Religious and national "causes" are at the root of most of what destroys humanity.
The logical response now would be for European nations to forge their own alliance with Russia, Iran and Syria in order to restore effective governments in the Arab lands disrupted by US invasions, Israeli aggression and Saudi religious fanaticism. The U.S. and its allies Israel and Saudi Arabia evidently have no interest in strong Arab states, and have no place in such an alliance.
The U.S, has long since discredited itself in the region and can no longer play a productive role, however much this truth may offend the pride of American politicians.
I regard the following quote as emblematic of the solipsism of the argument of this member of the media.
"Those calls often came from well-meaning people. But they showed a deeply discriminatory attitude now commonplace in France, where a particular group – one as diverse as any other – was stereotyped and
associated with its most extreme members."
By the time the madness of terrorism takes a human soul, THAT is the identification, not as a "member" of a "particular group". The reason I respectfully assert this interpretation is that the forces that have for generations been selectively dehumanizing likewise now hold all of humanity and nature hostage through its perverted ideology of nature as isolated, fragmented, fractionalized thing to feed its insanely insatiable "constant growth", its 'externalized costs', falsified definition of what it means to be "productive", - the list goes on.
This sick ideology does so for advantage because the entire ideological premise is based on projecting a veiled but fully documentable rationalizing construct. This model now demostrably self-reduced to ideological cant, with ts own plethora of internalized addictions to material self aggrandizement, false 'metrics', false histories, false portrayals of any group it wants to secure dominance over to extract advantage. In any human endeavor such as organized economy, there will be both efficacious and destructive elements in the process of learning and adapting. This model at the globalizing level exhibits neither and the consequences will undoubtedly continue to be predictably commensurate with its demands for adherence to its deadly and dehumanizing premises and actions.
Change we can and change we must. Another world IS possible.
The attack in Paris, like the death of two Canadian solders in Canada, is the direct result of being at war. We, the French and Canada, as well as other Western Nations have travelled to the Near East to kill Muslims as stooges of the American Empire. We are at war. In Canada the propaganda word is "mission", but it is war. We must expect blowback when you go to war in some one else's country. How many reports of the attacks in Paris even mention the word war? That is a shameful and cowardly failure of the media which can not find a war when it comes and blows up on their own doorstep.
Let's combine History's witness with playing "Forensic Detective."
All of the following factors are known:
In a number of nations, citizens are calling out for Progressive changes. These include fuller employment, more rational minimum wages, and continuations of public services.
As the Piketty Study reveals: Over the course of the past decade or so, as deregulation became all the rage and deregulation allowed Big Banks to merge (their interests) with Wall st., VAST sums moved to the tippy top (1%) of the global financial pyramid while assets diminished grandly for most working persons.
Unusual coalitions are forming--such as "the Cowboy-Indian alliance" and groups are becoming more active in opposing the globe's Energy Corporations since these entities are pocketing phenomenal profits while externalizing costs in the way of spreading oil spills, fracking wastes rendering well water toxic, and accelerating global warming with its myriad deleterious impacts.
The senseless spread of war (not to mention, dispersion of tons of weaponry) throughout the Middle East added to climate chaos has catalyzed a massive wave of refugees.
Across the globe, citizens are growing restless and coming together to protest everything from climate change to Black Lives Matter, etc.
Meanwhile, the elites are very close to obtaining their goal: full-scale control of citizens. What evidence is there in support of this axiom? How about the type of secret controls built into so-called trade agreements? These controls pre-empt any attempt on the part of organized citizens to oppose corporate activities that could arguably weaken public health (tainted meat, Monsanto's built-in pesticides, etc.), destroy ecosystems, micro-manage an already vastly unfair global fiscal system, and limit media content.
When those intent upon fixing their grip on absolute authority feel threatened, they use fear and trauma (conveniently through a "terrorist act") as a PRETEXT for clamping down on greater measures of control.
THAT is what this is likely about.
These "terrorist" events go off like clockworks just when they are "needed' to convince the public that its safety is on the line; that without Big Brother watching over (and spying upon everything), harm may come.
But as in the phrase "cui bono," it's typically those who are part of the 1% or those employed richly by that ilk who want to see humanity controlled and thus are using these False Flags to maintain their program and plans.
This is how it works:
"French politics has become deeply cynical, and the electorate has lost faith in its leaders. Many politicians will attempt to profit from this climate. Nicolas Sarkozy has already called for more drastic measures to be put in place. Some will also promise salvation by closing borders."
Anyone who leaves out the bloody muscle of militarism, its primacy in Hitler's day and its come-to-fruition warning (from Eisenhower) in the form of the Military Industrial Complex (here inside The Homeland) either suffers from a strange form of tunnel vision or is protecting his own turf.
"Falling for this narrative would offer IS exactly the false image of unity it wants to propagate. It would also be a dangerous simplification of who ‘we’ are – at the expense of anyone who acts or thinks differently."
Quoting Dana Carvey's impersonation of "Church Lady" from Saturday Night Live, to the above comment I'd add... "Well, isn't that special."
It's good to see that other writers are recognizing the powerful use of language frames and how these set forth consensuses that not only don't exist, they also format the allowable boundaries of discussion.
Anyone seen to be "out of bounds" gains the imprimatur of "conspiracy theorist" or the castigation of "crazy" and can therefore be dismissed.
What a clever way of wiping out dissent in order to manage perception and/or manufacture consent... of a sort.
From the article:
"No matter how obvious it seems to many of us, it will be worth repeating that it is not Muslims, immigrants or refugees who are responsible for the attacks, but handfuls of fanatics wanting us to continue down a terrible path of mistrust, exclusion and curtailment of basic freedoms."
I would invite you to look a bit more closely at events, Mr. Mondon. It's precisely the idea that it's fanatics--rather than CIA/Mossad/MI6, etc.--that's behind these attacks that always goes unchallenged... as if false flags are something unique to powerful interests who intend to maintain their powerful grip on and over human affairs... even when they so many facets of life are coming apart at the seams (as well as "seems") and causing a lot of people to oppose the Status Quo and its figureheads.
Religious and national "causes" are red herrings.
It is capitalist warfare for the purpose of control and expansion that destroys humanity.
The French media have been calling it a war. Today the French PM Valls announced today that France is at war, and "It is a war that we will win." My friend in Paris says that he has felt that France has been at war for some time, and now there is no doubt about it. The PM also said that France would be merciless in its pursuit of Isis, and that the French would "annihilate" them.
What are you talking about
What on Earth are you talking about? Put down the theaurus, stop making love to your own ego. And reflect. Youve simply constructed a narrative I've where you get to be the hero. Your not a hero.
France should respond just like the U.S. did after 9-11.
They should attack a nation Israel doesn't like (which had nothing to do with the attacks), depose the government and set up a corrupt. weak replacement that will, by its inability to govern, create a hot-house for extremist groups.
They should do this along with a 'coalition of the willing' and castigate any nations who don't go along with them.
They should rename any foods associated with uncooperative nations. If Sweden doesn't cooperate, 'Swedish Meatballs' should become 'Freedom Balls' (assuming France has 'Swedish Meatballs' - but you get the idea).
French security services should infiltrate Muslim religious groups. They should also entrap lonely Muslim idiots into agreeing to participate in plots dreamed up by security service employees, then arrest the poor slobs and loudly proclaim the state's success in fighting terror.
They should encourage French citizens to report anyone they consider suspicious, no matter how flimsy the reason for the suspicion ("They cook funny smelling food. I think they're terrorists.").
They should declare that the terrorists hate the French for their freedoms.
They should ignore any privacy laws and start monitoring all voice and data communications.
They should brand anyone opposing any of these actions as cowards and traitors. Ditto for anyone who gives any explanation other than 'evil'/'hatred of freedom' for the attacks.
Then they should find another nation Israel doesn't like and attack it.
Following the lead of the U.S. should give the French the same stellar success in the war on terror the U.S. has had.
He's trying to say something, but his logorhea gets in the way. The problem is-the man can't write.
We and Europe have been bombing and killing civilians for the past 14 years,no sorry go back to WW1 when the European powers were dividing up the middle east. Its mind boggling how the media treat this attack as something separate from the history of what has been happening in the middle east for decades. From the Palestinians being held hostage in their own homeland to the US invasion of Iraq,a country that never attacked us. I would say its time for healing-but how do you say this to the people of the middle east who have been devastated for decades.
The French may well know better, but unfortunately, those in charge will rule, as ever, and a likely response will be to send hundreds of troops to Syria, ostensibly to fight terrorism, but in reality to finish off the Syrian part of the PNAC plan that has been thwarted twice by by Russia, which is the overthrow of the Syrian government.
The chemical weapons false flag in 2013 was meant to be the trigger for the direct invasion of Syria. Since Russia thwarted that by requesting the Syrian government to hand over all its chemical weapons, the overthrow of Syria has had to proceed using ISIS and Al Nusra (Al Queda in Syria). The plan was to impose a no fly zone on the Syrian government, while using arial bombings to destroy the Syrian government and to prevent any effective Syrian response. You will recognise that that is exactly the tactics used to destroy Libya. As you may be aware, Russia has thwarted the plan B destruction of Syria by lending Syria its own air-force and imposing a no-fly zone over Syria upon NATO. Now an oportunity has arisen for NATO to complete its plans.
I agree Thornberry, that would be the logical response, and that's exactly why it won't happen.
Hi Sioux. Here's some more damning circumstantial evidence of the event likely being a false flag. For those who can understand French, in the following video "security expert" Patrick Pelloux informs us that the government "luckily" had a huge security contingent in place in Paris at the time of the attacks, to rehearse, guess what? A "multiple attack" scenario! So, just like 9/11, 7/7, and Boston! You can't make this stuff up! Here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iebVWcVn2PU
Well, it's refreshing to see that I am not the only one who smells a rat. But then, I think this is part of the calculus... isn't it? That false flags can run at intervals with "the real thing" and who will be able to discern one from the other?
Is this how the "free world" implodes? That the very ones DOING the harm are so sophisticated in fingering the wrong targets, and setting up these targets with everything from credible, official narratives to the planting (or removing) of evidence as to insist they are protecting The People while they draw the net tighter and tighter to contain the multitudes.
Who'd a thought the 21st century would return humanity to the same plight faced by the slaves fighting off the muscle of Pharaoh?
No. The CD coverage here has been lacking, but the information is publicly available. Have you been paying attention to the overthrow of Syria? While NATO forces are ostensibly in Syria to fight ISIS, that is not what they have been doing in reality. While our media loudly proclaims that NATO forces are in position to fight ISIS, they have actually being overthrowing the Syrian government, and there has been a HUGE refugee problem as a result.
Are you aware of reports of that show that:-
- ISIS was trained and armed directly by the USA and by the Saudis and Turkey.
- That Al Nusra (Al Queda in Syria) is now been re-labelled as a "moderate rebel".
- That France has loaned its air-power (as NATO) and NATO air-power have provided air-cover for these groups been used to prevent Syria from fighting these groups.
- That prior to the Russian intervention the no-fly zone, already effectively imposed on the Syrian government, was to be officially declared.
- That NATO forces have failed to interfere with oil trade to ISIS.
- That oil wells and trade routes that have not been bombed by NATO while operated by ISIS, have now been bombed only after they have been taken recently by Iran/Hizbollah/Syrian forces backed with Russian air-power.
- That NATO supplied weapons continue to find their way into the hands of both ISIS and Al Nusra.
- In response to the Russian intervention of NATO, the USA has been distributing shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles and anti tank missiles to "rebels" in Syria.
- That USA war hawks have declared that the USA must down the Russian planes.
- While Obama has not publicly agreed to the same, he has quietly complied. The USA is moving jet fighters into Syria that have no capacity for aerial bombing, but are fitted with air to air weapons only. Isis have no jet fighters, so these are to fight the Russians.
- There are plans to create a "safe zone" within the Syria side of the Syria-Turkey border.
- To this end, the USA state department issued the statement "The U.S. and its regional allies agreed to increase shipments of weapons and other supplies to help moderate Syrian rebels hold their ground and challenge the intervention of Russia and Iran on behalf of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad". That requires interpretation. "moderate Syrian rebels" = Al Queda, because other "moderate syrian rebels" barely exist in Syria.
- That Lindsey Graham almost admitted that the USA is responsible for training the rebels when he said "I would literally shoot [Putin's] planes down if he attacked the people we trained because we have to do that,"
Our media:- "'We' are there to fight ISIS."
Reality:- They are there to overthrow Syria.
It is all relevant to my assertion. It is all consistent with overthrowing of the Syrian government by arming and supplying terrorist groups and inconsistent with fighting those same groups. Its not what your media is telling your, so I suppose that makes it a conspiracy theory.
Yes you are so right. I am a conspiracy theorist. I believed that Iraq was being targeted not to save the world from its WMD but for oil and for Israel. Somehow that conspiracy theory gradually became accepted by most people. Even 45% of the USA population has come to believe it. Did you believe the official WMD story? Do you still believe it. Assuming you dont, at what point did you awaken?
I believed that the the British SAS who were caught in Libya were there as part of a conspiracy to overthrow the Libyan government. I believed that our media lied to us when they said they were interfering in Libya on humanitarian grounds. Do you believe that NATO bombed Libya for 6 months straight for "humanitarian reasons". Or did you give up that belief when Hillary crowed about their "victory". Do you, like Hillary, believe the conspiracy theory that NATO was there to overthrow a government?
Ive heard that a hundred times on our media. If they dont like what you are saying, then they label it a "conspiracy theory". Once this label is applied, then a conjecture no longer need consideration, and anyone who persists with evidence for the conjecture may be subjected to ridicule. They say "Thats a conspiracy theory and all conspiracy theories are false.". I guess someone has the right to declare that something is false by labeling it a conspiracy theory, and those someones are our friendly corporate media conglomerate monopolies. Good for you that you have saved yourself from the possibility of ridicule, and the effort of having to work out what is actually true by conforming to this manipulation.