TOPPLING DOMINOES [OPINION]

(Written shortly after the terror attacks in Paris)

Amidst all the horror, I have a very uncomfortable feeling gnawing away at me from

the pit of my stomach. I'm going to voice it, however much I probably shouldn't.

I really wish it wasn't there, but it is. And it struck me as soon I heard of events in

Paris, in the early hours on the 14th. Some would probably say I should be wearing a tinfoil

hat, and others might feel I'm somehow disrespecting the lives lost. I am not, and

anyone who thinks that doesn't know me at all.

The question I must unfortunately ask is, doesn't this all seem rather convenient?

I apologise for how offensive some might find use of that term, but can think of none more

suitable.

To happen exactly when Europe is facing unprecedented migration, and our leaders

are desperately scrambling for an excuse to close the borders, but crucially, without

looking like in-humanitarian monsters?

To happen exactly when would-be totalitarian governments need it most? Just as

left-wing and alternative parties are gaining momentum? Just as the powers-that-be are

seeking to clamp down on our personal freedoms, impose further methods of control,

remove the "undesirables" from society, and perhaps more importantly, the electorate?

Just as they seek to legitimise continued wars and military operations in the Middle East,

fighting an enemy they created in the first place?

What our governments in fact needed more than anything was a catalyst to justify

continued policies of xenophobia. And by God they've got it now. Coincidence number

one.

The rhetoric of a national leader at such a time speaks volumes, and history often

highlights this more astutely. Francois Hollande has already referred to these tragic events

repeatedly as a "declaration of war meriting a merciless response". Wouldn't a message of

peace have been a better example to all? From where I'm sitting, it's pretty clear what kind

of response it will be, and I doubt it will be good news for Muslim people anywhere - not

just in Syria.

Another detail troubling me is the military precision of the attacks, allegedly

committed by ISIS infiltrators with limited resources, yet they were somehow able to

bypass any response from vastly more advanced French security services. Again we're

supposed to just accept that Fred Flintstone can so easily outfox James Bond.

(Coincidence number two.)

As always there are discrepancies in accounts, all the perpetrators have been killed,

and the only alleged surviving conspirators captured were NOT actively involved in the

attacks. So yet again, no one survives to stand trial or offer any account that either

corroborates or disputes the official explanations provided. However, these soulless and

bloodthirsty killers WERE conscientious enough to bring along their passports, so we at

least know which countries to blame. It's odd how often terrorists provide the exact

evidence Western powers require to progress with their pre-dating, pre-conceived plans.

(Coincidence number three.)

There were similar discrepancies and details that didn't add up in the Charlie Hebdo

attacks earlier this year. In fact, the same is true of every notorious terrorist attack in the

past fifteen years, and whereas those who questioned 9/11 were once condemned as

"nutters", now it's widely accepted that the American government lied about many things.

It's just there's no one physically able to hold them to account, or to make them explain

why they lied.

One thing that's often telling to look into when these huge events and tragedies take

place, is what else is going on in the political spectrum that could potentially be being

distracted from. As well as similar attacks in Lebanon and Baghdad in recent days (which

haven't made headlines), it may also be interesting to note that France was due to host the

UN conference for climate change on November 30th: an event that was liable to attract

significant protest and disorder, and posed a big headache for our military/industrial

complex. Eg: the French government was already intent on closing the borders. Closing

them specifically to bar protest however, probably wouldn't poll as well. (Coincidence

number four?)

There is another beneficial side-effect from such tragedy for our governments.

People who were yesterday oppressed and pleading for a better standard of living will now

be terrified, paranoid, and pleading for simple things like more police on street corners.

Fear is undoubtedly the most useful tool that oppressive regimes have at their disposal,

and many citizens might now actively seek for their liberties to be further restricted.

(Coincidence number five: Theresa May will be so disappointed.) Just watch the news

headlines and the media in the next few weeks - they will ram this rejuvenated fear so far

down our throats, we won't be able to breathe without tasting it. As terrible as the Paris

attacks were, more Russian holidaymakers were killed in the alleged Sharm El-Sheikh

bombing of a civilian aircraft recently - but there was no outcry, no tears for innocent

Russian lives, there was no worldwide solidarity, and that's because it was not used by our

media in the same way. Why is that? Because it didn't serve a purpose. (Coincidence

number six.)

"The management of foreign relations appears to be the most susceptible of abuse, of all the trusts committed to a Government, because they can be concealed or disclosed, or disclosed in such parts and at such times as will best suit particular views; and because the body of the people are less capable of judging & are more under the influence of prejudices, on that branch of their affairs, than of any other. Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger real or pretended from abroad." 

- James Madison, writing to Thomas Jefferson in 1798

I am no friend to religion, Islam least of all, but there are two guiding principles in

criminal investigation. Firstly, to acknowledge there is rarely such thing as coincidence, let

alone numerous coincidences piled on top of one another. Secondly, asking the question

"who benefits" will usually lead you to the perpetrators. I ask you, who benefited from this?

I don't really see how ISIS do. They might rejoice in our suffering and loss, but politically

they seem most concerned with overthrowing existing regions of the Middle East and

asserting their own dominion. Actively provoking the West in such a way doesn't aid them.

Instead it will undoubtedly invite a fresh can of whoop-ass and precipitate further military

strikes in the region (which have already started... coincidence number seven), and

probably signal their own destruction. That doesn't make much sense.

Of course, murderers and religious zealots aren't required to make much sense,

and the official explanation is plausible to a certain degree: otherwise there wouldn't be

much point presenting it in the first place. After all, not many people (other than those of us

with "tin-foil hats") generally bother to look more closely and/or question what the media

tells us, so perhaps the finer details simply don't matter?

I really wish I didn't feel the need to ask these questions, or sense something wrong

with this. I genuinely feel guilty they occur to me. I do not claim to know exactly what

happened here, and maybe I am suspecting "false-flag" operations and conspiracies

where there are none? It all seems quite far-fetched after all. However, there's the

problem. To completely deny false-flag operations and/or propaganda exist: to deny even

the possibility that supposedly "righteous" governments would use events and calamity to

their own advantage is (in my opinion) as naive and as stupid as anything we supposed

"conspiracy theorists" can ever be accused of. Such people should maybe open the odd

history book, or perhaps even read Orwell's "1984".

When Hitler told his people (and the world) that communist Jews were responsible

for a "terrorist attack" destroying the Reichstag in 1933, any suggestion he was actually

behind it would have been met with accusations of lunacy, utter contempt, and probably

state execution. Were the Germans collectively gullible and hateful, or were they

collectively manipulated and misinformed? The answer is clearly the latter, and I simply

cannot grasp why most people firmly believe that sort of thing COULD happen less than a

hundred years ago, but not possibly happen today. Particularly when methods of

propaganda and media manipulation are ten times more effectual and prevalent in the 21st

century. Do they honestly believe capitalism eradicated the propensity for evil? More than

ever before in our history, Western governments are in league with faceless banks and

corporate/financial interests, groups that have become unaccountable to our laws and

ethical expectations, and if that wasn't enough, the same groups are secretively seeking

new legislation that will in fact formally remove them from the jurisdiction and procedure of

civil and common law (TTIP). Are these the people we're supposed to trust?

If you're open-minded enough to get past the deliberate mental roadblocks, the next

question is obviously, which events ARE false-flag/propaganda then? By definition they are

designed to not appear so, and to make those who challenge their legitimacy look like

either far-left loonies, or heartless and disrespectful attention-seekers feeding off

controversy - people who like to be "different". It's a very effective form of

social/psychological repression, and it's specifically why I fear reprisal or derision for even

daring to pose these questions.

I understand why older generations and the mainstream "cogs" of our society are so

reluctant to even conceive of such notions. Particularly those who remember the World

Wars, or those whose parents/grandparents lived through them. The very idea that the

democracies they and their forefathers fought and died for could have been hijacked by

immoral corporate elites, and in the process become far more akin to a fascist propaganda

machine they sought to destroy - must be particularly loathsome.

Here's the thing though, belittling and shouting it down doesn't automatically make it

not so.

If I'm wrong, and I'm completely off my rocker, fine, no harm no foul. But if you've

taken the time to read this and it makes some sense, I put it to you to keep an open mind,

and do some research outside the mainstream media outlets. Look outside the

propaganda machine. Take emotion and humanitarian ethos out of it, and look simply at

the chain of events. Realise that the view looks very different when you're tipping the

dominoes, and not one of the little people living underneath them. They are so giant that

unless you peak around the edges, they will obscure everything else.

I truly despair for our world, and only hope something happens to change the

course we're on. Whether I'm (hopefully) barking up the wrong tree or not, we don't seem

to be headed anywhere good.

My thoughts are with the people of France, and the victims of this heinous tragedy.

And all the others too.