My point is fuck all religions and the religious fanaticism that helps drive shit like this. Yes, it's a complicated issue, but it's not complicated to see the havoc religion causes and its role in attacks like these. And I agree that because of racial, cultural, socioeconomic similarities people in western countries will only really give a shit when something like this happens in a European country like France where affluent white people are affected. But not bat an eye when it happens in a peripheral country where the religious, cultural, political and racial make up is completely different like in Africa or the Middle East. To people living in U.S., an event like this scares them into thinking that if it can happen to people who are very similar to them in all the categories listed above (and in a place where is "shouldn't" happen), then an attack might be imminent on them too. And people just simply sympathize more with those who are similar to them and who they see as allies. Whereas shit like this is expected and precedented in Africa and the Middle East to the point that people become desensitized hearing about it all the time, and since they're so different than Europe and the U.S., people sympathize with those victims less. Anyway.. fuck Islam and religion in gerneral, and I know there are plenty of good muslims, but those are the ones who don't take their religion seriously.
edit: and the US and EU governments aren't off the hook either... constantly going into the middle east and causing havoc themselves on the region leads to more hate and aggression and fills the ranks of extremist groups... But the inherently radical doctrine of their religion makes matters worse.
Walkin is a person with no money. Someone who is broke enough to not be able to afford a bus pass and quotes someone else's shitty quote is just a fool who needs to come up with his own material.
Here's another one for ya "Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog."
Washington and its French vassal have refined how they conduct their false flag operations. With the Charlie Hebdo operation, they knew to immediately set the story in stone in order to avoid any questions from the print and TV media and in order to use the set story to take the place of an investigation.
The set story made it unnecessary to explain the mysterious “suicide” of one of the main police investigators while engaged in the investigation of the event. The set story also made it unnecessary to explain why it was necessary to kill rather than capture the alleged perpetrators, or to explain how the French authorities could be so wrong about the alleged get-away-driver but not about the two gunmen. There has been no explanation why the authorities believed there was a get-away-driver, and no such driver has been captured or killed. Indeed, there are many unanswered questions of no interest to any media except the alternative Internet media.
What the US and France learned from the Charlie Hebdo skepticism on the Internet is to keep the story flowing. Charlie Hebdo involved two scenes of violence, and the connection between the two acts of terrorism was vague. This time there were several scenes of violence, and they were better connected in the story.
More importantly, the story was followed quickly by more drama, such as the pursuit of a suspected perpetrator into Belgium, a French bombing attack on the Islamic State, a French aircraft carrier sent to the Middle East, a declaration of war by the French President against ISIL, and speculation that Hollande, pressured by Washington, will invoke NATO’s Article V, which will pull NATO into an invasion of the Islamic State. By superceding each event with a new one, the public’s attention is shifted away from the attack itself and the interests served by the attack. Already the attack itself is old news. The public’s attention has been led elsewhere. How soon will NATO have boots on the ground?
The Western media has avoided many interesting aspects of the Paris attacks. For example, what did the directors of the CIA and French intelligence discuss at their meeting a few days prior to the Paris attacks. Why were fake passports used to identify attackers? Why did the attacks occur on the same day as a multi-site simulation of a terrorist attack involving first responders, police, emergency services and medical personnel? Why has there been no media investigation of the report that French police were blinded by a sophisticated cyber attack on their mobile data tracking system? Does anyone really believe that ISIL has such capability?
The Western media serves merely as an amplifier of the government’s propaganda. Even the non-Western media follows this pattern because of the titillating effect. It is a good story for the media, and it requires no effort.
Initially even the Russian media served to trumpet the set story that rescues the Western political establishment from political defeat at home and Russian defeat in Syria. But it wasn’t too long before some of the Russian media remembered numerous false stories about a Russian invasion of Ukraine, about Assad’s use of chemical weapons, about US ABMs being placed on Russia’s borders to protect Europe from nonexistent Iranian nuclear ICBMs. And so on.
Russian media began asking questions and received some good answers from Gearoid O Colmain:
To understand the Paris attacks, it helps to begin with the question: “What is ISIL?” Apparently, ISIL is a creation of the CIA or some deep-state organization shielded by the CIA’s operations department. ISIL seems to have been used to overthrow Quadaffi in Libya and then sent to overthrow Assad in Syria. One would think that ISIL would be throughly infiltrated by the CIA, Mossad, British and French intelligence. Perhaps ISIL is discovering that it is an independent power and is substituting an agenda of its own for Washington’s, but ISIL still appears to be at least partially dependent on support, active or passive, from Washington.
ISIL is a new group that suddenly appeared. ISIL is portrayed as barbaric knife-wielding fanatics from medieval times. How did such a group so quickly acquire such extensive global capability as to blow a Russian airliner out of Egyptian skies, conduct bombings in Lebanon and Turkey, outwit French intelligence and conduct successful multi-prong attacks in Paris? How come ISIL never attacks Israel?
The next question is: “How does the Paris attack benefit ISIL?” Is it a benefit to ISIL to have Europe’s borders closed, thus halting ISIL’s ability to infiltrate Europe as refugees? Does it help ISIL to provoke French bombing of ISIL positions in the Middle East and to bring upon itself a NATO invasion?
Who does benefit? Clearly, the European and American political establishment in so many ways. Establishment political parties in France, Germany, and the UK are in trouble, because they enabled Washington’s Middle East wars that are bringing floods of refugees into Europe. Pegida is rising in Germany, Farage’s Independent Party in the UK, and Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France. Indeed, a recent poll showed Marine Le Pen in the lead as the next president of France.
The Paris attack takes the issue and the initiative away from these dissident political parties. Among the first words out of the mouth of the French president in response to the attack was his declaration that the borders of France are closed. Already Merkel’s political allies in Germany are pushing her government in that direction. “Paris changes everything,” they declare. It certainly saved the European political establishment from defeat and loss of power.
The same result occurred in the US. Outsiders Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders were slaughtering the establishment’s presidential candidates. Trump and Sanders had the momentum. But “Paris changes everything.” Trump and Sanders are now sidelined, out of the news. The momentum is lost. The story has changed. “Paris attacks become focus of 2016 race,” declares CNN: 2016 election: Foreign policy focus after Paris attacks - CNNPolitics.com
Also among the early words from the French president, and without any evidence in support, was Hollande’s declaration that the Islamic State had attacked the French nation. Obviously, it is set for Hollande to invoke NATO’s Article V, which would send a NATO invasion force into Syria. This would be Washington’s way of countering the Russian initiative that has saved the Assad government from defeat by the Islamic State. The NATO invasion would overthrow Assad as part of the war against the Islamic State.
The Russian government did not immediately recognize this threat. The Russian government saw in the Paris attack the opportunity to gain Western cooperation in the fight against ISIL. The Russian line has been that we must all fight ISIL together.
The Russian presence, although highly effective, is small in Syria. What does the Russian government do when its policy in Syria is crowded by a NATO invasion?
The only benefactor of the Paris attack is the Western political establishment and Washington’s goal of unseating Assad in Syria. The Paris attack has removed the threat to the French, German, and British political establishments from the National Front, Pegida, and the UK Independence Party. The Paris attack has removed the threat to the US political establishment from Trump and Sanders. The Paris attack has advanced Washington’s goal of removing Assad from power.
The answer to the Roman question, “cui bono,” is clear.
But don’t expect to hear it from the Western media.
----------------------------------
Paul Craig Roberts, PhD is an American economist and blogger. He served for one year as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy in the Reagan administration. He is a former editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, and Scripps Howard News Service.
If you watched the video instead of trying to be a smart ass, you'd see he is making the CNN reporters look stupid. Just like I am making you look stupid right now for jumping to conclusions.
things have changed since 911. pre 911, we could have great debates with one another regarding world issues and current events. if someone had a particular conspiracy theory, u would hear them out and the person relaying the theory wouldnt be judged or deemed a nut. i remember i did a paper and speech on the united states involvement in the drug trade in high school. it was well received....
post 911 any sort of conspiracy theory no matter the validity to the theory is debunked automatically. if your train of thought or beliefs are not with the masses you are shunned and labled an outcast or conspiracy nut. well played murrica, well played.
things have changed since 911. pre 911, we could have great debates with one another regarding world issues and current events. if someone had a particular conspiracy theory, u would hear them out and the person relaying the theory wouldnt be judged or deemed a nut. i remember i did a paper and speech on the united states involvement in the drug trade in high school. it was well received....
post 911 any sort of conspiracy theory no matter the validity to the theory is debunked automatically. if your train of thought or beliefs are not with the masses you are shunned and labled an outcast or conspiracy nut. well played murrica, well played.
You are right to an extent, the assault on our right to question "official" narratives has been further warped, but in reality it has been present since government was created. I do remember telling people about the national ID when I was a youth, and teachers saying that was conspiracy nut talk, but its here.
Anyway, here's some more brainwash for the masses (is it 10k refugees reported by the media or 100k refugees per year according to the POTUS?) - mind you a problem caused by Western Colonialism to force assimilation and further the "western civilization" agenda:
nope, the page I found said 213d, which is April 17, 2015 at 8:28:42p (there was so-called thwarted terrorism in Paris on Apr 19 that allegedly resulted in a woman's death) - so prob just paid internet nerds manipulating things to cause confusion and misdirect people from what is really going on....
You are right to an extent, the assault on our right to question "official" narratives has been further warped, but in reality it has been present since government was created. I do remember telling people about the national ID when I was a youth, and teachers saying that was conspiracy nut talk, but its here.
Anyway, here's some more brainwash for the masses (is it 10k refugees reported by the media or 100k refugees per year according to the POTUS?) - mind you a problem caused by Western Colonialism to force assimilation and further the "western civilization" agenda:
No you're entitled to your opinion and when I was asking if it was real I was asking because I never heard about it. Supposedly some bot was being used and well...you can read it here.
No you're entitled to your opinion and when I was asking if it was real I was asking because I never heard about it. Supposedly some bot was being used and well...you can read it here.
Thanks for the link, I didnt know about twitter bots. I understand your question and after reading the article Im still not sure what to make of it... It just seems to close to be a coincidence to me.
No disrespect to you but this is a foolish question to ask and even more foolish for me to try to answer. It does not matter what I propose, it only matters what is.
