13/11 Paris Massacre: Cui Bono?
By Oriental Review
Global Research, November 15, 2015
Yesterday night things changed in an instant in Paris. The available evidence suggest that the assaults were carried out by a professional killer group who used live bombs among other weapons. Todays post by Pepe Escobar on his Facebook page sheds some light on symbolism and timimg of the massacre:
Scouring a ton of reports, I found a Danish citizen describing one of the attackers to a Paris café; ultra-pro, black-clad head to toe, AK-47, very well trained. These are not your usual al-Zawahiri underwear bombers; these are precision killers. This one left the scene undisturbed, and contrary to French police, may not have been captured. He wore no suicide vest.
French intel swears they are monitoring at least 200 nationals who came back from Syraq. Talk about a lousy job. Paris is hyper-policed. The mind boggles thinking of at least 8 jihadis promenading at will on a Friday night dressed as pro killers.
They picked a mix of heavily symbolic venues. You have a France-German match witnessed by the President in a stadium where all barriers ethnic, religious dissolve, a true symbol of multiculturalism. You have a gig by an American band in a concert hall filled with young people. You have your average, cool, neighborhood cafés in the 10eme and 11eme, young, hip, secular, bobo Paris hoods.
This points to a calibrated conceptual spectrum carefully mapped out by French insiders; perhaps those Syraq returnees. This also points to a monumental fail by French intel and the Ministry of Interior.
Timing: crucial. Just as the US/Brits announce they may have evaporated with Jihad John. And a few hours before the Vienna talks are supposed to come up with an official Top Ten terrorist list in Syria.
As always, the honest response to the question cui bono might be the last (and perhaps major) victim of the 13/11 tragedy in Paris.
Several strong voices in favor of internal false flag version have already appeared, while the weak French government and secret services totally relying on American partners are hardly possessing enough resources to orchestrate the drama of such scale.
The underline reading of the hot-caked Stratfor report on the Paris attacks (certainly presuming undoubtful and entire Islamic State involment) suggests that the American neocons want to see a bigger French boot on the ground in Syraq. (More elaboration on NATOs mobilization as a result of 13/11 is done by Patrick Henningsen from 21st Century Wire .) They were also not satisfied by the French resilence to fully tumble into the pan-European refugee turmoil and general public indifference to anti-Islamic provocateurs from Charlie Hebdo. The only side effect bothering Stratfor analysts is the apparent rise of Marine Le Pen which, according to them, should be nipped by setting Nikolas Sarkozy at the same electoral field.
As a matter of fact, the bloody night in Paris was launched to definitely bury the European project as it was originally seen in Paris and Berlin economically powerful and politically sovereign concert of nations. The symbolism of attacks initiation near Stad du France during the France-Germany friendly match is obvious. We will not be surprised if the French investigation of the attack would discover a clear German trace of the perpetrators. The rules of the genre demand such storyline.
Very few in Europe are still taking seriously the immutable fact that the European Union allied with the Eurasian resourse base is even a bigger nightmare for the Wall Street owners than the established Russia-China alliance (please read more on the issue in our yesterdays update Grandmaster Putins Trap-2). The incumbent Wall Street-controlled EU bureaucracy is rapidly loosing not only public support in the European countries (it is mauvais ton in Brussels to raise this question for long already), but of the local business elites and other power groups. Replacement of the old EU bureacracy by new representatives who would take the way of sovereignization of Europe was at the public request in the continent and seriously challenged the transatlantic partnership (didnt you forget French trade minister Matthias Fekl threat to quit TTP talks last month?). Reinforcing the latter was the urgent task of the Wall Street political stooges on both sides of the ocean. Once the Ukrainian project factually failed and due to the notable shift in French approach towards the European Eastern policy, a foundation of the new transatlantic concensus was desperately needed. Black banner nearby Eiffel was virtually hoisted on the screens to disguide people from much more acute issues: what is the real agenda behind destabilization of the Middle East and where do the European interests rest in this regard?
So cui bono from this attack? Pour quel profit, France?
The original source of this article is Oriental Review