" >CNN (January 8) “Citing sources, the Agence France Presse news agency reported that an 18-year-old suspect in the attack had surrendered to police.”
Charlie Hebdo False Flag Attacks in Paris
Watch lecture above as Dr. Kevin Barrett goes through the Charlie Hebdo attack and explains (with slide-show) how, and why the Charlie Hebdo attack was a false flag.
Official Story (for background) from Wikipedia:
On 7 January 2015 at about 11:30 local time, two brothers, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, forced their way into the offices of the French satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Armed with assault rifles and other weapons, they killed 11 people and injured 11 others in the building. After leaving, they killed a French National Police officer outside the building. The gunmen identified themselves as belonging to the Islamist terrorist group Al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, who took responsibility for the attack. Several related attacks followed in the Île-de-France region, where a further five were killed and 11 wounded.
France raised its Vigipirate terror alert and deployed soldiers in Île-de-France and Picardy. A major manhunt led to the discovery of the suspects, who exchanged fire with police. The brothers took hostages at a signage company in Dammartin-en-Goële on 9 January and were shot dead when they emerged from the building firing.
On 11 January, about two million people, including more than 40 world leaders, met in Paris for a rally of national unity, and 3.7 million people joined demonstrations across France. The phrase Je suis Charlie became a common slogan of support at the rallies and in social media. The staff of Charlie Hebdo continued with the publication, and the following issue print ran 7.95 million copies in six languages, compared to its typical print run of 60,000 in only French.
Was it a false flag?
In January of this year it was reported worldwide that the magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris — famous for controversially publishing cartoons of the prophet Mohammed — was attacked by two radicalized Muslims who broke into their office building and shot 12 people to death.
Right away there was enough evidence to put the whole narrative to rest as a complete media/government lie. Aside from the suspects being connected to government figures in France — including former President Sarkozy — the nail in the coffin was a video the press released which claimed to show one of the “terrorists” shoot an officer in the head in the street. This video, as is easy for anyone with functioning eyes to see, was and is a complete fake. There is no recoil when the man is shot point blank in head, close range, with a high powered rifle. This is impossible. Not only that, we can see the blank from the gun strike the pavement beside the alleged victim. And to top it all off, there is no blood whatsoever. Another easy to spot impossibility. Blood and brains would be everywhere in an instant if someone were really shot in the head from a few inches away with an AK-47 bullet, but there is none to be seen. Because of these factors we can say with confidence that this was a faked video, and the only reason to believe the narrative trumpeted by the press about this whole situation would be because we saw it on TV, but if you still believe everything the TV tells you you’re still stuck in hopelessness, and you’re in for a rude awakening. Take a look for yourself:
Usually Muslim terrorists are prepared to die in the attack; yet the two professionals who hit Charlie Hebdo were determined to escape and succeeded, an amazing feat. Their identity was allegedly established by the claim that they conveniently left for the authorities their ID in the getaway car. Such a mistake is inconsistent with the professionalism of the attack and reminds me of the undamaged passport found miraculously among the ruins of the two WTC towers that served to establish the identity of the alleged 9/11 hijackers.
It is a plausible inference that the ID left behind in the getaway car was the ID of the two Kouachi brothers, convenient patsies, later killed by police, and from whom we will never hear anything, and not the ID of the professionals who attacked Charlie Hebdo. An important fact that supports this inference is the report that the third suspect in the attack, Hamyd Mourad, the alleged driver of the getaway car, when seeing his name circulating on social media as a suspect realized the danger he was in and quickly turned himself into the police for protection against being murdered by security forces as a terrorist.
Hamyd Mourad says he has an
" >iron-clad alibi. If so, this makes him the despoiler of a false flag attack. Authorities will have to say that despite being wrong about Mourad, they were right about the Kouachi brothers. Alternatively, Mourad could be coerced or tortured into some sort of confession that supports the official story. https://www.intellihub.com/18-year-old-charlie-hebdo-suspect-surrenders-police-claims-alibi/
The American and European media have ignored the fact that Mourad turned himself in for protection from being killed as a terrorist as he has an alibi. I googled Hamid Mourad and all I found (January 12) was the main US and European media reporting that the third suspect had turned himself in. The reason for his surrender was left out of the reports. The news was reported in a way that gave credence to the accusation that the suspect who turned himself in was part of the attack on Charlie Hebdo. Not a single US mainstream media source reported that the alleged suspect turned himself in because he has an ironclad alibi.
Some media merely reported Mourad’s surrender in a headline with no coverage in the report. The list that I googled includes the Washington Post (January 7 by Griff Witte and Anthony Faiola); Die Welt (Germany) “One suspect has turned himself in to police in connection with Wednesday’s massacre at the offices of Parisian satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo;” ABC News (January 7) “Youngest suspect in Charlie Hebdo Attack turns himself in;” The Cable News Network (aka: the Communist News Network, CIA News Network, Clinton News Network, Concocted News Network, etc.) is simply fake news. According to CNN’s own three-time Emmy award winning journalist, Amber Lyon, CNN is routinely paid by the US government to make up fake news and also to selectively report on certain events in ways that fit their narrative. Plus, the Obama administration even paid CNN for editorial control over their content, badly distorting the news in their(...)
Another puzzle in the official story that remains unreported by the presstitute media is the alleged suicide of a high ranking member of the French Judicial Police who had an important role in the Charlie Hebdo investigation. For unknown reasons, Helric Fredou, a police official involved in the most important investigation of a lifetime, decided to kill himself in his police office on January 7 or January 8 (both dates are reported in the foreign media) in the middle of the night while writing his report on his investigation. A google search as of 6pm EST January 13 turns up no mainstream US media report of this event. The alternative media reports it, as do some UK newspapers, but without suspicion or mention whether his report has disappeared. The official story is that Fredou was suffering from “depression” and “burnout,” but no evidence is provided. Depression and burnout are the standard explanations of mysterious deaths that have unsettling implications. Fredou had most likely discovered evidence of a cover up and was ‘suicided’.
Once again we see the US print and TV media serving as a ministry of propaganda for Washington. In place of investigation, the media repeats the government’s implausible story.
It behoves us all to think. Why would Muslims be more outraged by cartoons in a Paris magazine than by hundreds of thousands of Muslims killed by Washington and its French and NATO vassals in seven countries during the past 14 years?
If Muslims wanted to make a point of the cartoons, why not bring a hate crime charge or lawsuit? Imagine what would happen to a European magazine that dared to satirize
" >Jews in the way Charlie Hebdo satirized Muslims. Indeed, in Europe people are imprisoned for investigating the holocaust without entirely confirming every aspect of it.
If a Muslim lawsuit was deep-sixed by French authorities, the Muslims would have made their point. Killing people merely contributes to the demonization of Muslims, a result that only serves Washington’s wars against Muslim countries.
If Muslims are responsible for the attack on Charlie Hebdo, what Muslim goal did they achieve? None whatsoever. Indeed, the attack attributed to Muslims has ended French and European sympathy and support for Palestine and European opposition to more US wars against Muslims. Just recently France had voted in the UN with Palestine against the US-Israeli position. This assertion of an independent French foreign policy was reinforced by the recent statement by the President of France that the economic sanctions against Russia should be terminated.
Clearly, France was showing too much foreign policy independence. The attack on Charlie Hebdo serves to cow France and place France back under Washington’s thumb.
Some will contend that Muslims are sufficiently stupid to shoot themselves in the head in this way. But how do we reconcile such alleged stupidity with the alleged Muslim 9/11 and Charlie Hebdo professional attacks?
If we believe the official story, the 9/11 attack on the US shows that 19 Muslims, largely Saudis, without any government or intelligence service support, outwitted not only all 16 US intelligence agencies, the National Security Council, Dick Cheney and all the neoconservatives in high positions throughout the US government, and airport security, but also the intelligence services of NATO and Israel’s Mossad. How can such intelligent and capable people, who delivered the most humiliating blow in world history to an alleged Superpower with no difficulty whatsoever despite giving every indication of their intentions, possibly be so stupid as to shoot themselves in the head when they could have thrown France into turmoil with a mere lawsuit?
The Charlie Hebdo story simply doesn’t wash. If you believe it, you are no match for a Muslim.
Some who think that they are experts will say that a false flag attack in France would be impossible without the cooperation of French intelligence. To this I say that it is practically a certainty that the CIA has more control over French intelligence than does the President of France. Operation Gladio proves this. The largest part of the government of Italy was ignorant of the bombings conducted by the CIA and Italian Intelligence against European women and children and blamed on communists in order to diminish the communist vote in elections.
Americans are a pitifully misinformed people. All of history is a history of false flag operations. Yet Americans dismiss such proven operations as “conspiracy theories,” which merely proves that government has successfully brainwashed insouciant Americans and deprived them of the ability to recognize the truth.
We Are Not Charlie Hebdo: “A breakthrough in the study of State Crimes Against Democracy.” – David Ray Griffin, author of 9/11 Ten Years Later: When State Crimes Against Democracy Succeed, and Unprecedented: Can Civilization Survive the CO2 Crisis? “Today’s Western governments and mainstream media are not trustworthy. If you want the truth, you need to read books like this.” –Paul Hellyer, former Canadian Secretary of Defense, author of The Money Mafia: A World in Crisis “A necessary set of challenging responses to the Islamophobic manipulation of the Charlie Hebdo incident, suggesting the urgent relevance of dissent and suspicion in response to official versions of controversial events.” –Richard Falk, Prof. Emeritus of International Law, Princeton University Only one version of the Charlie Hebdo affair made the mainstream media: “Muslim extremists kill cartoonists and Jews.” An officially-orchestrated response – “je suis Charlie” – followed. But is there another side to the story? Disturbing facts quickly emerged. Politicians, big media, the security industry, and arms manufacturers all rushed to cash in. And freedom of speech in France – the supposed target of the terrorists – was rolled back by the French government. Even as millions marched for Charlie, millions more sensed that something was very, very wrong. In We Are Not Charlie Hebdo, twenty-one leading public intellectuals refuse the invitation to identify with “Je Suis Charlie.” Jews, Muslims, Christians, Protestants, Catholics, atheists, people of the left and right, progressives and traditionalists, people from many different countries and ethnicities – all have united to say “we are NOT Charlie Hebdo.” Most suspect the whole affair was a false flag operation or psy-op. (Evidence for that interpretation is presented in the book.) Others merely dissent from the official, mythic false consensus. If you question what governments tell you…if you doubt the mainstream media version of events…if you are NOT Charlie Hebdo…then this book is for you.
Were the “terrorist attacks” in Paris and San Bernardino false flag operations? Most of this book’s 26 contributors say “yes.” Though the government, academy, and mainstream media are afraid to explore the evidence, these 26 leading public intellectuals – including former high-level government officials, professors, and journalists – fearlessly explain how and why our own governments are slaughtering us in horrific terror events set up to be falsely blamed on “radical Muslim” patsies. From the Pentagon’s “Operation Gladio,” a US military program which orchestrated almost all of the high-profile “terrorist attacks” during the Cold War, to the post-9/11 era, abundant evidence indicates that most terrorism is created by governments and falsely blamed on their enemies.
The motive: Roll back freedom, promote authoritarian leadership, and prepare the public for
" >war. In this book, former CIA counter-terrorism officers Philip Giraldi and Robert David Steele, leading economic advisor to President Reagan Paul Craig Roberts, and two dozen other top analysts question the official stories of what happened in Paris on 11/13/15 and in San Bernardino on 12/2/15. This book was published on the first anniversary of the Charlie Hebdo attacks. It follows on the heels of We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo! Free Thinkers Question the French 9/11, which garnered praise from 9/11 researcher leader David Ray Griffin, international law professor Richard Falk, and former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer, among other luminaries. ANOTHER French False Flag, and We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo, have pioneered a new genre: “Open-Source Intelligence” projects that expose big false flags shortly after they happen. Why is this necessary? Normally, false flags are designed so that the Official Story is hammered deep into the public mind in the immediate aftermath of the event, when people are in a state of shock and susceptible to mass hypnosis. If critics wait too long to express a skeptical view, it will fall on deaf ears. So if we want to win the “infowar” by spreading the truth, we need to act as quickly as possible. These books do that. ANOTHER French False Flag is a monument to free speech in a time of cowardice and
Editor Kevin Barrett has been attacked indirectly by French President François Hollande in anti-conspiracy-theory tirades, and named as one of the five most dangerous “conspiracy intellectuals” in the world by Hollande’s think tank, the Jean Jaurés Institute. That hasn’t stopped Barrett from repeatedly flying to Paris to give interviews (in French) and participate in conferences in which he tells the French people that it is Hollande’s government and its foreign allies—NOT “radical Muslims”—who have been mass-murdering them in their streets, offices, stadiums, cafés and nightclubs. ANOTHER French False Flag and its predecessor We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo are the most important books the truth movement has produced since the 2002 – 2005 period that gave us the seminal works of Thierry Meyssan, Nafeez Ahmed, David Ray Griffin, and Webster Tarpley. As former Canadian Defense Minister Paul Hellyer says, “Today’s Western governments and mainstream media are not trustworthy. If you want the truth, you need to read books like this.”