This is not likely a false flag, because the operatives were killed in a suicide operation, so they needed to be brainwashed young people, not seasoned intelligence agency people. They were likely receiving orders via internet, and getting supplies, guns and suicide vests, from couriers, and only needed to meet up on the day of the attack. France seems to have been immune to such false flags in the past. While ISIS is a Western and Saudi creation, once it acquired independent sources of financing through looting ancient art and oil production, it seems to have a life of its own, and it can no longer be controlled. This attack is probably what people are saying. That is not to say that past events, the ones between 2000 and 2010 are as they seem, those are clearly false flags, as they have reported drills associated to them, in ways that are statistically impossible. I doubt very much there were any drills in Paris on Friday.
EDIT: It seems I was wrong about drills--- there was at least one drill involving medical personnel that leaked. It could be an inside job, but then there is probably exactly one way to do it: have one "hostage taking" drill involving three stupid agents who are killed, and have additional agents shoot the theater and the original agents who take the hostages, killing them. The bombs are easy to do with drills too, same as the Boston Bombing. One just has to wait to see if any French leaks about drills come out in the next few weeks.
Hi Ron, it's Harry; we used to chat on Facebook from time-to-time. Out-of-interest, why did you delete your Facebook account?
I never chatted with a "Harry", but if you want to know the reason, read Richard Stallman on Facebook. It's a terrible place to be.
When I first turned on the TV to watch CNN and Fox News cover the Paris attacks I quickly became aware of two things:
1. I was looking for footage that would be undeniable that an attack actually took place. I saw plenty of emergency personnel and law enforcement and their vehicles and later a few bodies laying in the street with either a sheet over them or a couple people with blood on them which is not by any means conclusive evidence since we saw bloodied "victims" during the Boston Bombing. Also, we heard the shots in the distance at the concert hall - that could've been faked as well.
2. I listened to hours of Shepard Smith reading as if from a script what different "victims" or "witnesses" were saying as he was being fed information. The coverage as to actual victims speaking just wasn't evident. It seemed so contrived to me. Anyone can write a story line inserting so-called real victims or witnesses. I couldn't help but think that maybe they decided the crisis actors would be better served lying on the ground covered with sheets rather than actually having them talk on camera and risk being exposed as frauds, which has happened with other staged events.
I don't know if anyone was actually killed or this was purely a staged event. What I would like to know is what the people in Paris actually saw, if anything.
A friend of a friend died at the stadium. The deaths were real.
You mean at the concert hall, idiot, there were no deaths at the Stadium, unless your friend of a friend is a suicide bomber. This isn't a hoax, it's either a false flag, or an out of control ISIS doing what it says it is doing.
Does this mean that there isn't any such thing as radical Islamic terrorism? Is it ALL perpetrated by the West, or is some of it "real?"
None of it is real, but these organizations are composed of actually brainwashed 18 year olds, so they can do stupid things sometimes, it's hard to tell.
It is reported that 129 victims died in Paris. And 352 were wounded. People claiming these are all crisis actors should present some evidence to that effect. Because we had a faked 911 does not mean that all muslim terror attacks are faked. Here in Copenhagen we had 2 killed in January. One at the synagoge and the other at a meeting with swedish artist Lars Wilks. I should have attended the last, but I could not attend because my wife had invited guests. Yours, Ole Gerstrom, Copenhagen, Denmark.
OleGerstrom: It may be useful to differentiate between the two distinct psy-ops attacks being thrown at us: “False-Flag attacks” and “Hoax Attacks”.
The author is not saying the November 13, 2015 Paris event was a hoax attack -- a staged event in which the attack is fake and all of the participants are actors, like Sandy Hook. The author writes that Paris was a false-flag attack -- a real attack carried out by the government and blamed on others, like 9/11.
Sure Johnny, we should differentiate. But when the author claims that Paris was false flag, he should produce evidence to that effect. He has not done so. Not one single piece.
Sadly, that's standard practice among the Tin Foil Hat crowd: they don't provide solid evidence for their accusations, they just make the accusations and then claim that it's up to the people who don't believe them to prove them wrong. The whole concept of 'innocent until proven guilty' is lost on them.
There is no innocent regarding ISIS. It is an organization with 0% support in Syria, in Iraq, and in Jordan. It's entirely a creation of outside intelligence agencies and billionaire angel investors. The "Tin Foil Hat crowd" is you, and your stupid friends.
If they had zero support, they wouldn't have been able to recruite ten of thousands of people. Unless, of course, you can prove that all those ISIS fighters are really government employees who are more than happy to blow themselves up.
They didn't "recruit" tens of thousands locally by political persuasion, they coerced thousands of impoverished people to join them with high salary payments in an economically destitute area. They also acquired a bunch of male foreign fighters by giving them the chance to capture and rape women at will. There is nothing religious going on here. There is 0% support for ISIS in Lebanon (it actually polls at zero percent) and Syria likewise, except there is no poll in Syria because nobody can speak freely, and you need to consider those who are directly paid by the organization, and the foreign fighters themselves. The "true believers" consist of a handful of 20 year old kids with AK-47s who are drunk with power. This is not a grassroots organization, or a Muslim organization, it is an out-of-control creation that has been funded from outside, and now controls enough oil-wealth to be self-sustaining.
The doesn't make the Paris attack a false-flag necessarily, as by this point, the self-interest of those in ISIS is to preserve their little fiefdom. But it does mean that the organization has nothing to do with local political choices among Muslims, and everything to do with the choices that your tax dollars support. Nobody in the region would have formed or maintained an ISIS without outside intervention, and the only people who work for them are deluded kids, insane people, or those who only chase after money and power.
An organization with zero percent support can be destroyed just by funding the opposition. The problem is that Assad has only 10% support too, so it is hard to find who to help. The Kurds are the true popular movement in the region, and they have solid Kurdish support, and they fight ISIS back successfully, and they will win if they are funded. But Turkey won't like it, because if they win, they will form a state, with a chunk of Turkey cut out. So Turkey is dithering on ISIS, and there is no excuse for this. The Kurds have been oppressed enough, doesn't the principle of self-determination apply even when it annoys an ally?