Well Donald Trump is being pilloried by the establishment politicians for speaking truth to power, again. What Donald Trump called for was “a total and complete shutdown” of all federal processes allowing followers of Islam into the country until elected leaders can “figure out what is going on.” In other words, until our totally inept elected leaders, with the most sophisticated surveillance in the world can figure out what’s happening under their noses, close the barn door.
But what if our elected leaders don’t want to know what is going on, or worse yet know what’s going on and it benefits them not to stop these horrific attacks on innocent civilians. It seems as though every time these attacks occur, our elected leaders benefit. What if these attacks are false flags and the alleged perpetrators of the crimes are never taken custody, because dead men don’t talk. Here’s what Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge has to say about the San Bernardino alleged attackers:
San Bernardino Attack Eye-Witness: "Three Tall White Men Did It"
A few interesting details have surfaced regarding Wednesday’s mass shooting dubbed ‘terror attack’ which killed 14 and injured 17 others. One of the most interesting comes from an eyewitness… details from an eyewitness, who came forth on the day of the shooting, may have been overlooked by investigators and suggest that there were actually ‘three white shooters’ instead of the radicalized husband and wife natural-born killer team portrayed in some mainline reports.
The witness, Sally Abdelmageed, worked at Inland Medical Center where the attack took place and saw it all unfold firsthand…
In a phone interview with CBS Abdelmageed explained:
"I heard shots fired and it was from you know an automatic weapon. [...] very unusual. Why would we hear shots? As we looked out the window a second set of shots goes off [...] and we saw a man fall to the floor. Then we just looked and we saw three men dressed in all black, military attire, with vests on they were holding assault rifles. As soon as they opened up the doors to building three [...] one of them [...] started to shoot into the room."
When asked what the gunman that shot into the room looked like the eyewitness replied:
"I couldn’t see a face, he had a black hat on […] black cargo pants, the kind with the big puffy pockets on the side [...] long sleeve shirt [...] gloves [...] huge assault rifle [...] six magazines […] I just saw three dressed exactly the same”.
“You are certain you saw three men,” the newscaster asked Abdelmageed.
“Yes,” said Abdelmageed.
“It looked like their skin color was white. They look like they were athletic build and they appeared to be tall…”
The family’s attorney was interviewed on CNN and expressed the same doubts.
And what was the reaction to the San Bernardino attacks by our elected leader?
“President Barack Obama will make a rare primetime address to the nation Sunday laying out how he will keep Americans safe and defeat the Islamic State group, days after 14 people were shot dead in California,” AFP reports.
The Paris attacks bear similar trademarks to that of the San Bernardino attacks in that the perpetrators of the crime that targeted innocent civilians were killed rather than taken into custody. From Paul Craig Roberts:
Another Paris False Flag Attack? — Paul Craig Roberts
At 7pm on Friday 13th we do not have much information about the “terrorist attacks” in Paris other than that Paris is closed down like Boston was after the “Boston Marathon Bombing,” also a suspected false flag event…
The latest French poll shows that, as a result of the refugees from Washington’s wars, Marine Le Pen has come out on top of the candidates for the next French presidential election.
By supporting for 14 years Washington’s neoconservative wars for US hegemony over the Middle East, establishment European governments eroded their electoral support. European peoples want to be French, German, Dutch, Italian, Hungarian, Czech, British. They do not want their countries to be a diverse Tower of Babel created by millions of refugees from Washington’s wars…
Realizing its vulnerability, it is entirely possible that the French Establishment made a decision to protect its hold on power with a false flag attack that would allow the Establishment to close France’s borders and, thereby, deprive Marine Le Pen of her main political issue…
Considering the Western World’s long tradition of false flag orchestrations, the “terrorist attacks” in Paris could be the most recent manifestation.
President Hollande of France’s popularity was in the shitter on November 12th and how did Hollande respond to the attacks on innocent civilians on December 13th? From the New York Times:
France Strikes ISIS Targets in Syria in Retaliation for Attacks
PARIS — France bombed the Syrian city of Raqqa on Sunday night, its most aggressive strike against the Islamic State group it blames for killing 129 people in a string of terrorist attacks across Paris only two days before.
President François Hollande, who vowed to be “unforgiving with the barbarians” of the Islamic State after the carnage in Paris, decided on the airstrikes in a meeting with his national security team on Saturday, officials said.
While France has been conducting scores of airstrikes against the Islamic State in Iraq, it had been bombing inside Syria only sparingly, wary of inadvertently strengthening the hand of President Bashar al-Assad by killing his enemies...
But after militants with AK-47 rifles and suicide explosives vests shattered the peaceful revelry of Paris on Friday night, killing dozens of civilians in restaurants and at a concert hall, France seemed intent on sending a clear message of its determination to curb the Islamic State and its ability to carry out attacks outside the territory it controls.
And, not to be outdone by Hollande, David Cameron rushed through parliament a vote to join in the carnage taking place in Syria, where bombing has caused massive civilian casualties. From Russia Times:
Will British MPs vote to bomb Syria? Cameron, Corbyn diverge on Paris attack response
Prime Minister David Cameron says he wants Britain to take part in airstrikes against Islamic State in Syria, but still needs to convince MPs to back an intervention. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn meanwhile has warned bombing will not defeat the jihadists.
Cameron said he won’t hold a vote in Parliament on extending UK airstrikes from Iraq into Syria until he can be sure MPs will back it.
The PM told BBC radio if a vote on airstrikes against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) is defeated in the house it could damage Britain’s reputation on the global stage.
France has launched a series of “massive” strikes against IS in its stronghold of Raqqa in northern Syria following Friday’s terror attacks in Paris…
The UK is currently involved in bombing raids against IS targets in Iraq, but Parliament rejected a vote to extend airstrikes to Syria in 2013.
Speaking to the BBC, Cameron said he wants Britain to join a bombing campaign in Syria.
So in the case of the “terrorist” attacks in Paris and San Bernardino the attackers are killed so we don’t know who financed them, who supplied the armament used in the attacks so we kill hundreds of Syrian innocent citizens in bombings for what? From Russia Times:
Why the US, France and Britain are destroying Syria
Since Russia stepped up to the plate, suddenly western countries can’t wait to bomb ISIS. Are they now there to get the job done? Or are they there to stop Russia increasing its influence, and to make sure it doesn’t succeed where they failed?
The world is falling over itself to bomb Syria…. This time the plan – at least judging from the outcomes – is to destroy Syria.
Syria has been anathema to the self-appointed arbiters of righteousness: the ‘international community’, that coterie of hypocrites which arrogates to itself the monopoly on meting out death to those who won’t get with the program.
This group dislikes Syria which has had an uncompromising stance towards Israel and an independent financial system, and is using the chance to destroy it to flood Europe with refugees, thus further debasing the makeup of its constituent nations, and simultaneously justifying a lockdown in those countries.
Everything was going swimmingly until Putin stepped in.
While many in the West who have grown jaundiced at the obvious usurpation of our governments by outside interests ascribe almost saint-like motivations to Putin, I do not. He is a superb strategist. Exactly what he is strategizing for is not clear yet.
What is clear is that his move into Syria threw a spanner in the works of a status quo the US was quite happy with: growing terrorism and mayhem in Syria and spreading nicely to Europe.
Assad himself said a few days ago to the BBC (courtesy of Czech Television) that ISIS was growing smaller after Russian bombing intervention whereas moves by other countries served only to strengthen ISIS and increase their recruitment.
He added: "The facts are telling."
So what do the facts tell?
They tell us that Russia is the only country involved to date which has the removal of ISIS as an actual goal.
Russia is also the only country with a legitimate mandate under international law.
In addition, ISIS WAS most eloquently outed by author and journalist Gearóid Ó Colmáin on Russia Today as A US CREATION…
France and Britain milking the crises
The propaganda war is hotting up, with western press issuing unsubstantiated and emotional surmise as news.
Meanwhile, the French and the British are now, of course, bombing Syria.
At home, the French government not only voted to bomb but enacted ‘emergency’ powers at the same time. And Holland wants to change the constitution to extend these powers.
The Telegraph states: “The draft “Protection of the Nation” bill […] would extend the right to strip French citizenship from dual nationals convicted of terrorism offences by also including people born in France….
And a man no less respected than Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, formerly Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, has raised legitimate questions about the official line on the Paris attacks.
The same event, of course, justifies France’s bombing of Syria.
The British government for its part – despite some theatrical hand-wringing – has got on the bandwagon and opted to join in whatever further criminality the US has planned in Syria.
As though to justify the decision, the Telegraph breathlessly informs us that ISIS (or ISIL as it calls it) is planning to attack the UK “next”.
It says: “There are unconfirmed reports that Isil has decided that the next target of an attack will be Britain…
In short: the ruling elite wants this war. Our pretend governments voted it through on the nod. And we the people will have to deal with the fallout and put up with random terrorist acts if we wake up and speak out about how this charade is rigged.
At the same time, the people of Syria are subject to bombing raids by the US, France and the UK – none of which have any invitation from the legitimate government of that country – actions which, properly speaking, are acts of war against the country the perpetrators claim to want to help.
So British intelligence tells their elected leaders that ISIS’ next target is the UK. So what is Cameron and his cohorts doing to protect the UK’s citizens from ISIS’ next terror attack? Why they’re planning to ban Donald Trump from entering Britain. From CNN:
London (CNN) A petition calling for Donald Trump to be banned from entering the UK has attracted more than a quarter of a million signatures -- more than enough for a committee to consider sending the motion for parliamentary debate.
The petition to block the front-running Republican presidential candidate from entering the country was created on the British government's official petitions website in response to Trump's call Monday to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. due to the threat of terrorism.
Ha, ha screw them Donald, you’re in good company. Radio personality, Dr. Michael Savage has also been banned in Britain for hate speech.
Donald J. Trump was the first to recognize the hypocrisy of the elected leaders condemning Russian President Vladimir Putin for actually bombing ISIS. Donald J. Trump said let Putin take care of ISIS in Syria. Now this genius named Trump is saying, stop all Muslims from entering the United States until our elected leaders can get their heads out of their asses and figure out who is who.
Our elected leaders have said repeatedly that “radicalized” Muslims want to kill us. “Radicalized Muslims” hate America, and yet they have done nothing to stop terror attacks. Now these same leaders are attacking Donald J. Trump because if they stop all Muslims from entering the U.S. they will lose their scapegoats.
Our elected leaders want Trump out of the Presidential race, the establishment GOP think Trump supporters will flock to Rubio or Cruz or Jebby Bush to protect them from radicalized Muslims and dump Trump. They are wrong, if there is one thing the voters do not want, it is more of the same.
Newsmax is reporting that according to a Bloomberg poll Trump’s ban on Muslims entering the U.S. until we can properly vet them has overwhelming support from likely Republican voters.
Support for Trump's proposal remains virtually unchanged even after voters are told both sides of the argument. On one side, they were told that “leaders from across the political spectrum have condemned this policy” as one that will make the U.S. “less safe by alienating the allies we need to fight ISIS.” They were also told that Trump has said it is needed until more is known about the threat and that the nation "cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in jihad."
When voters were provided with this additional information, support for the proposal remains essentially unchanged, with 64 percent of likely Republican primary voters saying they favor the idea. That includes 52 percent who say they strongly support the proposal.
And that is the genius of Donald Trump, false flags and dead men don’t talk.
By Patricia Baeten