Paris Attacks Summary

Standard

ISIS never claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks.

ISIS released a statement praising the attackers:

IS CLAIMS PARIS ATTACKS, WARNS OPERATION IS “FIRST OF THE STORM”

The statement details nothing that was not publicly available information from news reports:

“Terror groups, when they claim credit for attacks, will sometimes include details of the planning or execution that establish the group was indeed responsible. There are none here; the statement details nothing that was not publicly available information from news reports. It also includes no biographical information on the attackers, even a name or photo, though terror groups will often lionize its attackers as “martyrs” in such statements.”

(via Here is ISIS’s statement claiming responsibility for the Paris attacks)

Eight suspects identified were EU citizens. A Syrian passport was found near a ninth suspect, but its legitimacy has come under question by everybody including French and German authorities.

“A third red flag is the fact that the passport concerned was found in the first place. Analysts find it strange that a bomber would remember to bring his passport on a mission, particularly one who does not intend to return alive.”

(via Why Syrian refugee passport found at Paris attack scene must be treated with caution)

Additionally, there is the fact that the passport remained intact while the suicide bomber did not. French and German authorities say ISIS may have planted the passport to turn public opinion against refugees:

France Will Still Welcome Syrian Refugees

Since ISIS was likely not involved, since French authorities have no problem blaming people for crimes they did not commit, and since sinister people always accuse others of crimes they did themselves, it’s likely a case that more sinister French authorities planted that passport.

Despite accusing ISIS of killing 130 French citizens, France chooses to retaliate by bombing abandoned empty locations:

“all these strikes are targeting abandoned empty locations.”

(via Strikes in Raqqa in Syria Lead to More Questions Than Results)

FotorCreated paris attacks final2 jpeg

Full image: Click Here

You Can’t Trust the Headlines

Standard

(I should start by saying that Palestine always has the right to use violence against Israel as long as Israel continues to occupy stolen Palestinian land.   This is true even according to international law and the international community.  People living on stolen property are never innocent. Unfortunately, Palestinians don’t have an organized state or military powerful enough to rid themselves of the illegal occupying power.)

This is what actually happened leading up to the 2014 Gaza massacre:

“Something had to be done, and an occasion arose on June 12, when the three Israeli boys were murdered in the West Bank. Early on, the Netanyahu government knew that they were dead, but pretended otherwise, which provided the opportunity to launch a rampage in the West Bank, targeting Hamas.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed to have certain knowledge that Hamas was responsible. That too was a lie.

One of Israel’s leading authorities on Hamas, Shlomi Eldar, reported almost at once that the killers very likely came from a dissident clan in Hebron that has long been a thorn in the side of Hamas. Eldar added that “I’m sure they didn’t get any green light from the leadership of Hamas, they just thought it was the right time to act.”

The 18-day rampage after the kidnapping, however, succeeded in undermining the feared unity government, and sharply increasing Israeli repression. Israel also conducted dozens of attacks in Gaza, killing five Hamas members on July 7.

Hamas finally reacted with its first rockets in 19 months, providing Israel with the pretext for Operation Protective Edge on July 8.”

(via  Noam Chomsky: The Nightmare in Gaza)

Hamas denied responsibility for the attacks, but many headlines would eventually say that Hamas claimed responsibility for the attacks.  Examples:

NPR: Hamas Admits To Kidnapping And Killing Israeli Teens

CBC: Hamas admits kidnapping 3 young Israeli men, setting off Gaza war

CNN: Hamas leader admits militants abducted slain Israeli teens

However, when one actually reads the articles, one quickly realizes that Hamas did not claim responsibility:

Aruri said the operation to abduct the teens was not approved by the Hamas leadership or its military wing, the Qassam Brigades.

(via CNN: Hamas leader admits militants abducted slain Israeli teens)

Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, who is in exile in Qatar, denied knowledge of the abduction but praised its perpetrators.

(via CBC: Hamas admits kidnapping 3 young Israeli men, setting off Gaza war)

Being from a dissident clan from the same region, the real perpetrators of the crime likely had weak ties to Hamas.  Some of them might have been members of Hamas in the past.

The man, Hussam Qawasmeh, 41, part of a sprawling clan in the West Bank city of Hebron with ties to the militant Islamist Hamas movement, was convicted last week of handling $60,000 in five installments from the Gaza Strip to buy two cars, two M-16 rifles and two pistols for use in the operation. In September, Israeli troops cornered and killed the two men they believe carried out the kidnapping and murders: Marwan Qawasmeh, 29, a relative of Mr. Qawasmeh’s, and Amer Abu Aisha, 33.

Having ties or former association with Hamas does not mean Hamas was responsible.  Hamas praising the act does not mean Hamas carried out the act.

Likewise, the fact that some of the alleged suspects behind the Paris attacks have/had some affiliation with the Islamic State is still not proof that the Islamic State itself was behind the Paris attacks:

The Expanding Web of Connections Among the Paris Attackers

Capture Web Paris Attacks

The Islamic State praising the Paris attacks is not proof that the Islamic State was behind the Paris attacks.

Athenian-Style Slave-Maker Alert

Standard

Jeff Sallot wants to enslave thousands of young refugees (who are desperate to flee violence) by turning them into military slaves who are forced to fight for Canada and serve no other purpose. He suggests keeping them in large holding facilities where they can be monitored.

“Why not train thousands of young refugee men in Canada and send them back to fight? We have a lot of geography and a number of military bases that can be used for training.

Say we offer these Syrian and Iraqi men this deal: If you want to come to Canada you have to agree to a rigorous military training regime to fight the caliphate. You say you’re fleeing ISIS. Well, here’s your chance to do something about ISIS — and Canada will help you.

Able-bodied single men who refuse the deal would drop to the bottom of the list. Or we could admit them conditionally, keep them in holding facilities until a more thorough screening process can assure Canadian officials the men are not a security risk. I think most of them would take the deal.”

(via http://ipolitics.ca/…/bombs-arent-working-to-beat-isis-we-…/)

This guy is a slave-making impulse away from suggesting that we make a deal with Blacks desperate to flee Africa that they can come to Canada as long as they work for us for free. Most will take the deal, he’ll say, because they are so desperate to flee their tragic situation and it’s only logical that we exploit them unfairly. Furthermore, we can pack them as close together as we can in large cargo ships so we can get a maximum number of workers at one time.

Further Evidence That ISIS Was Not Behind the Paris Attacks

Standard

Here is another article that says ISIS claimed responsibility, but then gives very specific information that ISIS likely was not responsible:

“Terror groups, when they claim credit for attacks, will sometimes include details of the planning or execution that establish the group was indeed responsible. There are none here; the statement details nothing that was not publicly available information from news reports. It also includes no biographical information on the attackers, even a name or photo, though terror groups will often lionize its attackers as “martyrs” in such statements.”

(via http://www.vox.com/2015/11/14/9734794/isis-claim-paris-statement)

The following statement implies ISIS did not claim responsibility by implying they might still claim it later:

“None of this is to argue that ISIS is thus not responsible; it is entirely possible the group may later release more information to establish its role.”

ISIS Didn’t Do It.

Standard

People have to be very careful when reading these articles. The headline and first paragraph say ISIS claimed responsibility:

http://www.nytimes.com/…/isis-claims-responsibility-for-par…

However, they specifically imply throughout the article that ISIS did not claim responsibility. (The New York Times and many papers did this with Hamas during the 2014 Gaza massacre. The headlines would say Hamas claimed responsibility while the rest of the article implies that they didn’t.)

ISIS celebrated the attacks. They never said they did it. Here is a translation of one of the messages from the groups encrypted messaging accounts:

https://ent.siteintelgroup.com/…/is-claims-paris-attacks-wa…

In fact, throughout The New York Times article, there is continued debate between whether to blame ISIS or Al Queda. (Obviously, if ISIS had actually claimed responsibility, they wouldn’t be debating between blaming ISIS or Al Queda throughout the article.)  The reality is that it might not have been either group but they need to pin it on either ISIS or Al Queda so they can declare war. If it was just homegrown terrorism exploiting Islam, they would not be able to go to war, so they pretend it’s not even a possibility.

Additionally, if ISIS was going to claim responsibility and declare open war on France, an encrypted internal communique isn’t going to achieve that.

(Another scenario is that ISIS was trying to do it in secret, didn’t want France to know, and the internal communique accidentally exposed that they were responsible. However, the encrypted message only showed that ISIS knew of the attacks and praised the attackers. They never said they did it.)

The best evidence they have linking ISIS to the crime is the encrypted internal communique which actually implies ISIS didn’t do it.

ISIS say they were impressed with the way the Paris terrorists executed the attack and applauded them on a job well done, but imply that the Paris terrorists were people they didn’t actually know.

Additionally, if ISIS had orchestrated a terrorist attack they considered impressive and successful, why wouldn’t they be patting themselves on the back for a job well done? Why wouldn’t they be cockier and more full of hubris?

If ISIS had done it, they would have been more arrogant and self-congratulatory rather than merely applauding the work of others.

Thus, I highly doubt it was ISIS.

 

Solidarity with Palestine Is What We Need Right Now

Standard

The moment I open Facebook or Twitter, I notice the French flag on half the profile pictures and avatars.  The entire planet and a bulk of Muslims were forced to show the type of respect for the victims of the recent Paris attacks that imperialist powers never seem to show anybody else in return.  The victims of the attacks were genuine victims, yet everything surrounding the attacks from media coverage, to global solidarity movements, was driven by more sinister forces of imperialist hunger.  Many Muslims would have condemned the attacks regardless, but one could easily sense a fear among the Muslim community not to show extra deference towards the loss of life for one of the members of the family of elite imperialist powers.

It wasn’t really Muslims as much as people exploiting Islam who were responsible for the crimes, but the only reason the Paris attacks gained such global recognition was because Muslims could be used as scapegoats which could be leveraged into greater warfare in the Middle East.

(There is no evidence that ISIS was responsible, but Hollande had no problem declaring war against ISIS.)

One would think that the overfocus on the Paris attacks versus other atrocities around the globe displays a horrible exalting of Western lives over the lives of non-Westerners.  However, when one takes a closer look to reactions to other Western tragedies, an even more disturbing trend appears:

After the Paris attacks, vigils were held in Toronto and across the US for the Paris attack victims:

However, Toronto did NOT hold vigils after the 2013 Lac-Mégantic train disaster where 47 French Canadians died.  And there were no vigils held outside Washington after the 2014 Oso mudslide claimed 43 American lives.  (People can correct me if I’m wrong.)

Thus, people who don’t even mourn the death of their own countrymen if the disaster occurs in the next state or province will mourn the death of foreigners from across the Atlantic as long as Muslims can be scapegoated and war can be declared.

Additionally, after the 2011 Norway attacks, there were no international vigils mourning the 77 lives taken by radical anti-Muslim extremist, Anders Breivik.

However, had people exploiting Islam been responsible for the Lac-Mégantic train disaster, Oso mudslide, or the Norway attacks, there would have been extensive international media coverage and vigils held across the globe for the victims.

This infographic says it all: http://i.imgur.com/Vlu7Om0.png

 

 

 

Additionally, showing too much solidarity with France (despite being a kind gesture from more genuine people) can actually have a negative impact.  I encourage people to read these arguments for why showing solidarity with Palestinians would result in much greater peace:

1) France has enjoyed great peace and security since WWII and will continue to enjoy great peace and security. Palestinians have endured nothing but horrible suffering and oppression since the aftermath of WWII where routine massacres, housing demolitions, kidnappings, and lack of basic resources has been the norm (and still is.)

2) Showing solidarity with Palestinians could actually achieve positive results by putting pressure on Western states to stop supporting Israel, resulting in the potential for greater peace and security for an oppressed population.

Excessive solidarity with France is already being exploited and leveraged by imperialists to escalate violence and do more harm to innocent people and doesn’t do much to help the French victims of the attack.

3) France doesn’t actually need the extra display of solidarity. France is a first world country that is fully equipped to handle the situation on their own.

Palestinians are a stateless, defenceless people with no military and no foreign support. Palestinians have had to endure FAR worse than the French for decades and will CONTINUE to endure far worse if things continue the way they do.

To sum up:
Showing solidarity with Palestinians could lead to greater peace.
Excessive solidarity with France is already being exploited by imperialists to put more innocent lives in jeopardy.

Palestinian Flag

 

ISIS: A Political and Economic Diversion Tactic

Standard

[T]he system was one that made the elite very rich and the poor even poorer as their debts increased. Increasing numbers of people started to leave the cities to escape their debts, and often joined rogue groups known as the [H]abiru in Syria and the Levant, which not only maintained a way of life free from the control of the major kings, but which also raided their cities and supplies.

via Kingdoms of Anatolia – Sea Peoples.

Did the Sea People cause the Late Bronze Age collapse, or was it merely a case that elitists were pathologically using them as a diversion tactic to blind people to the horrendous inequality of the period? Were Mongols from the North the true reason the Great Wall of China was built, or was that a way to keep people busy so nobody had time to question the injustice of the ruling class and those serving it?

The situation in the West (and, in particular, the United States) is one where people are mainly just looking out for their own interests at this point (even at the expense of the nation itself.)  Those working in news/media need a story to cover and a constant “war on terror” allows for just that.  The rich want to divert attention away from themselves.  Others serving the war-machine want to maintain their roles, even if the wars serve no real benefit to the invading nation.  Conservatives are wired to naturally serve oppressors.  Phoney-liberals are wired to do the same (but pretend that they don’t.)

As the lesser of evils, it would be far better for the West to train/supply regional resistance forces that are naturally going to do battle with ISIS anyway.  However, honest people would need to keep a VERY close eye on the situation to make sure the state is doing what it says it’s doing (because half the time it will do the exact opposite.  NATO kept urging Turkey to fight ISIS, yet it ended up using its opportunity for “humanitarian” intervention to bomb the state enemy, the Kurds, instead. However, Turkish elites and media outlets most likely announced that they were intervening to defend Turkey from the threat of ISIS.)

However, the best way to deal with terrorism would actually be to deal with the extreme inequality in wealth (along with sinister forms of academic elitism that try to keep the general populace stupid while praising sinister notions of what it means to be “educated.”)

Less wealth inequality allows more honest individuals to speak out against all forms of hypocritical elitist behaviour in society including those in media, academia, politics, business etc. who try to keep the general populace vapid and uninformed.  Had the populace been less deluded and had there been greater opportunity for dissent in the years leading up to the Iraq war, it may have never happened in the first place, meaning ISIS wouldn’t even exist right now.