Difference between revisions of "2016 Brussels Bombing"
(Sheeple still buying "Muslim suicide bomber" narrative) |
(→Sheeple still buying "Muslim suicide bomber" narrative: Maelbeek station close to EU buildings) |
||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
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 D.C., and which has been under a state of high alert since the [[Mass murder in Paris|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. | 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 D.C., and which has been under a state of high alert since the [[Mass murder in Paris|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. | ||
[[File:Brussels_map.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Zaventem airport not far from [[NATO]] HQ]] | [[File:Brussels_map.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Zaventem airport not far from [[NATO]] HQ]] | ||
+ | [[File:Maelbeek_metro_station.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Maelbeek station close to [[EU]] buildings]] | ||
Take a look at the map of Brussels (right). | Take a look at the map of Brussels (right). | ||
Line 51: | Line 52: | ||
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 [[Ukraine|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, [[Philip M. Breedlove|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. | 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 [[Ukraine|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, [[Philip M. Breedlove|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?'''<ref>[http://www.sott.net/article/315020-Who-is-Bombing-European-Civilians "Who is Bombing European Civilians?"] Sott.net Tuesday, 22 Mar 2016 15:39 UTC</ref> | + | 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?'''<ref>[http://www.sott.net/article/315020-Who-is-Bombing-European-Civilians "Who is Bombing European Civilians?"] Sott.net Tuesday, 22 Mar 2016 15:39 UTC</ref> |
==External links== | ==External links== |
Revision as of 12:39, 24 March 2016
![]() Three Zaventem suspects: two suicide bombers were named as Ibrahim el-Bakraoui (centre) and Najim Laachraoui (right). Third unnamed suspect is on the run. | |
Date | 2016/03/22 |
---|---|
Location | Brussels Airport (Zaventem), Maelbeek metro station, Brussels, Belgium |
Blamed on | ISIS |
Type | • Suicide attack • mass murder • bomb attack |
Deaths | 31 |
Injured (non-fatal) | 230 |
Subpage | •2016 Brussels Bombing/Media manipulation |
Description | A terrorist attack in Brussels involving 3 explosions which reportedly killed more than 30 people and injured hundreds more. Responsibility for the attack was immediately attributed to ISIS by the commercially-controlled media, clearly assuming the sheeple are still buying this "Muslim suicide bomber" Official Narrative |
On the morning of 22 March 2016, three explosions occurred in Belgium: two at Brussels main airport in Zaventem and one at Maelbeek metro station in the centre of Brussels, allegedly carried out by suicide bomber Khalid el-Bakraoui.[1] 31 people were killed and 261 others were injured, resulting in three days of national mourning in Belgium.[2] An assault rifle and a third bomb were found in a search of the airport.
It was the deadliest act of terrorism on Belgian soil and came four months after the Mass murder in Paris.[3]
Contents
Claims of responsibility
The Islamic State are said to have claimed responsibility for the attacks.[4] The claims are based on information emanating from social media, which is hardly a reliable source of information. An unknown self-proclaimed "news agency" (Amaq Agency) - claiming to represent ISIS and whose website has no content dated earlier than 4 March 2016, provided the following report:
Brussels – Amaq Agency: Islamic State fighters carried out a series of bombings with explosive belts and devices on Tuesday, targeting an airport and a central metro station in the center of the Belgian capital Brussels, a country participating in the international coalition against the Islamic State.
Islamic State fighters opened fire inside Zaventem Airport, before several of them detonated their explosive belts, as a martyrdom bomber detonated his explosive belt in the Maalbeek metro station. The attacks resulted in more than 230 dead and wounded.[5]
So, who controls the Amaq Agency site which is hosted on a free account provided by Wordpress? The answer to that question is important because the site appears to be the earliest and primary source of subsequent commercially-controlled media claims of ISIS responsibility for the attacks.
Sheeple still buying "Muslim suicide bomber" narrative
The Pentagon recently designated Russia as the number one threat facing the United States 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 Turkey's President Tayyip Erdogan warning just a few days ago that "there is no reason why the bomb that exploded in Ankara [on 12 March 2016] could not explode in Brussels."
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 D.C., 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.
![](/w/images/thumb/2/27/Brussels_map.jpg/300px-Brussels_map.jpg)
![](/w/images/thumb/8/88/Maelbeek_metro_station.jpg/300px-Maelbeek_metro_station.jpg)
Take a look at the map of Brussels (right).
Note that Zaventem 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, NATO and EU are the two organisations under which the bombing of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria took place.
Something else is perplexing: 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?[6]
External links
- Brussels Bombing: The True Implications of ISIS Links - Tony Cartalucci. Land Destroyer Report 22 March 2016
Related Documents
Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
---|---|---|---|---|
Document:A lesson from Brussels we refuse to learn | article | 24 March 2016 | Jonathan Cook | Commentary on the shortcomings of a Simon Jenkins article on the Mass murder in Brussels |
Document:Brussels Attack: Another Chapter in NATO's Gladio Strategy? | article | 27 March 2016 | Wayne Madsen | Analysis of the 2016 Brussels Bombing from an experienced terror-sceptic. |
Document:Terror Theatre | article | 26 March 2016 | Jay Dyer | Compelling analysis of the nature of the Brussels attacks of 22 March 2016 |
Document:The scariest thing about Brussels is our reaction to it | article | 24 March 2016 | Simon Jenkins | Absurd over-reaction to terrorist attacks in the west in general and the Mass murder in Brussels in particular, is EXACTLY what the those responsible for the attacks want and expect. |
Document:Who is Bombing European Civilians? | article | 22 March 2016 | Sott.net | Sharp questioning of precisely who is responsible for attacks on civilians in Europe |
The Official Culprit
Name | Description |
---|---|
Islamic State | An "Islamic fundamentalist terrorist" organisation which whistleblower Sibel Edmonds links to Operation Gladio/B and succinctly describes as a re-branding of al-Qaeda. |
References
- ↑ "Brussels attacks: el-Bakraoui brothers 'named as suicide bombers'"
- ↑ "Brussels attacks: Latest updates from the BBC"
- ↑ "Brussels attacks: were they revenge for Abdeslam's arrest?"
- ↑ "Brussels attacks: Isis flag and nail bomb found in raid"
- ↑ "Bombings Carried out by Islamic State Fighters Hit Belgium’s Capital Brussels" - Amaq Agency 22 March 2016
- ↑ "Who is Bombing European Civilians?" Sott.net Tuesday, 22 Mar 2016 15:39 UTC