A Questão do Terrorismo e o atentado ao Charlie Hebdo by Lejeune Mirhan *

A Questão do Terrorismo e o atentado ao Charlie Hebdo

Lejeune Mirhan *

As palavras “terrorismo” e “terrorista” vem sendo fartamente utilizadas pelos meios de comunicação de massa, particularmente depois das ações ocorridas no dia 11 de setembro de 2001. O atentado mais recente, do assassinato de 12 pessoas, entre cartunistas e funcionários do jornal francês Charlie Hebdo ocorrido no último dia 7 de janeiro, chocou o mundo. 

Pretendemos com este artigo, discorrer um pouco sobre esse conceito de “terror”, abordando a questão do terrorismo de estado e comentando o movimento de ser ou não ser Charlie, bem como os limites da liberdade de expressão. Comentaremos um tema novo, chamado de “falsa bandeira”, quando um atentado é cometido por pessoas de uma corrente de opinião, geralmente opostas às que são injustamente acusadas. Ao final, apresentaremos algumas conclusões. 

Introdução 

Pode-se classificar, grosso modo, em quatro tipos as ações que se dizem “terroristas” e diversos são os exemplos com o passar da história: o terror religioso e fundamentalista (no caso de muçulmanos, cristãos e judeus extremistas que muitas vezes fazem de seu corpo uma arma de guerra); os do tipo mercenário (aqueles que se movem por dinheiro), que são pessoas que abraçam essas concepções e até editam uma revista em plano mundial denominada Soldiers of Fortune e agiram muito em território africano nas décadas de 1960 e 1970 do século passado. Um terceiro tipo seriam os nacionalistas (como o exército Republicano Irlandês – IRA na Irlanda) e por fim os ideológicos sejam eles de esquerda ou de direita (o caso das milícias americanas das quais era membro Timothy McVeigh, na ação em Oklahoma) (1).

A palavra passa a ser mais largamente empregada na história a partir de 1793, na França de Robespierre. Até o inventor da guilhotina, um cidadão francês de sobrenome Guilhotan, teve sua cabeça ceifada por esse instrumento no período que se denominou chamar de “terror”. O caso que repercutiu muito no final do século XIX foi o assassinato do Czar da Rússia Alexandre II, em 1891, por uma organização revolucionária da qual o irmão de Wladimir Lênin participava, que se autodenominava de “Vontade do Povo”. Os livros de História Geral dão como certo que o início e o estopim da I Guerra Mundial foi o assassinato do Arquiduque Francisco Ferdinando e sua esposa, perpetrado pelo estudante Gavrilo Prinzip, integrante do grupo que se intitulava “Mão Negra”, de origem sérvia.

Durante a resistência ao nazismo e ao fascismo na Europa durante a 2ª Guerra Mundial, atos de “terror” foram adotados, mas a terminologia mais correta deveria ser sabotagem, pois os atentados organizados pela resistência eram mais contra ferrovias, estações, prédios públicos, no sentido de desgastar o governo direitista da Alemanha e da Itália. Nunca os objetivos eram civis, pessoas comuns.

O mito do terrorismo islâmico

Os impérios na história também sempre se esforçaram para criar certos mitos, difundir certas ideias e conceitos e mesmo dar certas dimensões para fatos e episódios que nem sempre correspondem à realidade. Isso sem falar na distorção de informações, que são feitas cotidianamente pela grande imprensa. São muitos os casos. Lembremos do incêndio no Reichtag – prédio do parlamento alemão – ao qual o governo de Hitler divulgou como tendo sido praticado por um comunista. Um camarada do Partido Comunista Alemão chegou a ser preso e torturado no sentido de que admitisse esse ato criminoso, que, muito mais tarde, ficou provado que tal incêndio criminoso fora feito por agentes do Partido Nazista.

Osama Bin Laden, assassinado a mando de Barak Obama em 2011, já foi considerado pela mídia ocidental como sendo um “guerreiro da liberdade”. Era assim que ele era chamado, quando lutava contra o exército soviético na guerra pela ocupação do Afeganistão pela antiga URSS a partir de 1979. Nessa época, os guerrilheiros islâmicos de Osama receberam armas, milhões de dólares e até mesmo treinamento por parte das agências de inteligência dos EUA. Ou seja, um terrorista criado e apoiado pelos EUA. 

Um debate e duas visões

A questão central que se coloca neste debate, em especial após os ocorridos em Paris no dia 7 de janeiro passado, é a seguinte: qual é a causa, a raiz de atentados desse tipo? De um lado, temos os que afirmam que o terrorismo é gerado simplesmente pela fome e a pobreza existente no mundo. De outro lado, existem os que afirmam que o terrorismo é gerado exatamente pelas ações dos países imperialistas com relação aos povos oprimidos como uma reação.

A primeira versão do debate, de que a fome e a miséria podem gerar terrorismo não encontra guarida na história. No caso da Índia, da África e em certos períodos da própria China, presenciamos grandes surtos de fome e miséria, sem que se tenha visto ações terroristas. Na verdade, por trás dessa análise, tem uma certa tentativa de fazer um mea culpa pelos países ricos de sua omissão para ajudar os mais pobres e a forma como exploram essas nações. 

Nós nos alinhamos à segunda corrente de análise sobre as causas e as raízes do chamado terrorismo. Elas se encontram na forma pelos quais os povos dos países explorados e ocupados militarmente pelas potências centrais são agredidos. Enquanto os Estados Unidos e seus aliados como a Inglaterra e a França, não desocuparem o Iraque, o Afeganistão, não desmontarem suas bases militares em todo o mundo, não revirem suas formas de tratar os árabes e os muçulmanos em todos os países, ações terroristas vão continuar e são até inevitáveis, por mais que se ampliem os esquemas de segurança. 

A questão que se levanta no momento, depois do ataque ao Charlie Hebdo – e que não vão parar – é se a política externa americana de combate ao terrorismo vem dando certo ou não. As pessoas em todos os países se indagam se o mundo esta mais seguro depois da invasão do Iraque em março de 2003. A resposta vem sendo um contundente não, na medida que a insegurança hoje ronda qualquer cidadão em qualquer parte do mundo. Pessoas hoje em Tóquio e Roma já esperam a qualquer momento por um ataque. Isso vai colocar cada vez mais em xeque a política externa americana e seu unilateralismo. Após o fim da chamada Guerra Fria, os conflitos regionais ou “guerra por procuração” como se diz, aumentaram exponencialmente. 

Liberdade de imprensa e hipocrisia

Todos assistimos às barbaridades cometidos pelos terroristas mascarados no dia 7 de janeiro. Portando armamentos modernos, profissionais bem treinados militarmente invadiram a redação do jornal satírico Charlie Hebdo e assassinaram friamente cinco cartunistas, vários funcionários e dois policiais. Disseram “vingar” o profeta Mohammad (Maomé, no Ocidente). Falaram em voz alta para que todos ouvissem que “eram da Al Qaeda”. 

O jornal francês vinha se caracterizando, há tempos, como um incitador ao racismo e em especial à islamofobia. Na França vivem hoje mais de seis milhões de muçulmanos, boa parte filhos e netos de imigrantes da Argélia, sua colônia de 1830 até 1962. 

A questão que se coloca é a seguinte: há limites para a liberdade de imprensa e de expressão? O filósofo francês Jean Jacques Rousseau é defensor das teorias dos limites da liberdade, ou seja a minha começa onde termina a do meu próximo. De fato, só é verdadeiramente livre uma sociedade de iguais (3).

A liberdade de expressão nunca significou e nem nunca significará dizer qualquer coisa e de qualquer forma. “Não por outra razão, todo racista hoje em dia clama por liberdade de expressão, pelo seu direito de ‘expressar sua opinião’. Mas, racismo e preconceito não são opiniões. São crimes” (4).

Não nos esqueçamos, que mesmo sendo crescente o número de muçulmanos na França, a imensa e esmagadora maioria não apoia qualquer ato de terrorismo, procura viver em harmonia com os franceses. O policial Ahmet Merabet assassinado na calçada do jornal, que enfrentou até a morte os terroristas era muçulmano e seus familiares acusaram os terroristas como falsos muçulmanos, pois em nenhuma passagem do Corão há algo que incentive o terrorismo. Aliás, nem a blasfêmia é condenada. A Bíblia o faz em Levítico (24:16) (5).

Há um debate posto, que vem desde os atentados de 2001, qual seja, a chamada indignação seletiva ou indignação desigual. Seja a opinião do professor de Ciência Política da UCLA, Magid Shihade, seja a filósofa estadunidense Judith Butler. Ambos tratam desse assunto. “Assassinos treinados pelos EUA contra cidadãos inocentes no Afeganistão e Iraque são ‘acidentes colaterais’ e não têm repercussão alguma”, diz Magid (6). E Judith completa “a indignação com os três mil mortos das Torres Gêmeas em 2001 é seguida de completa indiferença com os milhares de mortos das guerras feitas pelos EUA” (7). Nunca é demais lembrar que exatamente no dia seguinte desse massacre em Paris, na Nigéria os terroristas assassinaram duas mil pessoas inocentes e ninguém se indignou. 

No domingo, 11 de janeiro, quatro dias depois do massacre ao jornal, uma Marcha contra o Terrorismo foi realizada em Paris. Convocada inicialmente pela esquerda francesa, ela foi apropriada pelo reacionário presidente francês, François Hollande, cuja popularidade estava em baixa, sendo hoje considerado o pior presidente da história da França.

A fotos publicada nos jornais, com vários chefes de estado e de governo, da Europa e fora dela, é a verdadeira imagem da hipocrisia. Em alguns dos países cujos líderes estavam na linha de frente da passeata, a palavra “liberdade” é banida do dicionário. Só para rememorar, a própria França, em julho de 2014 proibiu qualquer manifestação contra Israel, que bombardeava impiedosamente os palestinos na Faixa de Gaza, matando mais de duas mil pessoas.

Dois líderes árabes, como Abdullah da Jordânia e Al Nahyan dos Emirados não são exemplos de democratas nem seus países possuem amplas liberdades de expressão. Mas, o maior escândalo foi a presença do maior terrorista vivo hoje no mundo: Benjamin Netanyahu. Nem sequer havia sido convidado, mas apareceu, cercado de mais de cem agentes do Mossad (polícia secreta de Israel). Esse primeiro ministro de Israel, que enfrentará novas eleições em março próximo, estava mesmo é tentando tirar proveito da situação, com base na hipocrisia, para facilitar a sua reeleição. Um terrorista participando de uma marcha contra o terrorismo. 

Boa parte dos chefes de estado presentes eram financiadores de atividades militares de terroristas que combatem contra países como a Síria, Iraque, Afeganistão, Líbia entre outros. O chamado Estado Islâmico (ISIS na sigla em inglês), é totalmente apoiado pela França, UK, Turquia e EUA. 

Apenas nos EUA, entre os seus chamados “liberais”, o direito à liberdade de manifestação do pensamento é considerado um direito absoluto. Em nenhum outro país isso é assim. Há leis que regulamentam os limites dessas liberdades. A concepção por trás dos insultos publicados na forma de charges, que alguns não veem como insultos, mostra claramente que existe uma cultura – a dos EUA – que se apresenta como superior a todas as outras. Não nos esqueçamos jamais: esse mesmo Estado francês que hoje vive o seu 11/09, foi o quem armou, treinou, apoiou de todas as formas os ataques contra vários países, em especial árabes, sob os mesmos pretextos de defesa da democracia e “liberdade”. Os ataques dos fundamentalistas em cidades como Trípoli, capital da Líbia, e Allepo, a segunda cidade síria, são sempre saudados no Ocidente como heroicos (8). 

A França não só é membro da OTAN, a organização terrorista de maior poder bélico em atuação hoje no planeta, como financia, arma e treina terroristas que agem hoje na Síria e no Iraque e formam o chamado Estado Islâmico, em especial seu braço armado denominado Al Qaeda e suas filiais. Ainda que os terroristas que atacaram o jornal se proclamem membros da Al Qaeda, eles são produtos de uma rede de terrorismo criado e alimentado pelo Ocidente, para “manter uma guerra contra seus próprios cidadãos” (9).

Posições progressistas do Papa Francisco

Não é de hoje que o Cardeal argentino Jorge Mário Bergóglio, chamado de Papa Francisco, vem surpreendendo o mundo com seus posicionamentos. Especificamente em algumas declarações que trataram do conceito de “terrorismo de estado”, amplamente condenado pelas esquerdas, mas quase nunca aceito pelas potências ou países que o praticam. Alguns o chamam hoje de “estadista solitário”.

Em recente encontro que manteve com o corpo diplomático creditado no Vaticano, em 12 de janeiro, dia seguinte à chamada Marcha contra o Terrorismo em Paris, Francisco declarou em audiência: “há uma tendência à rejeição ... que induz a olhar o próximo não como um irmão a acolher, mas como alguém deixado fora de nosso horizonte de vida pessoal, transformando-o antes que em um concorrente, mas em um súdito a dominar” (10).

Na sua homilia do dia 8, quando celebrou missa na Casa de Santa Marta, onde reside no Vaticano, Francisco declarou: “esse ato de crueldade nos faz pensar tanto em terrorismo isolado, quanto no terrorismo de estado”. Talvez essa tenha sido a sua declaração mais direta contra esse tipo de terrorismo que a mídia jamais menciona. 

No entanto, houve um momento no ano passado, quando Francisco faz uma condenação explícita ao terrorismo de estado, quando, em 25 de novembro, em uma conversa informal com jornalistas no avião papal ele declarou: “é verdade, existe a ameaça desses terroristas. Mas, existe também outra ameaça. É o terrorismo de estado, quando há uma escalada de violência e cada estado por sua conta acha que tem o direito de massacrar os terroristas e, com eles, caem muitos inocentes”, em uma clara e direta alusão à Israel e aos EUA.

Tais posicionamentos ajudam os que lutam hoje no mundo pela paz e contra o imperialismo. 

O crescimento da islamofobia e as falsas bandeiras

Muito já se falou da nova ordem mundial construída pelos EUA após a sua vitória contra o Iraque em janeiro de 1991 e com o fim da URSS no final desse ano quando o mundo passa a ser unipolar. No entanto, fica fácil perceber que a indústria bélica estadunidense e os neoliberais em todo o mundo precisam fazer mais guerras. Contra os povos do mundo para controlar as suas riquezas, ou para derrubar seus governantes que lhes contestam. Foi assim com Saddam Hussein, no Iraque e com Muammar Khadaffi na Líbia, que foram brutalmente assassinados. Tentaram e seguem tentando de tudo para fazer o mesmo com o presidente da Síria, Dr. Bashar Al Assad. Mas, têm sido fragorosamente derrotados até aqui.

Particularmente após os atentados às torres gêmeas de setembro de 2001 a ocupação do Iraque, em março de 2003, um inimigo começou a ser forjado: o Islã como religião e os muçulmanos em geral, que são hoje mais de 1,6 bilhões em todo o mundo em 47 países de população majoritária de seguidores dessa fé religiosa.

O fato é que “os anglo-sionistas nutriram, organizaram, financiaram, treinaram, equiparam, armaram cuidadosamente, dedicadamente, ao longo de décadas os takfiris terroristas que hoje se voltam contra eles e seus países” (11).

Neste caso, há uma clara responsabilidade por tudo que ocorreu, do próprio governo francês e de seu presidente sionista François Hollande. Em recente visita oficial à Israel, em que pese tudo que os sionistas fazem contra os palestinos, o presidente francês declarou em alto e bom som: “serei sempre amigo de Israel” (sic). 

Aqui fica sempre a pergunta que devemos nos fazer: quem ganhou com esses atentados abomináveis? Em primeiro lugar, ganha o próprio presidente francês cuja popularidade estava lá embaixo. Em segundo, todos os chefes de estado e de governo, que apoiam a aliança mundial liderada pela OTAN que lutam contra os povos de todo o mundo que clamam por sua independência e soberania nacional. Por fim, ganham os partidos de direita, os fascistas, os que defendem na Europa restrições às imigrações e ao crescimento do Islã como religião. Com a ajuda providencial e imediata da mídia, vão tentar extrair as maiores vantagens esses atentados.

Aqui vale a pena introduzir um conceito que vem sendo aos poucos publicado nas mídias alternativas. A chamada “falsa bandeira”, ou seja, faz-se um atentado para se jogar a culpa em correntes ou grupos sociais que pensam oposto ao que foi realizado. Dois exemplos me vêm à mente neste momento.

Em 2005, ocorreu em Beirute o atentado terrorista que resultou a morte de Rafik Hariri, ex-primeiro Ministro do Líbano. Imediatamente, os dedos acusadores se voltaram contra o presidente da Síria, Dr. Bashar Al Assad. Ora, este era o último que teria interesse em cometer um crime dessa natureza, até pelas consequências que isso acarretaria em seguida, completamente previsíveis. Na Argentina, um promotor de nome Alberto Nisman morreu de forma ainda não esclarecida. Imediatamente, os dedos apontam para a presidente Cristina Kishner, seu desafeto. Um crime como esse coloca boa parte da população contra seu governo, que é odiado pelos meios de comunicação e pelos EUA.

O caso mais rumoroso de “falsa bandeira” ocorreu em 2 de agosto de 1980, quando um ataque terrorista à estação de trens de Bolonha matou 85 pessoas e feriu outras 250. Imediatamente, a mídia acusou a esquerda. Tempos depois, apurou-se que os criminosos eram membros de uma célula fascista radical. Estava em curso na Europa a chamada Operação Gladio, que consistia em armar guerrilheiros para combater uma possível e hipotética invasão da URSS à Europa. Armas foram enterradas em diversas partes da Europa (12).

Conclusões finais

De nossa parte, os atentados cometidos contra o jornal Charlie Hebdo devem ser condenados com a maior veemência e merecem nosso total repúdio. Ao mesmo tempo que devemos prestar a todas as famílias das vítimas a nossa irrestrita solidariedade. Nem por isso, deve ser automático o apoio à linha editorial de um jornal que ajudou a criar na França um clima islamofóbico e racista. 

Imediatamente após os atentados, criou-se o movimento Eu Sou Charlie e outro que se dizia Eu Não Sou Charlie. Uma falsa dicotomia. Condenar os atentados não significa condenar o jornal e a liberdade de expressão. Nem tampouco apoiá-lo acriticamente. Um falso dilema, uma falsa dicotomia. Devemos ser contra quem incita o ódio e o racismo, que fomenta o terrorismo, quem o financia, que são os Estados Unidos e seus aliados árabes no Golfo, a Turquia, Israel e países clientes da Europa. Devemos pregar sempre a união do povo contra um inimigo comum.

Nosso ódio e o centro de nossa ação política deve ser contra o imperialismo, contra os Estados Unidos e seus aliados neoliberais. Devemos pregar contra toda e qualquer intervenção militar em qualquer país, seja sob qual argumento for, “levar democracia”, direitos humanos etc. Devemos defender o fim de toda e qualquer lei racista, que discrimine pessoas seja pela cor da sua pele, seja pela sua confissão religiosa.

A defesa de um estado laico neste momento, democrático deve ser a nossa bandeira. Não devemos dividir as pessoas, mas unir o povo na luta comum contra o maior inimigo da humanidade, o capitalismo e o rentismo, sob o comando dos EUA. 

Devemos propugnar pelo desenvolvimento econômico e social. Devemos respeitar todas as religiões e defender a liberdade de culto e de consciência. Queremos a solidariedade entre os povos e nações e a soberania e independência nacional. 

Sabemos bem que a luta pela paz, por um mundo justo e com igualdade, tem hoje um caráter claramente anti-imperialista. 

Bibliografia Consultada

(1) ARBEX JR, José, Terrorismo: um legado da história, 9 de outubro de 2001, 3 páginas, que circulou na Internet em língua espanhola, sem maiores referências.

(2) Aos que queiram conferir essa passagem bíblica, podem fazê-lo em Juízes capítulo 16, versículo de 23 a 31, página 323 da Bíblia de tradução de Almeida, Editora Vida, 1981.

(3) Editorial da Revista Carta Capital, edição 833 de 21/1/2015, pág. 14-18, escrito por Mino Carta;

(4) Vladimir Safatle, Carta Capital, edição citada, pág. 27;

(5) Wálter Fanganiello Maierovitch, Carta Capital, edição citada, pág. 19;

(6) Gianni Carta, em “Morre por mim, França”, Carta Capital, edição citada, pág. 20-23;

(7) Said Bouamama, em https://bouamamas.wordpress.com/2015/01/11/lattentat-contre-charlie-hebdo-loccultation-politique-et-mediatique-des-causes-des-consequences-et-des-enjeux/ de 25/01/2015;

(8) Blog Moon of Alabama de 7 de janeiro de 2015 http://www.moonofalabama.org/2015/01/charlie-hebdo-the-chickens-come-home-to-roost.html#comments;

(9) Artigo de Tony Cartalucci, publicado em http://landdestroyer.blogspot.ca/2015/01/france-armed-terrorists-that-struck.html do dia 12 de janeiro de 2015;

(10) Artigo de Cláudio Bernabucci, intitulado A palavra do estadista solitário, Carta Capital, edição citada, pág. 24-26;

(11) Artigo publicado em 8 de janeiro de 2015 em http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com.br/2015/01/i-am-not-charlie.html; 

(12) Artigo de Wayne Madson, obtido em http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/01/11/curtain-rises-another-act-continual-global-war-terror-play.html publicado no dia 21 de janeiro de 2015.

* Sociólogo, professor de Sociologia e de Ciência Política da Unimep (1986 a 2006). Foi sociólogo da Fundação Unesp (1995 a 2005). É colunista do Portal Vermelho onde escreve desde 2002 sobre a temática Oriente Médio. Colabora com a Revista Sociologia da Editora Escala. Possui oito livros publicados. Atualmente é diretor do Sindicato dos Sociólogos do Estado de SP. 

SPECIAL REPORT. Aprés Paris: False flag in Copenhagen? bt Wayne Madsen

SPECIAL REPORT. Aprés Paris: False flag in Copenhagen?

After having shot up a free speech debate at Copenhagen's Krudttonden Cultural Center that was chaired by Swedish Prophet Mohammed cartoonist Lars Vilks, and killing a Danish film director, an unnamed man said to look like an Arab was tracked down by police, using CCTV footage, to Copenhagen's heavily-Middle Eastern NØrrebro distict. The unnamed 22-year old gunman, said to have been involved in a criminal gang, was then reported to have been killed in a shootout with police, however, not before the gunman made what has become an almost predictable stop at Copenhagen's main synagogue where he shot and killed a Jewish security guard named Dan Uzan, a dual Israeli-Danish citizen. 

Still, without initially disclosing the identity of the killer, police were able to conclusively state that the man was a "lone wolf" who was responsible for the attacks on the cultural center and the synagogue. The Copenhagen attacks began to take on the same air of "false flag" stench as did the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and the Hyper Cacher kosher market in Paris. Some Danish news reports stated that the gunman had been hired from the ranks of a Danish skinhead motorcycle gang to commit the murders, a wrinkle that would dispel any notion of a "lone wolf" attack.

Those charged with carrying out the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and Hyper Cacher, the Franco-Algerian brothers Kouachi and Franco-Senegalese-Malian Amedy Coulibaly, it turned out, were well-known to French police and intelligence as was Mohammed Merah, charged in the 2012 slayings of French soldiers in Montauban and three children and their teacher at the Ozar Hatorah Jewish day school in Toulouse. And sure enough, Danish police and intelligence files did turn up the name of the alleged Copenhagen shooter, one Omar Alhamid Alhussein, a Danish national and criminal with a violent record who was released from a Danish prison just two weeks prior to the twin attacks. 

Echoing the "glittering generality" rhetoric of French President Francois Hollande in the aftermath of the Paris attacks, Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt called the aftermath of the Copenhagen attacks “a fight for freedom against a dark ideology." Thorning-Schmidt is the daughter-in-law of former British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock and a promoter of European federalism. 

There was no surprise that French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve, who is as staunchly pro-Israeli as Prime Minister Manuel Valls, whose wife is an ardent Zionist, flew off to Copenhagen after the twin attacks to show solidarity with the Danish people. Immediately, Danish police said the Copenhagen attacks were linked to the Charlie Hebdo slayings. A new meme, similar to "Je suis Charlie" (I am Charlie), spread aorund the Internet: "We are all Danish tonight." The predictable signage with such trite mottos followed in short order on the web.

The head of the Danish Security and Intelligence Service, the Politiets Efterretningstjeneste (PET), Jens Madsen, said, without giving the alleged terrorist's name, that the dead assailant was "inspired by Islamic radicalism." The script, as previously written in similar cases in Paris, Montauban, and Toulouse, appears to have been previously written. As with the alleged French terrorists, Alhussein's radicalization in prison was passed on to PET by Michael Gjorup, the head of Denmark's prison and probation service. Madsen verified that Alhussein had "been on the radar" of the PET prior to the attack. Veering away somewhat from the "lone wolf" theory, the Danish authorities decided to arrest two initially unnamed men who were said to have been accomplices of Alhussein.

But few recall that it was Cazeneuve who was reportedly under investigation by 45-year old French Police Commissioner Helric Fredou, the second in command of the French Judicial Police in Limoges, for links with Jeanette Bougrab, the so-called girlfriend of slain Charlie Hebdoeditor Stephane Charbonnier or "Charb." Bougrab claimed to have been Charb's girlfriend and even insinuated that he fathered her daughter. However, other French news reports claim that Charb was gay and that Bougrab made up her relationship out of whole cloth. Fredou is said to have committed suicide at the height of his investigation of a link between Bougrab and Cazeneuve. And, according to French news reports, Fredou had Cazeneuve under suspicion since the police commissioner's days as Cherbourg police commissioner. Cazeneuve has been mayor of the town of Cherbourg-Octeville since 2001 and it was during his time as police commissioner that Fredou first became aware of Cazeneuve's links with Mossad and his relationship with Bougrab and her cabal of anti-Muslim and Zionist provocateurs.

Fredou is said to have shot himself in the head after becoming despondent after meeting the family of one of victims of the French attacks. However, Fredou's family and friends discounted reports that Fredou was depressed. Furthermore, they pointed out that he had cracked open a major lead in the terrorist attacks a move that placed him at loggerheads with Cazeneuve and Israeli Prime Minster Binyamin Netanyahu, who intended, as his display of arrogance in Paris indicated, to make as much political hay out of the Charlie Hebdo and Hyper Cacher attacks as possible. After the Copenhagen attacks, Netanyahu called on all European Jews to emigrate to Israel. He made the same call after the Paris attacks. 

In addition to the suspicions around Fredou's alleged, but unlikely "suicide," came word from a Dutch on-line publication Quote that Charlie Hebdo, in addition to the French newspaper Libération, was purchased byÉdouard Baron de Rothschild shortly before the attacks. Charlie Hebdo, while publishing blasphemous cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, Jesus, and Pope Francis, took a decidedly cautious road in criticizing Judaism or important figures of world Jewry. In fact, in 2009, Charlie Hebdocartoonist Maurice Siné was fired for publishing a cartoon in the satirical magazine for making fun of Jean Sarkozy, the son of Nicolas Sarkozy, for "marrying up" when he wed Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, the Jewish heiress of the large consumer electronics company, Darty Group. Siné was accused of "inciting racial hatred" but Siné had the last laugh when a French court in 2010 awarded him €40,000 from Charlie Hebdo's coffers for wrongful termination.

Michael Emsalem, the CEO of Hyper Cacher, conveniently sold his shares of stock in Hyper Cacher the day before Coulibaly allegedly stormed the market and shot several hostages after a standoff with police. Emsalem announced plans to move to Manhattan's Upper East Side, where his wife and daughters had already been living before the attack on the Paris market. Emsalem and his family have applied for U.S. green cards as a result of purported rampant "anti-Semitism" in France. Emsalem's dumping of his firm's stock was reminiscent of Wall Street insiders placing put options on American and United Airlines a day before the 9/11 attack. 

For Denmark, the recent attacks smelled of the same psychological operations that were employed by PET's previous chief, Jakob Scharf, a Danish Jew who never missed an opportunity of linking Danish terror events to global "jihadism." In January 2011, Scharf, who has close connections to Israel, led a joint Danish PET-Swedish SAPO security service law enforcement team in self-congratulating themselves for rounding up a group of five alleged Islamist terrorists who were charged with planning to attack the Copenhagen offices of the newspaper Jyllands-Posten in a Mumbai-like attack planned for the same month. Scharf stated, "It is our assessment that this is a militant Islamist group and they have links to international terrorist networks," adding that the group could have been linked to David Headley, an American charged with aiding in the Mumbai attacks. Scharf conveniently left out the fact that Headley was covertly working for the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) at the time of the Mumbai attacks and may, himself, have been a false flag terrorist operative working for U.S. intelligence.

The Mossad's Danish "PET" partner-in-crime for false flag attacks

Jyllands-Posten sparked outrage among Muslims worldwide when it published cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed considered blasphemous by Muslims. The newspaper's cultural editor, Flemming Rose, who approved the publication of the cartoons, was identified as being linked to various neocon and Israel Lobby operatives in Washington, including the propagandists at the neocon American Enterprise Institute. While Scharf, who has moved Denmark's PET closer to Mossad more than his predecessors have done, talks of international Islamist conspiracies to carry out terrorism, he is silent on the international conspiracy by Israeli propagandists to incite violence by publishing cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed. The neocon Mohammed cartoon operation, which incited violence that resulted in deaths from riots staged in cities in the Muslim world, never registered on Scharf's "criminal conspiracy meter" since he is part and parcel of it. Rose's columns have been welcomed by the neocon and Israel Lobby-owned and operated Wall Street Journal.

Scharf's operation against the alleged terrorists, lauded by the Obama administration, began to fall apart shortly after it started. One of the five charged, Abdullah Muhammed Salman, an Iraqi immigrant, was released after his arrest due to lack of evidence. He said that he merely rented an apartment to three of the accused in the plot and was unaware of their "plans."


Scharf's fingerprints were on past fale flag events in Denmark while he headed the PET

Scharf resigned as the head of the PET in December 2013 amid charges that he spied on the then-leader of the right-wing People's Party and Member of Parliament Pia Kjærsgaard. A number of Scharf's staff resigned after they said they lost confidence in his leadership abilities. However, Scharf has remained as National Police Commissioner in an unpaid leave status since his departure as the head of the PET. In a complaint, five PET employees said Scharf abused his position as head of Danish "homeland security" by ordering agents to access Kjærgarrd's private calendar to prevent her from visiting the "independent" Copenhagen hippie/anarchist commune of Christiana ub her capacity as a member of the parliamentaryJudicial Commission. Was Scharf concerned that the anti-immigration leader might have discovered that Scharf was using Christiana to recruit all sorts of ne'er-do-wells for his Al Qaeda false flag operations?

Scharf's Al Qaeda "Ugly Duckling"
One such ne-er-do-well reportedly recruited by Schard was Al Qaeda infiltrator Morten Storm. The blond-haired Storm convinced Al Qaeda that he was a fellow jihadist. However, Storm said he was recruited by Scharf to send the PET, as well as the CIA, plans of Al Qaeda's next moves. Storm, in a book, said he helped the CIA target several al Qaeda leaders for assassination, including the American Islamist leader Anwar a-Awlaki, killed in a CIA drone strike in Yemen in September 2011. Given the close relationship between PEWT and Mossad, made stronger under Scharf's tenure, Storm was also accused of working for the Mossad as a triple agent. Storm did admit that he also acted as an agent for Britain's MI5. Storm appeared on CBS News's 60 Minutes to hype his "exploits" as the "Danish James Bond" who successfully infiltrated Al Qaeda. Scharf was secretly patting himself on the back for the success of the operation that put him on the intelligence "A-list" in Langley.

Scharf denied having recruited Storm or having any relationship with him. However, Scharf's predecessor as the head of the PET, Hans JØrgen Bonnichsen corroborated Scharf's role in Storm's book, "Agent Storm: My Life Inside Al Qaeda and the CIA."

  
Al Qaeda's Danish "Ugly Duckling" Morten Storm. Left as an Al Qaeda jihadist. Right as celebrity spy.

The newspaper that helped hype Storm's "exploits" was none other thanJyllands-Posten, the same Zionist-connected paper that spurred on the first Prophet Mohammed cartoon violence. The newspaper wasted no time in cashing in on the Copenhagen shootings in stating, "Unfortunately, it is difficult to claim surprise at the attacks in Copenhagen . . . [the attack] was not a question of if, but when." The neoconservatives relish in their self-fulfilled prophecies.

The Three "Jakobs" of Copenhagen

Meanwhile, Scharf has started a private security firm, Certa Intelligence and Security A/S with his partner Jakob Dreyer. Scharf's status as a National Police Commissioner within the Ministry of Justice continues until January 2016, which gives him continued access to police business, including the investigation of the attack on the freedom of speech conference and the Copenhagen synagogue. Scharf's special status also allows him to recruit for Certa from his former PET agents. A third board member of Certa's board is Jakob Shank-Pedersen. Scharf says that Certa's main mission is to convince countries around the world that the Islamist radical threat is real. Schard recently said in an interview, "We are also more exposed than before because of the militant Islamist environments that have allies and sympathizers in all countries." It is the same scare tactics that have successfully been used by former U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to drum up business for their post-9/11 security businesses. The recent attacks in Copenhagen should certainly increase business for Certa.

While the Danish police, along with INTERPOL and the FBI, are looking for Muslims and "Arab-looking" terrorists running around Denmark, perhaps they should be paying closer attention to the recent activities of the "Three Jakobs of Copenhagen."

While there is definitely "something rotten in the state of Denmark," to quote Marcellus in Shakespeare's "Hamlet," it is not the cheese or the halal butcher shop but something that was thrown from the top rung of "Jakobs' ladder." But this ladder is not the fabled staircase to heaven but an express elevator to the top floor of Mossad headquarters.

Anglican vicar a target of "Anti-Gentilism" from Zionist quarters by Wayne Madsen

Anglican vicar a target of "Anti-Gentilism" from Zionist quarters

WMR has recently reported on the growing threat of "anti-Gentilism" in Europe most notably seen in the virulent anti-Christian and anti-Islamic cartoons published by the recent Rothschild family-acquired French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, sexually-explicit attacks on churches and mosques by George Soros-funded and -inspired feminist groups like FEMEN and Pussy Riot, and attacks by Zionist groups on mainstream Christian denominations that support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) initiative against Israel.

Reverend Stephen Sizer, Church of England vicar of Christ Church of Virginia Water in Surrey, England and a staunch defender of the rights of Palestinians and repressed Christians in the Middle East is facing a barrage of crticism over posting on his Facebook page a link to an article titled "9/11: Israel Did It." Sizer posted the following question and statement: "Is this anti-Semitic? It raises so many questions."

Although there is overwhelming evidence from law enforcement and intelligence agencies around the world that Israel was culpable in organizing and carrying out the 9/11 attack on the United States in a typical Israel "false flag" operation, Sizer is facing demands by the Board of Deputies of British Jews for his dismissal by the Church of England. Although Sizer apologized for posting the link, the Jewish Board has always had Sizer in its cross hairs for his principled pro-Palestinian stance.

The Diocese of Guildford, which oversees Sizer's church, appeared ready to carry out the British Jewish board's demands and throw Sizer under the bus. A spokesman for the diocese said, "It [the Facebook post] was particularly insensitive in that last week coincided with Holocaust Memorial Day."
 
Whether its their condemnation of Stephen Sizer [left] or Pope Francis [right], the hypocrisy of the spokesparties for political Jewry has no end.

However, for Zionists, any comment critical of their Talmudic political movement and Israel always comes at "insensitive" times considering the number of holidays that Talmudic Zionism celebrates in a single year. And the demands by Zionists to sanction Christian prelates for their views on Israel and Zionism are growing with the Zionists launching a vicious attack last June against Pope Francis I after he prayed on Israel's "Separation Wall" that divides Israelis and Palestinians. The neocon Jerusalem Postcalled Francis a "liar" for pointing out that Jesus spoke Aramaic, not Hebrew and intimated that the Christian messiah was a Palestinian, not an Israeli. Of course, the Zionists charged Francis with anti-Semitism, the only canard those who have no other arguments, rely on when they are called out on their blatant historical and biblical revisionism. It comes as no surprise, therefore, that a sect based on exceptionalism and exclusion finds it necessary to attack the leaders of a religion based on inclusiveness.


WMR editor top tier, third from right, at Tehran policy conference with Rev. Stephen Sizer, bottom tier, 7th from left

Israel supporters want to have it both ways. They condemn and want sanctioned Christian leaders who point out the evils incarnate with modern-day Israel. However, when it comes to rabbis supporting "price tag" arson, window breaking, and graffiti attacks against Christian properties in Israel and the Occupied Territories, they remain silent. There are no calls for offensive rabbis to be stripped of their religious titles and tossed out of Jewish institutions. Haredi Orthodox rabbis have urged their followers to spit on Christians in Israel and the Occupied West Bank. Where were the calls by international Jewry to ostracize and abandon three rabbis -- Rabbis Yitzhak Ginzburg, Yaakov Yosef, and Yitzhak Shapiro -- for endorsing the following statement in 2009?: "If we kill a Gentile who has sinned or has violated one of the seven commandments -- because we care about the commandment -- there is nothing wrong with the murder." Why was not Rabbi Yaacov Perrin dismissed from his office for making the following statement in 1994 at the eulogy for Baruch Goldstein who opened fire and killed 39 Muslims praying at a mosque in Hebron?: "One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail."

Christians expect their leaders to always tell the truth, even when that truth hurts a Christian or someone other than a Christian who attacks Christianity. Dr. Stephen Sizer and Pope Francis I have told the truth about Israel and the Talmudic Zionists who pose a threat to the peace of the entire planet.

In the interest of full disclosure, this editor's first intended career path was to attend St. Olaf College in Minnesota on an Air Force ROTC scholarship and eventually become a Lutheran minister after serving a chaplaincy in the Air Force. Although that career trajectory went off into a different area entirely, I have great respect for mainstream and traditional Christian ministers like Stephen Sizer who "answered the call" and serve their congregations, their nations, and those around the world, like the Palestinians and the dwindling Christian population of the Middle East, who are caught between Talmudic "anti-Gentilism" and foreign-supported cults like Daesh that falsely claim to represent Islam. Both notions are foul and deserve nothing but ostracism and condemnation. Perhaps the Board of Deputies of British Jews should look in their own backyard before they make demands of a religion they neither recognize nor historically respected.

There are limits to inciteful speech by Wayne Madsen

There are limits to inciteful speech by Wayne Madsen

As unlikely a pair as Pope Francis I and Charlie Hebdo founder have weighed in on the flagrant incitement of believers of a major religion with the intent of causing violence. On his way to the Philippines, the Pope said, "You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others." He also said that if someone insulted his mother, he "could expect a punch" in return.

The founder and former editor of Charlie Hebdo, Henri Roussel, voiced his misgivings about one of his successors as editor, Stephane Charbonnier, among the satirical newspaper's staff gunned down by two Islamist radicals seeking revenge for the paper's cartoon portrayals of the Prophet Mohammed. Roussel blamed Charbonnier for needlessly dragging his staff to their deaths, pointing out that the late editor, known as "Charb" played a dangerous "game of one-upmanship" in provoking radical Muslims to act. Roussel said that after the paper's offices were firebombed in 2011 after it published a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed considered by Muslims to be blasphemous.

Roussel criticized the most recent management of Charlie Hebdo. He accused Charbonnier's predecessor as editor, Philippe Val, of turning the paper into a "Zionist and Islamophobic organ," especially after Val fired longtime cartoonist Maurice Sine for publishing a cartoon of the marriage of former President Nicolas Sarkozy' son to a Jewish electronic chain heiress. Val considered that cartoon to be anti-Semitic, but, as Roussel pointed out, the paper's management had no problem repeatedly mocking and insulting Islam. Roussel pointed out that after "Charb" published an offensive Mohammed cartoon in 2011 and the paper's offices were firebombed, he proceeded to do the same thing again in 2012. Roussel said Charbonnier "shouldn’t have done it."

The peak inside the inner workings of Charlie Hebdo is reminiscent of the activities of the neo-conservative-influenced and financed protest groups FEMEN, Pussy Riot, and Voina, which have received international publicity over their inciteful and lewd protests at Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian cathedrals, as well as Islamic mosques. There is no record of these protesters committing any actions against Jewish synagogues in any of the countries where they have protested against Christianity and Islam. 

These facts certainly point to the actions of Charlie Hebdo, FEMEN, Pussy Riot, and Voina being directed by well-organized and money-flush Zionist interests. The corporate news media have been full of stories on the sale of over five million copies of the "survivors' edition" of Charlie Hebdo and how French police have been rounding up those who have been charged with inciting "anti-Semitic" speech. At the same time, the Pope, Muslim clerics, and informed observers like Roussel have been slammed hard by the corporate, and largely Zionist-owned media, for their views on what can only be termed as "anti-Gentilic" speech. It certainly appears that the Pope and France's four top imams had Charlie Hebdo's actions in mind when they issued a joint statement condemning the Paris attacks on Charlie Hebdo and the Hyper Cacher Jewish market but urging the media to restrain itself from publishing content disrespectful of religious faiths.

The Charlie Hebdo "survivors' edition" can be downloaded by clicking here. Apparently, the surviving staff saw fit to disregard the wishes of their former editor and founder, the Pope, and France's four chief imams. After examining this much-heralded issue, it is clear that Charlie Hebdo's modus operandi is to provide a single stock caricature of a bearded Jewish man in a one cartoon while devoting the remainder of its pages to bashing Islam and Christianity. A single caricature does not constitute a license to incite. 

Anti-Christian and Islam "comedian" Bill Maher recently said the following in comparing Christianity and Islam, "one is herpes and one is cancer." Not everyone in Hollywood thinks Maher is funny and actor Ben Affleck called Maher on his Islamophobia. The Zionists, using their Talmud as their inspirational guide, want to convince the world that it is perfectly okay to mock, ridicule, blaspheme, and incite Muslims and Christians but to utter one word of condemnation of Jewish practices, including the ritual genital mutilation of infant boys, is "anti-Semitic." Monsieur Roussel, Pope Francis, the French imams, and others, including this website, see the hypocrisy being carried out. President Obama was right to miss out on the navel-gazing "march," that is, the photo-op, of world leaders in Paris. The only march the world needs is one to expose the hypocrisy of the world's elites because once again, they have perpetrated a cruel hoax on the civilized people and nations of the world.

THE ROVING EYE - Who profits from killing Charlie? By Pepe Escobar

THE ROVING EYE Who profits from killing Charlie? By Pepe Escobar Putin did it. Sorry, he didn't. In the end, it was not Russia "aggression" that attacked the heart of Europe. It was a pro-style jihadi commando. Cui bono?  Careful planning and preparation; Kalashnikovs; rocket-propelled grenade launcher; balaclavas; sand-colored ammunition vest stuffed with spare magazines; army boots; piece of cake escape in a black Citroen. And the icing on the lethal cake; faultless Paris-based logistical support to pull that off. A former top French military commander, Frederic Gallois, has stressed the perfect application of "urban guerrilla technique" (where are those notorious Western counter-terrorism "experts" when one needs them?) They might have spoken perfect French; others said it was broken French. Anyway, what matters is that they uttered the magic word; "We're al-Qaeda." Better yet; they told a man in the street, "Tell the media that this is al-Qaeda in Yemen", which means, in American terror terminology, al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula (AQAP), which had Charlie Hebdo's editor/cartoonist Stephane Charbonnier ("Charb") on a hit list duly promoted by AQAP's glossy magazine Inspire. Accusation: "Insulting the Prophet Mohammed." And just to make sure everyone had the perpetrators implanted on their brain, the killers also said, "Allahu Akbar"; "We have killed Charlie Hebdo"; and "We have avenged the Prophet." Case closed? Well, it took only a few hours for French police to identify the (usual?) suspects; French-Algerian brothers Said and Cherif Kouachi. The third man - the driver of the black Citroen, 18-year-old Hamyd Mourad - then turned himself in with an ironclad alibi. So the third man remains a cipher. They all wore balaclavas. The Kouachi brothers have not been captured. But the police seem to know very well who they are. Because they found an abandoned ID in the black Citroen (oh, the troubles of being a command in a rush ...) How come they didn't know anything before the carnage? Right on cue, Cherif Kouachi's bio was splattered all over. He was on a global watch list. Along with six others, he was sentenced in May 2008 to 3 years in prison for "terrorism"; in fact unloading a dozen young Frenchmen via madrassas in Egypt and Syria to none other than Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the killed-by-an-American-missile former head of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the spiritual father of Daesh/ISIS/ISIL. Also right on clue, a full narrative was ready for mass consumption. The key point; French police privileges the hypothesis of "Islamic terrorism". According to their "experts", this could be an attack "ordered from abroad and executed by jihadis coming back from Syria that have escaped us", or it could be "suburban idiots that radicalized themselves and concocted this military attack in the name of al-Qaeda." Scrap option two, please; this was a pro job. And staying with option one, this points right at - what else - blowback. Yes, they could be Daesh/ISIS/ISIL mercenaries trained by NATO (crucially, France included) in Turkey and/or Jordan. But it might get even false-flag nastier. They could also be former or current French special forces. Blast Islam, will travel  Predictably, 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. It's so convenient to forget that untold millions from Pakistan's tribal areas to street markets across Iraq continue to feel pain devastating their hearts and lives as they are expendable victims of the jihadi mindset - or "Kalashnikov culture", as it is known in Pakistan - profiting the "West", directly or indirectly, for decades now. Think ritual droning of Pakistani, Yemeni, Syrian, Iraqi or Libyan civilians. Think Sadr City witnessing carnages over 10 times worse than Paris. What French President Francois Hollande defined as "an act of exceptional barbarism" - and it is - does not apply when the "West", France in the front line, from King Sarko to General Hollande himself, weaponizes, trains and remote-controls assorted mercenaries/beheaders from Libya to Syria. Oh yeah; killing civilians in Tripoli or Aleppo is perfectly all right. But don't do that in Paris. So this, in the heart of Europe, is what blowback feels like. This is what people feel in the Waziristans when a wedding party is incinerated by a Hellfire missile. In parallel, it's absolutely impossible that the oh so sophisticated Western intel network had not seen blowback coming - and was impotent to prevent it (how come the scapegoats du jour, the Kouachi brothers, were not in the gallows?) Of course the ultra-elaborate Western counter-terrorism expert network - so proficient at strip-teasing us all at every airport - saw it coming; but in shadow warland, portmanteau "al-Qaeda" and its myriad declinations, including "renegade" Daesh/ISIS/ISIL, are used as much as a mercenary army as a convenient domestic threat "against our freedoms". Who profits?  US Think Tankland, also predictably, is busy spinning the drama of an "intra-Muslim" split which provides jihadis a lot of geopolitical space to exploit - all this sucking the Western world into a Muslim civil war. This is absolutely ridiculous. The Empire of Chaos, already during the 70s, was busy cultivating jihadi/Kalashnikov culture to fight anything from the USSR to nationalist movements all across the Global South. Divide and Rule has always been used to fan the flames "intra-Islam", from the Clinton administration getting cozy with the Taliban to the Cheney regime - helped by Persian Gulf vassals - advancing the sectarian Sunni/Shi'ite schism. Cui bono, then, with killing Charlie? Only those whose agenda is to demonize Islam. Not even a bunch of brainwashed fanatics would pull off the Charlie carnage to show people who accuse them of being barbarians that they are, in fact, barbarians. French intel at least has concluded that this is no underwear bomber stunt. This is a pro job. That happens to take place just a few days after France recognizes Palestinian statehood. And just a few days after General Hollande demanded the lifting of sanctions against the Russian "threat". The Masters of the Universe who pull the real levers of the Empire of Chaos are freaking out with the systemic chaos in the racket they so far had the illusion of controlling. Make no mistake - the Empire of Chaos will do what it can to exploit the post-Charlie environment - be it blowback or false flag. The Obama administration is already mobilizing the UN Security Council. The FBI is "helping" with the French investigation. And as an Italian analyst memorably put it, jihadis don't attack a vulture hedge fund; they attack a satirical rag. This is not religion; this is hardcore geopolitics. Reminds me of David Bowie: "This is not rock'n roll. This is suicide." The Obama administration is already mobilized to offer "protection" - Mob-style - to a Western Europe that is just, only just, starting to be diffident of the pre-fabricated Russian "threat". And just as it happens, when the Empire of Chaos mostly needs it, evil "terra" once again rears its ugly head. And yes, I am Charlie. Not only because they made us laugh; but because they were sacrificial lambs in a much nastier, gruesome, never-ending shadowplay. Pepe Escobar's latest book is Empire of Chaos. Follow him onFacebook. He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

Hebdo attack rife with "false flag" clues by Wayne Madsen

 Hebdo attack rife with "false flag" clues

by Wayne Madsen

The reliance of governments and non-state actors on carrying out "false flag" terrorist attacks, which, in the modern-era, began in Europe with the 1980 time-bombing of the Bologna train station that killed 85 and injured over 200, is beginning to yield predictable clues. This is certainly the case with the three-man professional military assault carried out in a precision manner by three alleged Islamist terrorists on the Paris editorial offices of the satirical journal Charlie Hebdo. 

The 1980 attack on the Bologna train station began the age of modern false flag attacks. Although the Italian government and media originally blamed the bombing on leftist radical Italian guerrillas, it was, in fact, carried out by an underground fascist cell that obtained the bomb materials from hidden caches belonging to the secret NATO "stay behind" paramilitary network known as "Gladio." 

Gladio was intended to mobilize guerrilla forces to fight the Soviets in the event of a ground war in Europe. Weapons and materials were hidden underground and in caves throughout Western Europe for future guerrilla assaults on occupying Soviet troops. However, Italian rightists and Zionists attempted to use the discredited Mitrokhin Dossier, obtained from KGB files, to pin the blame for the Bologna attack on the Soviets acting in concert with radical Arabs, including Palestinian groups. It was later discovered that it was the CIA that funded such news stories in a psychological warfare operation against the Soviets and the Arab countries. From his Paris jail cell in 2005, Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, the famed terrorist known as "Carlos," revealed that it was the CIA and Mossad that carried out the Bologna bombing and that the Mitrokhin File was being used to "falsify history."

Ever since Bologna, the tell-tale signs of Western intelligence false flag operations are extremely evident in attack after attack. By sticking to the same doctrine for over 40 years, Western intelligence fingerprints, including those of Mossad, are becoming as clear as day.

One such tell-tale sign of a false flag operation is the convenient discovery by police of evidence linking attacks to the perpetrators, be they unknowing double agents or patsies who believe in whatever cause has been dangled before them.

One sign of a false flag operation is that "evidence" linking the intended perpetrators to the crime scene is always discovered. French police claim they were able to pin the attack on two Franco-Algerian brothers, Cherif Kouachi and Said Kouachi, because Said, the eldest brother, left his French identification card in a black Citroen used as a getaway car. Police would not say whose identification card they found. Some French security experts warned that the ID card may have been purposely planted in the car to confuse the police. Police also conveniently found Molotov cocktails and Islamist jihadist flags inside the getaway car.

  
From Bologna 1980 [left] to Paris 2015 [right], false flag operations all bear the same telltale signs and clues. They are becoming standardized, always a clue of government involvement.

Alleged 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta's passport was supposedly found in pristine condition in the rubble of the World Trade Center. A third suspect identified by French police, Hamyd Mourad, the 18-year old brother-in-law of the Kouachis, was said to be the third gunman but he has an alibi. Mourad was in school at the time of the attack. That means that the third gunman has not been captured, let alone identified. Mourad surrendered to authorities after his name appeared in the media as a supposed suspect.

Often, the true perpetrators of false flag attacks are masked. This was the case with the three gunmen who killed 12 people at the Charlie Hedbooffices who were wearing balaclavas during their assault on the newspaper's offices.

There are always other attacks in the region to confuse police. For example, while French police were concentrating their search for the gunmen from northern Paris to the Belgian border, a French police woman was shot and killed in Montrouge, south of Paris. French authorities were quick to say the events south of Paris and at Charlie Hebdo were not linked. A gas station in Villers-Cotteret in Picardy, northern France, was robbed by two men said to be the terrorists.

Another false flag clue is that the alleged perpetrators are almost always known to the police in advance. In 2008, Cherif Kouachi was convicted by French authorities for trying to recruit fighters for the Sunni insurgency in Iraq. However, he never served a day of his sentence because half of his three-year sentence was suspended and the rest if his pre-trial prison time was recognized as time served. 

Pre-attack knowledge by the authorities of an alleged perpetrator was certainly the case in the Merah affair in March 2012 when Mohammed Merah, a French national, was killed by French police. Merah was accused of killing three French paratroopers in Montauban and three students and a teacher at a Jewish school in Toulouse. It was later discovered that not only did the French Central Directorate of Internal Intelligence (DCRI) have a dossier on Merah but that it tried to recruit him as an agent. Merah traveled with ease to Afghanistan and Pakistan with the foreknowledge of French intelligence. The then-governing conservatives of President Nicolas Sarkozy and the opposition, now ruling, Socialist Party conspired to cover up Merah's links to French intelligence.

The Kouachi brothers are said to have returned from Syria this past summer, where the CIA and French intelligence have been backing Islamist guerrilla groups battling the government of President Bashar al-Assad. 

Where government stories about terrorist perpetrators start to break apart is when descriptions of the alleged terrorists fail to meet popular conceptions. Although Cherif Kouachi was said to be a follower of Islamic cleric Farid Benyettou at the Addawa mosque in Paris, he was also reported by associates to be a drinker, smoker, carouser around women, and beardless. Similarly, the alleged 9/11 hijackers, far from being hard core Islamists, preferred to drink alcohol, spend time in topless bars, and use drugs. 

Another common denominator in false flag operations is the release of information by authorities that the alleged perpetrators were bent on attacking Jewish targets. Cherif Kouachi was said to have planned attacks on Jewish targets in France just as Merah was identified as the attacker of the Jewish school in Toulouse.

The attack in Paris was the deadliest in Europe since the July 11, 2011 attack on a Norwegian Labor Party youth camp and government buildings in Oslo. Although the attack was originally believed by the corporate media to be an Islamist attack, it was later pinned on Norwegian fascist right-winger Anders Breivik. Breivik attacked the socialist party youth camp because it had just rallied in support of Palestine. Breivik, a neo-Nazi, maintained close links with European rightists, some of whom had traveled to Israel and even lived for a while on kibbutzes. Breivik's links to Zionists were quickly erased by the media from the public discourse.