Hybášková, Ambassador of the European Union in Iraq, oil tankers filled with oil purchased from ISIL had arrived in European countries. She refused to go into further detail or give a list of the countries concerned.

Meanwhile, the site Atlantico has indicated the ISIL sells its oil at around 25 to 50 dollars per barrel (it sells for 100 dollars per barrel on the international market) via its network of smugglers in Jordan, Turkey, Kurdistan and Iran, and that it cannot be ruled out that this crude oil then comes into the US or into Europe.

As for the supply of weapons to the Kurds, the ambassador claimed that it was impossible to verify whether the true recipients were still the Peshmerga or “Kurdish terrorist groups”. According to her, moreover, support for Kurdish independence would trigger “the complete collapse of the Middle East”.

22 September 2014


Translated from French

The original author was Gilles Munier

Source : France-Irak Actualité

http://www.france-irak-actualite.com/2014/09/du-petrole-de-l-etat-islamique-achete-par-des-pays-europeens.html


See also: “ISIL: Are we honestly fighting against the terrorists?”

https://geostrategieblog.wordpress.com/are-we-honestly-fighting-against-the-islamic-state-isil/

Church Attack: Morocco had warned France just 4 days before

On the 22 July, four days before two men stormed the church of St Etienne-du-Rouvray, the Moroccan intelligence services had warned the French authorities of an imminent attack.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "prêtre tué france"

This was revealed yesterday by the magazine Marianne which explains that the Moroccan intelligence services had warned France of an “immediate threat” and provided a photo of one of the suspects, Abdel Malik Petitjean.

According to the alert sent to the French police by the Moroccan anti-terrorist unit:

The individual, whose photo appears below, is prepared to participate in a terrorist attack on French soil. He is already in France and could either act alone or with other people. The date, the target and the method are, currently, unknown. Investigations are being carried out in order to identify the target…

Although the French anti-terrorist units were on a state of alert, they could not prevent the two individuals from killing the priest, Jacques Hamel, and from seriously wounding another member of the congregation.

This is not the first time that the intelligence services have warned the French. Last November, Morocco had provided the location of Abdelhamid Abaaoud, one of the terrorists who attacked the Paris football stadium.


Translated from French

Source: Bladi Net

http://www.bladi.net/maroc-services-renseignements-france,45956.html

See also: “Algerian Intelligence had Warned the French” https://geostrategieblog.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/paris-attacks-algerian-intelligence-had-warned-the-french-2/

Terrorism – A Geopolitical Perspective

Who will tell you about the origins of the different forms of terrorism ? Who will explain the geopolitical role of this destructive logic in the confrontation between the two opposing blocks in the world? So far, sociologists and other experts have not been able to usefully categorise the different types of terrorism, according to their geostrategic role, and place them in a historical perspective.


The Clash of Civilisations – A Messianic Strategy 

Some people know, superficially at any rate, Samuel Huntington’s pseudo theory which has been greatly promoted by the media. The “clash of civilisations” divides the world according to religion and civilisation and presents the diversity of cultures as the root cause of geopolitical conflict. It therefore implies that only cultural and political unification will eliminate all conflict.  This is in line with Francis Fukayama’s idea of the end of history, which is constantly proven wrong by reality

.

Few know that this so-called theory was taken from Bernard Lewis who, in 1957, developed his clash of civilisations concept. According to this, the Christian world and the Muslim world are, by their very nature, destined to confront each other until the end of “history” or rather until both of these civilisations destroy each other in an eschatological war which will be to the benefit of a third party

My latest historical research (1), which identifies the origins of Zionism and this clash of civilisations strategy, shows that what Lewis had put forward as theoretical conflict between the most important religions in the world is in fact a messianic strategy, which was developed during the Middle Ages as part of the project to re-establish the Kingdom of Israel. This project gave birth to political Zionism in its atheist form at the end of the 19th century.

Bernard Lewis – who holds Israeli, Britsh and Amerian passports – is not just an historian. He also a strategist who has worked at the heart of both the British and American state, and has done so ultimately for the benefit of Israel. He is, moreover, one of those influential stateless people who are members of, or allies to, the powerful American pro-Israel lobby, which pushed the American administration to destroy Iraq (2) to the benefit of Israeli expansionism. Lewis will go down in history as having given a scientific facade, a theoretical disguise, to this messianic strategy. History will recognise that Huntington brought this strategy to the masses in order to justify global chaos, which is not a natural state of affairs, but is encouraged by powerful forces (3).

Terrorism has not always been international. Nor has it always had that shade which certain ideologues close to Zionist and neo-conservative circles describe as “green-fascism”+. Neither has terrorism always benefited from Hollywood-style media promotion on a global scale.

What we describe as being terrorism, sometimes wrongly, can take a large number of forms and have many definitions.

We can draw a parellel between the terror linked to the expansion of the Cromwell regime in the 17th century with that of Wahhabism in the Arab peninsula in the 18th century. We can also make a comparison with the French revolution of 1789, which preceded the social-anarcho revolutions of the 19th and 20th centuries.

These revolutions, which were accompanied by territorial conquest, all had one point in common : mass extermination as a means of achieving ideological domination. The goal was to construct modern institutions on the ruins of the traditional society.

The socialist ideology behind these historical catastrophes also gave birth to the Haganah, created in the early 1920s, which in turn led to the creation of the Irgun. These Jewish homeland (Yishuv) terrorist organisations, which formed the basis of what was to become the IDF, were created to support and expand the Jewish settlements in Palestine.

Wahhabi Terrorism, Zionist Terrorism and False Flag Attacks

It is necessary to distinguish two types of terrorism, the analysis of which will allow us to see geopolitics from a different perspective:

  • Wahhabi terrorism, directed by America, whose aim is territorial conquest and the disintegration of nations.
  • Zionist terrorism which aims to divide and provoke.

Although the British created a Jewish homeland for the Zionists at the end of the First World War, the Irgun led a violent campaign against the British in order to drive them out of Palestine (4).

This culminated with the bombing of the British administrative headquarters in the Hotel King David on the 22 July 1946. An important detail : the Irgun terrorists dressed as Arabs for the occasion so that the Palestinians would be blamed for the attackThis is an excellent example of a “false flag” attack.

The Israelis carried out several disguised attacks of this sort in order to drag their allies into armed conflicts:

  • In 1954, Israeli agents attempted to blow up several American buildings in Egypt in order to turn the Americans against the Egyptians.
  • In 1967, the Americans avoided intervening in the Six-Day War as the Soviet Union was an ally to Syria and Egypt. The Israelis attempted to draw the Americans into the war by attacking their reconnaissance ship, the USS Liberty. The Israelis attempted to pass this off as an attack by the Egyptians, in the same way as they had done in 1954.

The same pattern can be found with the 9/11 attacks which led the United States into a permanent war with one part of the Muslim world, in accordance with the clash of civilisations strategy and the Israeli project to redraw the boundaries of the Muslim world (5). The World Trade Centre attacks were viewed with suspicion by various analysts, scientists and politicians.

Certain facts lead me to believe that we are dealing with the same strategy as that deployed in 1946, 1954 and 1967.

Among the stack of evidence highlighting the implication, albeit indirect, of the Israeli secret services in these spectacular attacks we find the fact that five Israelis were arrested by the New York police. They were caught rejoicing while taking photos of each other in front of the burning towers.  The police had discovered documents in their possession which proved that they knew the exact time and location of the attacks. It turned out that they were Mossad agents. Their names: Sivan and Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari.

Some thirty other Israeli agents, who went undercover as art students in America, lived close to 15 of the supposed hijackers (6).

An article in the New York Times, published on the 18 February 2009, revealed that Ali al-Jarrah, who was a cousin of Ziad al-Jarrah, the hijacker of flight UA93, had been a Mossad spy for 25 years and had infiltrated the Palestinian resistance movement in 1983.

Moreover, the US Army School for Advance Military Studies published a report, quoted in a Washington Times article *, which stated that Mossad “has the capability to target US forces and make it look like an Arab/Palestinian act”.

What’s more, journalists working for Le Monde revealed on February 2015 that a Mossad agent in Panama, Shimon Yalin Yelinik, had confessed to having funded the 9/11 terrorists.

Benjamin Netanyahou, the current Israeli Prime Minister, gladly admitted that the terrorist attacks benefitted Israel. The Israeli newspaper Maariv quoted Netanyahou, who declared the 9/11 attacks had been “good for Israel” and added: “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq. These events have swung American public opinion in our favour”

When interviewed by a French journalist for I-Télé on the 7 August 2014, Netanyahou implied, somewhat menacingly, that terrorists would attack France if it did not support Israel in its policy with regard to the Palestinians.

We do not have solid proof to hand of Mossad involvement in the terrorist attacks against France, carried out in 2012 and 2015. Nevertheless, Georges Malbrunot, journalist for Le Figaro, stated in a Tweet 17 days after the November attacks that: “A military official confides that the DGSI (the French secret service) refused Israeli assistance in the aftermath of the Paris terrorist attacks” and adds that “Mossad took advantage of the honeymoon between Sarkozy and Israel to reinforce its presence in France”. He concludes with the DGSI’s own words: “Mossad already has an active presence on French soil and we must not reinforce it”

This confirms the statement of the former French minister for foreign affairs, Roland Dumas. In his book, Coups et Blessures, he delared that: “The Israelis do what they like in France and manipulate the French intelligence service, the DST, in any way which suits them … The Jewish lobby, as Mitterrand used to call it, was extremely active”.

This Zionist form of terrorism combines perfectly with the nihilistic Wahhabi form of terrorism, a product of two ideologies which appear foreign to one another. From an historical and geopolitical point of view, they merge within the framework of the clash of civilisations strategy.

What is extraordinary is the fact that Wahhabism and Zionism, as incarned by a nation state, appeared at the same time and were both backed by the British armed forces.

The British, who supported at arms’ length the accomplishment of the Zionist project in the aftermath of the First World War, also encouraged Saudi-Wahhabi expansionism in the Arab peninsula in the early 1920s.

In 1945, the Americans took over from the British in their support for Saudi Arabia, in the same way as they did for the state of Israel, and contributed to the spread of the Wahhabi doctrine across the world (7).

Wahabbi terrorism was, right from the very start, a geostrategic weapon used by the British and Americans against their enemies. As mentioned previously, this form of terrorism is used by the Anglo-Saxons as a corrosive to fragment target nations.

Indeed, in the late 1970s, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was at the time National Security Advisor to President Carter, masterminded the coordination of the CIA with the Pakistani and Saudi intelligence services in order to finance future terrorists, including Bin Laden, in order to draw the Soviet Union into Afghanistan.

In the late 1990s, this strategy was again deployed in Chechnya in order to trigger the collapse of the Russian Federation. It was then used in Iraq (in 2003) and again in Libya, in Syria and in Yemen. And, perhaps, it will again be used in Algeria.

This fact was finally admitted by the New York Times on the 23 January 2016: “US relies heavily on Saudi money to support Syrian Rebels” **

Geopolitical Conclusion – America versus Russia in the Struggle to Control Eurasia

Let’s put this into a geostrategic perspective. The key issue in the geopolitics of opposing continental blocks is the control of Eurasia, the centre of which is the Middle East.

The Atlanticist policy, whose strategy for the year 2000 onwards was developed by Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1997, consists of penetrating deeply into Eurasia by making Europe one of the vital pillars of an American-sponsored Eurasian structure of security and cooperation (8).

This strategy aims to destroy, or at least weaken, Russia by pushing for Ukrainian independence. This would change the very geostrategic nature of Russia: “Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire (9)”.

Russia is the main target. It is having to cope with a double strategy, as explained in article published in 2015 (10). First, there is the Brzezinski strategy, which serves American imperial interests. Secondly, there is the more covert Zionist strategy, epitomised by Henry Kissinger. This consists of disconnecting Russia from its allies in the Middle East, in particular Iran and Syria.

So far, Putin’s Russia has withstood the Kissinger strategy. On 11 May 2014, Kissinger declared that “we should not isolate Russia and it’s in everybody’s interests that it be maintained in the international system.” As far back as 2008, he reached out to Russia, claiming that the United States should seek agreement with Russia, while describing Iran as being a danger for the region, in accordance with the Israeli geopolitical doctrine. This sent a clear message to the Russians : you will remain in the international system provided that you abandon your Middle Eastern allies in favour of Israel. But this geopolitical deal is a trap, the ultimate goal being to weaken Russia.

The conclusion is obvious: the stabilisation and the continued existence of the Middle East, the Maghreb and Europe depend on the formation of a mutually beneficial strategic axis, stretching from Brest to Vladivostock, running through Rabat and Alger. This would lead to Brezinski’s worst nightmare: the loosening of transatlantic ties which would bring an end to America’s primacy in Eurasia.

+Islamic extremism. Green is the colour of the cloth used to cover coffins in Islamic funerals.
*See http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2001/sep/10/20010910-025319-6906r/
**See http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/world/middleeast/us-relies-heavily-on-saudi-money-to-support-syrian-rebels.html?_r=0

Translated from French

The original author was Youssef Hindi

Source: Arret Sur Info


References:

(1) Youssef Hindi, Occident et islam – Sources et genèse messianiques du sionisme, éd. Sigest, 2015.

(2) Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, 2008

 (3) Youssef Hindi op. cit.

(4) Henry Laurens, L’Orient arabe, Arabisme et islamisme de 1798 à 1945, éd. Armand Colin, 1993, p. 353.

(5) Oded Yinon’s “A strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”, Published by the Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc., Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982, Special Document N° 1 (ISBN 0-937694-56-8).

(6) Youssef Hindi, op. cit.

(7) Hamadi Redissi, Le pacte de Nadjd, ou comment l’islam sectaire est devenu l’islam, 2007, éd. Seuil.

(8) Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, 1997.

(9) Zbigniew Brzezinski, op. cit.

(10) Youssef Hindi, La Russie, l’Europe et l’Orient, Revue Europe & Orient, N° 21, 2015.

Governing by Chaos

Following yet another tragic and avoidable terrorist attack on French soil, it is salutary to remember that sometimes not is all what it seems and that chaos and carnage attributed to an enemy, either real or imagined (the victims, sadly, are always only too real), can in fact be a way of maintaining power. The following extract from Lucien Cerise’s Gouverner par le Chaos (Governing by Chaos), details the psychological operations used by governments in order to crush any opposition to their rule.


Afficher l'image d'origine

Counter-insurgency warfare

In their work on the virtualisation of politics, social engineers have drawn much inspiration from the methods of counter-insurgency warfare. Manufacturing the population’s consent demands the ability to side-step, counteract and eliminate the risk that it stages a rebellion.

Faced with the various civil insurrections which have marked the 20th century – colonial wars, revolutions, guerrilla warfare, uprisings and social conflict – military officers of various countries have sought to formalize counter-insurgency tactics. By counter-insurgency tactics we mean proven coercive methods to prevent any form of popular resistance to government power, ideally nipping it in the bud even before it appears.

The most famous manuals are :

Modern Warfare by Roger Trinquier

Counter-Insurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice by David Galula

Low Intensity Operations: Subversion, Insurgency and Peacekeeping by Frank Kitson.

The retired British army general, Frank Kitson, held the most prestigious posts (he was Commander in Chief of UK land forces) and gained the highest distinctions (he was awarded Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the British Empire).

With many years of experience gained in operations on the ground (Kenya, Malaysia, Northern Ireland, Falklands), he wrote a manual which provides a summary of the tactics to be deployed by an armed unit seeking to prevail over a rebellious local population.

This book was never published in French and we only know of five copies in the French university library system. In fact, the mere publication of this book in larger numbers could radically shift the world’s geopolitical balance of power.

The investigative journalist, Michel Collon, summarises the content of this holy grail of political thought :

“Though a general, Kitson considers that conventional police and military tactics have no chance of working in a campaign for  ‘hearts and minds’, what he terms strategic psychological warfare”.

What lies behind this obscure term, “strategic psychological warfare” ?

It becomes clearer once we examine the range of techniques advocated and used by Kitson :

  • Give all government chiefs (in the army, ministry of foreign affairs, etc) training in the methods of psychological operations or “psy ops” (the psychological manipulation of public opinion)
  • Form “psuedogangs” to gather a maximum amount of intelligence. More importantly, by carrying out operations attributed to the enemy, these gangs will discredit the opposition.
  • Create diversions by, for example, fermenting religious wars.
  • Create false documents (“black propaganda”) and attribute these to the enemy in order to discredit him.
  • Place agents in the opposition groups or incite members to betray the group (either by using blackmail or corruption) in order to discredit these organisations or even create splits.
  • Militarise the news and completely censure all opposing opinion. Control the international news and ensure collaboration. Provide photos to influence public opinion. Use journalists on the ground as spies.
  • Use music to attract young people with a message which appears non-political.
  • Set up and promote artificially “spontaneous” groups, presented as being neutral and independent but which are in fact financed and controlled with the aim to weaken support for the opposition.

Thus Kitson reviews the entire arsenal of weapons used by political leaders today: create false enemies, false friends, false problems and false solutions by means of erroneous perceptions induced by false terrorist attacks (what’s termed “false flag” attacks in the military jargon) and false news (black propaganda, which is entirely false, or grey propaganda, which is mixture of both truth and lies, in order to make the population accept what is not true). All these techniques can be categorised as “psy ops”.

As Christian Harbulot higlights in his Cognitive Warfare, manipulation, lies, decoys and deception are age-old political techniques when it comes to controlling minds via images and words. In the very first chapter of his manual, Sun Tzu declares “All warfare is based on deception.” More recently, general Francart explains in great detail how propaganda should emulate advertising techniques in order to gain the approval of, or even curry favour with, the target population.

The ‘derealisation’ of politics has reached its high point thanks to mass media, especially the television, a fabulous tool of social control, a spy which has penetrated as far as the bedrooms of our teenage children. Television alters perceptions and shapes the way that millions of citizens see the world. The most important tool in psychological operations, the television has placed whole populations in an artificial reality, which has been completely constructed by the government.


Translated from French

Source: Gouverner par le Chaos (Governing by Chaos), written by Lucien Cerise and published by Max Milo. Pages 58-61.