Dubbed and edited to outrage Muslims.
In July 2012, clips of the anti-Islam film on YouTube had barely been noticed. The film was made by the shady ‘Sam Bacile’ and ‘Alan Roberts’ (bogus names) on a fabricated $5 million budget. An actress involved had said there was nothing controversial during the shoot, and the (Mohammed) character was called ‘Master George’, but then the film was purposely dubbed and edited to elicit maximum outrage from Muslims.
On around the 8th of September 2012, the film’s name was changed (by NewsPoliticsNow channel) to The Innocence of Muslims – a channel connected to a US government contractor Stanley Inc. – and the film was then ‘fed’ to Egyptian television. Fury erupted.
Angry crowds in Cairo protest the film by burning the US flag.
The Muslim World in Fury – 2012
The film was subsequently blamed for the brutal deaths of U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other American officials on September 11, 2012 in Benghazi. This too was a fabrication. The 14 minute farce of a film, and the mainstream media’s promotion of enraged Muslims, shielded the true reasons behind the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens. Benghazi was about a cover up over arms transfer to al-Qaeda – and the war against Syria’s President al-Assad.
Doug Hagmann, after 18 months of investigation, writes that the Benghazi video can be directly tied to a covert intelligence operation and operational assets of the U.S. Department of Justice. If so, was the film created, or just conveniently used, to inflame the Muslim world? It certainly inflamed Western perceptions of a hostile Arab people.
What an extraordinary outcome. How can a no-budget film create such mayhem – or perceived mayhem in the Arab world? In the West the film was hardly a blip (except for poor Ambassador Stevens).
Charlie Hebdo – Paris
The irreverent and satirical weekly French magazine has a circulation of around 50,000 to 60,000.
In 2011 the office was fire-bombed and the website was hacked (website hacked??). The attacks were presumed to be linked to its decision to rename a special edition “Charia Hebdo”, with Muhammad listed as the “editor-in-chief”.
Then in September 2012, the newspaper published a series of satirical cartoons of Muhammad, as a response to the above mentioned anti-Islamic film The Innocence of Muslims. Riot police were stationed at the offices, and the Foreign Minister criticised the magazine, saying “Is it really sensible or intelligent to pour oil on the fire?”.
Flash forward – 2015. The brutal murder of the magazine’s cartoonists divide the world once again. You need so little to cause chaos or promote mayhem. Assassinate a number of cartoonists and you have a religious war of words.
The West then protest like they have never protested before – in the MILLIONS. Leaders and dignitaries, too, flocked to the streets of Paris for their separate photo opportunity and to partake in the ‘free speech’ hysteria, that the “I am Charlie” (Je Suis Charlie) ‘campaign’ created.
Meanwhile, it took the Muslim world a little more time to gear up their ‘campaigns’ and anti-Charlie hysteria – with “I am Muslim” (Je Suis Muslim) – and their demand to end offensive content.
The mainstream media almost direct ‘us’ and encourage this division – and the world reacts.
Déjà vu – Muslim Fury, 2015
Plus many more countries. And now we have Nasr al-Ansi — allegedly a top commander of Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) — appear in an 11-minute Internet video saying the massacre at Charlie Hebdo was in “vengeance for the prophet.”
Nasr al-Ansi looks like he’s ready to step onto the CIA movie set of Arabian Nights – but as many commentators claim – he is one of their actors anyway.
Like the ‘Innocence’ film, these Paris ‘terrorists’ too have odd ties to Anglo-American intelligence. As globalresearch reports, Anwar al-Awlaki – who allegedly financed the Kouachi brothers – was linked to several terrorist attacks and was a guest at a Pentagon in the months after 9/11 (as part of an ‘outreach program’).
Financed – But NO Petty Cash
The media focus is on the distraction of free speech – but to me the big problem is that the mainstream media don’t bother to question whether the hooded highly professional assassination duo on January 7 were also the UN-HOODED brothers acting as petty thieves at the petrol station on January 8. Well obviously (the late) Anwar al-Awlaki (who financed them) failed to give them enough petty cash for their escape.
There are several options: It could have been a (foreign) false flag attack to bring the (independent) French back in line (with NATO’s agenda). It could be about the militarisation and bringing in new laws to a free thinking powerful nation as France. It could be just another attack to bolster the destruction of the Middle East (as per Ret. General Wesley Clarke’s revelation of the Neocon plan to eventually destroy Iran). I just don’t know. But these could have been achieved with a car bomb and a charred passport.
Or – as reported – it could also be al-Qaeda out to get “vengeance for the prophet. This could have been more easily achieved with a car bomb outside the magazine’s office. Why the bucket list of specific names?
The tragic attack on the Charlie Hebdo magazine seems more like a new style “terror publicity stunt”.
Problem – Reaction – Solution
Over the past decade or more, the typical false flag has created a terrorist problem. The reaction of governments has been to bolster legislation and surveillance – making us safer, thus creating the solution. This has entrenched the status quo power structure.
But now mainstream media is struggling against the free flowing internet to contain the truth of the 9/11 style events (that are essentially about resource plunder), and those in control also understand that the people are becoming savvy about excessive surveillance and increased militarization (to keep us safe). And as technology advances, we face a future world where there will be more unemployment – and more disenfranchised people are going to have more time on their hands…. to think. Thus, the war to control the minds of the people has to be more sophisticated.
A Make Believe Solution
Why target fringe satirists and cartoonists? It is non-political and all-political. It is neither left nor right.
And so the leaders flocked in – from alleged ‘war criminals’ to mayors. But why the photo opportunity?
Charlie Hebdo has (safely) created a notion that governments, leaders and the mainstream media everywhere are worried about free speech for the people. And this has created a belief that we are in a democratic world. This photo op was proof we live in a democratic world (the solution). The magazine has now printed 7 million – up from 60,000 – magazines, so we must be living in ‘freedom’. But we DON’T live in democracies. We live in a crony capitalist system heading towards collectivism. (Update – and fascism)
I think Charlie Hebdo has distracted us – and made us BELIEVE we live in a democracy – and our minds are battling a new form of media militarization.
We need to wake up – and take on the other sign from Paris “Not Afraid” – and use what free speech is left to expose the crimes of governments – so that humanity can guide itself to a better future.