Cui bono? – Who benefits from the attacks in Paris?

Sendungstext
herunterladen

PDF (.pdf)

Word (.docx)

23.12.2015 | www.kla.tv/7374

In the wave of terror on 13th of November in Paris, more than 130 people were killed and more than 300 people were injured. The ori-ginator is supposed to be the “Islamic State”. Immediately after the attacks there are many speculations how the Western world should react and act. In this broadcasting we want to answer those speculations from a different side. We want to ask: cui bono? This is a Latin phrase and means: “Who ben-efits from it?” This question wants to give more food for thought and wants to rise ques-tions on the backgrounds of the terror attacks. Cui bono? As the attackers were able to move freely in France and Belgium, being able to coordinate their actions, the call for activities of the secret services and the police will become louder. As a result, there will be inevitably more surveillance in public. But also the internet and telecommunication will be more controlled by secret services and searchers. For security reasons, personal rights like postal privacy, right to integrity of housing or freedom of assembly will be se-verely restricted. Our fear in Europe, that ter-rorists could threaten our lives and strike eve-rywhere serves those circles who want to re-place our national police and military forces by a world police and a world army through excessive demand. They purposefully restrict our freedom of opinion. Ban on meetings and speaking can easily be extended on political dissidents, that means dissenters of all kind. Those have been a thorn in the side of the established media and parties for a long time. We refer to the interview with Geraiod O Colmáin (www.kla.tv/7198). The state of emergency declared by President Hollande can lead to emergency laws which will more and more consolidate a global police state. As the terrorist threat cannot be limited to France, other EU countries would need to follow this example. Cui Bono? As all of the identified attackers had contact to Syria and the IS, it will be of use for all those who want to end the frozen conflict in Syria by military means as soon as possible. Due to the emotionally heated at-mosphere in Paris and the whole world, the readiness for determined military action against the IS in Syria has significantly in-creased. This instrumentalization of fear is already known since the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001 and the wars that were thereby legitimated in Afghanistan and Iraq. Those wars are now generally known as con-trary to the international law and are classified as serious mistakes because firstly, they were started on the base of wrong assertions, secondly they could not stem the international terror and thirdly, they left behind two completely unstable countries. Insofar it is important to pay particular attention so that the mistakes of history are not repeated. Someone who benefits from the people’s fear to justify more wars must be considered a war criminal. Such a war can also have global conse-quences: France is member of the NATO. According to article 5 of the NATO treaty, the so called “mutual defense clause” can be invoked. If one state of this alliance is attacked from the exterior, the other alliance partners have to provide military support to the attacked NATO country. That means: If the mutual defense clause will be invoked, an extension of the war in Syria including ground forces would be a realistic scenario in the fight against the IS. But who would benefit from this new military escalation? We switch to the studio Rottweil. Thank you studio Dresden. Yes, who would benefit from this new military escalation? Some political circles, especially the so-called neo-cons in the USA have since long insisted on the suppression of the IS through ground troops. Why? Since the beginning of the Russian air strikes in September, the Syrian army has gained significant ground and is now encircling rebels. Those mostly known as “moderate” rebels are supported by the USA with much money, instructors and weapons. To avoid these mercenary troops from being crushed by the regular Syrian army, they would have to be evacuated so one could use them again later on, in order to promote the plan of the neocons – which is to overthrow Assad. At this point, the neocons, that means the new-conservatives, reveal themselves as wolves in sheep’s clothing. They are in fact as little conservative as the so-called neo-Nazis have a true national atti-tude. Similar actions have already been carried out by the NATO ally Turkey during the last few weeks and IS fighters were brought to safety from Russian-Syrian attacks. If NATO ground forces would be sent to Syria, this would also serve Turkey. For a few months, the Turkish president Erdogan has been waging a hidden war against the Kurdish organisations PKK and YPG in the north of Syria and Iraq. A broad anti-terror operation of the NATO could be useful for Erdogan to take even tougher actions against the Kurdish militias which he also classifies to be a terror organization. A NATO case of alliance according to Article 5 would enable Erdogan to employ ground forces and to invade the North of Syria. Russia’s president Putin would also appre-ciate a common action against the IS, be-cause he also fears the Islamic State to ex-tend to the Caucasus and Central Asia. His appeal is: “The international community must unite for an effective war against the devil.” The German BILD magazine asked the ques-tion: “After the terror in Paris, do we have to go to war now?” Probably the answer will be: Yes. At the moment, one can only specu-late about the extent of this war. But due to many different interests and obscure military coalitions, the situation is particularly preca-rious. In 1914, one attack in similar confusing constellations was enough to lit the powder keg. The result was World War I. Cui bono? Who benefits from it? In criminolo-gy, this fundamental question serves to find perpretators and backers. Therefore, one last note concerning this matter: In the end, a big war always serves the same big earners who have the politicians of almost every country in their pocket through their economic power: the armaments companies and major banks. In order to buy weapons, war parties need credits. This is basically in the interest of the banks and global rulers. That way, the states are more and more driven into debts and, depending on the course of the war, completely destabilized. As soon as states have lost their ability to act - and the call for a strong, regulating hand becomes louder and louder, the time has come for the global strategists to install once and for all their inhuman New World Order. This plan needs to be brought into the public conscience unequivocally, if we don’t want to end up in a global dictatorship. Therefore, please spread our broadcastings. Goodbye.

from ro. and sl.

Sources/Links: http://www.welt.de/politik/article148844755/Frankreich-mobilisiert-115-000-Sicherheitskraefte.html
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/terror-in-paris/frankreich-usa-fordern-mehr-engagement-gegen-is-terrorismus-13916648.html
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/terror-in-paris/nach-paris-anschlaege-warum-is-auf-kriegserklaerung-wartet-13914393.html
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/11/17/frankreich-verbietet-demonstrationen-bei-klimagipfel-in-paris/
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/11/01/syrien-us-allianz-fliegt-terroristen-aus-um-sie-vor-russen-zu-schuetzen/
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/11/15/anschlaege-von-paris-putin-stellt-die-frage-nach-den-drahtziehern/
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/11/15/terror-offene-grenzen-sind-das-problem-nicht-die-fluechtlinge/
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/11/15/wegen-terror-bundesregierung-stockt-geheimdienste-massiv-auf/
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/11/14/terror-von-paris-putin-ruft-zum-kampf-gegen-den-teufel-auf/
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/11/16/frankreich-aenderung-der-verfassung-um-sonder-massnahmen-durchzusetzen/
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/deatten/nach-den-anschl%C3%A4gen-in-paris-notstand-warum-eigentlich-nicht-13917881.html