The point of this wave of bombings and shootings was to divide, manipulate, and control public opinion using fear, propaganda, disinformation, psychological warfare, agents provocateurs, and false flag terrorist acts to achieve the strategic aims of Western governments, in particular the US government. These strategic aims were embedded in the 'Cold War' ideology of preventing left wing, socialist or communist parties from reaching executive power in Europe, reducing US influence and thereby increasing that of the former Soviet Union.
Last year the Chairman of the U.S. Join Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, stated that the US government and military was 'dusting off its Cold War playbook' in order to deal with Russia and the threat of it gaining influence over European countries. The Pentagon recently designated Russia as the number one threat facing the US today. One has to wonder then how closely the Pentagon's Cold War strategy is being followed today, and if it involves similar false-flag terror attacks against the civilian population of Europe in order to create a climate of insecurity under which more authoritarian policies can be imposed on the public. One also has to wonder about the strange coincidence of Turkish PM Erdogan warning just a few days ago that, "there is no reason why the bomb that exploded in Ankara [on March 12th] could not explode in Brussels."
But where does Islamic terrorism fit into this template?
You may have noticed that whenever an attack of this kind occurs, it is automatically inserted into the well-established 'rolling narrative' of 'Islamic terrorism'. There is no need, therefore, to provide any real evidence to back up the claim by Western authorities that a 'Muslim suicide bomber' was to blame because 14 years of vicious and deliberate anti-Muslim propaganda means everyone 'just knows' that it was 'the Mooslims'. But for the sake of argument, let's roll with the suicide bomber idea for a moment.
What 95 percent of all alleged suicide attacks have in common since 1980, is not religion, but a specific strategic response to Western (or Western-affiliated) military intervention and/or military occupation of territory that the terrorists view as their homeland, or prize greatly. From Lebanon and the West Bank in the 80s and 90s, to Iraq and Afghanistan and up through the Brussels bombings today, it is Western military intervention in - and specifically Western military occupation of - foreign lands that provokes suicide terrorism more than anything else.
But we still don't buy it. Remove the image of the lone-wolf, wild-eyed terrorist, and what we're dealing with here is clearly a very effective military organization, capable of planning and carrying out complex and devastating attacks in the heart of a high-tech Western society glistening with security apparatus, personnel and intelligence networks.
The Brussels attacks were a sophisticated multi-site operation that somehow evaded all digital and physical security of a city that is effectively Europe's Washington, DC, and which has been under a state of high alert since the Paris attacks last November, including the apparently now permanent presence of military patrols on the streets. The attackers then chose two targets that are right next to what should surely have been more enticing targets for jihadists bent on avenging their fellow martyrs' deaths.
Take a look at the map of Brussels below:
Note that the airport is just a couple of kms from NATO HQ. But the jihadists apparently weren't interested...
Note also that within a 200m range of Maalbeek metro station, the jihadists had a choice of targeting the US embassy, the European Parliament, the European Council building, and any number of European Commission buildings. But again, the jihadists apparently weren't interested, and preferred to attack civilians, which included (no doubt) Muslims. Remember, this is NATO and EU headquarters, the two organisations under which the bombing of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria have taken place.
There's something else that perplexes us; why do 'Islamic terror' attacks always involve 'suicide bombers'? If someone has the know-how to build a bomb and plan an operation, why blow themselves up with it? Has the idea of reaching a target and then dropping the bomb and walking away never occurred to these people? More to the point, how do we reconcile the 'suicide bomber' angle in the Brussels Airport bombing when eyewitnesses have claimed that the two explosions there occurred behind the check-in desks, and when a preponderance of lower-leg injuries on victims strongly suggests a bomb lying on the ground?
Of course, we're being a little coy here. Because the idea of an 'Islamic suicide bomber' is a real boon for anyone interested in demonizing Muslims. Apart from the act of killing civilians, the act of 'suicide bombing' - and the complete lack of any survival instinct it conveys - tends to instantly delegitimize you and your cause (if any) in the eyes of normal people, and instead portrays you as an irrational, crazed, fundie nutjob.
This campaign of 'Islamic terrorism' in Europe seems, therefore, to be massively counter-productive to any agenda of liberation of the Middle East from NATO aggression. In fact, it directly facilitates further Western military meddling in the Middle East on the basis of 'dealing with the terror threat' and, as noted, justifies the implementation of police state measures in European society and 'lock downs' on the movement of ordinary people.
What we're getting at here, if you haven't noticed, is that 'Islamic terror attacks' are most likely a form of proxy war waged by the US (and other Western government agents) aimed at maintaining control over their 'interests'. Those interests are (and have always been) control over the political destiny of as much of the rest of the world as possible and, of course, ever finer control over the most valuable resource on this planet: its human population.
Now, this idea of a 'proxy war' waged by governments as a way to conceal their true intentions may be new to you, but it is not new to your political and military leaders. In responding to the attacks in Brussels today, the head of the Ukrainian intelligence service said that he "would not be surprised if it turns out that the Brussels attacks were an element of hybrid war waged by Russia." Of course, the idea that Russia was behind the attacks is risible, and fully in keeping with the ongoing US-led anti-Russia propaganda campaign, which recently saw NATO's Chief warmonger in Europe, General Breedlove accuse Russia of creating the refugee crisis in order to "overwhelm and break Europe". Yes indeed, Russia, a country that has spent the last 6 months destroying the terrorist armies in Syria that created the refugee crisis, is responsible for creating the refugee crisis as a form of 'hybrid war' against Europe! You really have to be a full-blown psychopath, or clinically insane (not much difference) to reach that conclusion.
So hybrid war is the same as proxy war. It is war by indirect means, where one actor aims to produce in his opponent the same effect as a direct attack without directly attacking him, while a third party is blamed. So given that the direct results of so-called 'Islamic terrorism' is renewed justification for Western government control over the Middle East and justification for ever tighter police state controls of European populations, who would you conclude benefits most from these attacks? Russia? Middle Easterners and other Muslims fighting for 'freedom'? Or certain Western political and corporate cliques?
Reader Comments
EVERY False Flag Terror Attack Has An Explicit Purpose …
… Especially When They Are Perpetrated At Key Landmarks In Europe
[Link]
Fake Video Used in News Coverage of Brussels Terror Attacks
Brussels News media Derniere Heure DH.be as well as other Belgian Media reported on the attacks by providing a CC Camera Video of the terror attacks in the Airport.
It just so happens that the published video footage was fake as documented by blog posting on Media Part.
The published video pertains to a terror attack at Moscow’s Domodedovo airport on 24 January 2011 (on youtube in November 2013).
The report of DH.be on the airport attack uses the video of Moscow 2011 attack with the date of the Brussels attack: (22/03/2016)
Below is the screenshot of DH’s report..........
Also notice the date 3/22 is the number associated with skull and bones. FWIW.
Buzz words are 9/11 7/7 rendition, terrorist, moderate terrorists, insurgents, patriot act, full body scanners, Al Qaeda, more recently IS ISIL Daesh. jihadists, head choppers, surveillance. Drones, drone attacks, enemy combatants Muslims, Muslim terrorists, Jihadi John, Black Widow and many more, those are the few that come to the top of my head at present. We in the west are familiar with those words and the implications thanks to MSM.
Where did these worlds come from one might ask, well look over the Atlantic
to the US.
We are 16 years into the new millennia instead of the fight against terror it has increased exponentially, are the US fighting terror or terrorists I think not.
The only thing that it has accomplished is create chaos, destabilize strategic countries throughout the world and put the fear of god into a population that wants' nothing more than to live in peace have a decent roof over there heads, a job to provide for there families and have some foreseeable future.
Of course that doesn't suit the psychopaths in power they want the whole planet on lock down, a compliant and obedient population that will do there bidding while they rape, pillage and exploit everything on this planet for there own ends.
As the commenter cyre2067 posted Gladio 2.0 may I take the liberty of adding the addition of Gladio 2.0 on steroids.
...there were monitors on the treadmills etc. playing all the mainstream news outlets covering the bombing. You could see the faces of the watchers glued to each line coming out of the mainstream news. All those sharp dressed news men and women wearing suits and ties. Often with the screen split with many talking heads all at once. The people watching were riveted. Some of their faces scrunched up like they were getting disgusted while others had that "I knew it" look. Some even started peddling or running faster. Some of them were wearing super patriot tee shirts with the American flag and the words "freedom". Enough to make you gag! Made me want to wave my hand in front of their faces and say "wake up"! I'm sure that would go over well!
Later a Trump supporter told me that all the people out of work were lazy and they were the problem because they refused to get a job and Trump would "fix" that. It's a full moon tonight.
No doubt we will be told about x number of plots that have been thwarted - but will not be allowed to hear any details due to security issues
It's a tricky conundrum for the PTB to justify mass surveillance and intrusive security for the masses whilst creating situations which make a mockery of that security .... I guess they just hope the sheeple are too enraged and do not notice
This SOTT author's very insightful and understandably coy examination here of salient facts echos my AHA!
Except, privately I was able to put more flesh on the bones.
Two questions:
1. IF Russian can make great progress against ISIS in Syria in a few short months, WHY couldn't a coalition of the world's most massive militaries do so in a few short weeks?
2. Who benefits?
Who benefits from a broken EU that has to be put back together with different key players and on rather more preferential terms? Who would that phoenix EU belong to?
Just found this:
Controlled chaos: How the U.S. empire infects other nations in its pursuit for total control
[Link]
"In conclusion:
1.The US is currently the main actor using "controlled chaos" tools with the aim of seizing control over a country or region and preventing it from pursuing its own development. Controlled chaos is de-facto neo-colonialism which transforms countries into resource suppliers to the First World. It entails predatory relations in trade and property acquisition.
2.Using controlled chaos technologies runs against international norms of non-interference in domestic affairs. It means there is a basis for banning and international monitoring over controlled chaos technologies. Over the last several decades, several countries were in favor of ensuring international information security through legal agreements, now they could also initiate similar actions in regard to controlled chaos technologies."
Off course certain political and corporate cliques. Thanks for the article, its well written in a objective manner.