Home War/ Terror “Brothers in Arms”

“Brothers in Arms”


April 15, 2013 – Boston Marathon bombing. 3 people killed.

January 7, 2015 – Charlie Hebdo attack, Paris. 12 people killed.

November 13, 2015 – Paris staduim attacks. 129 killed.

We have a brothers problem.

tsarev brothers1Tamerlan and Dzhokar Tsarnaev – Boston.

paris brothersSaïd Kouachi, his brother Chérif Kouachi – Paris.

In my article, “The Bizarre Actions of the ‘Kouachi brothers,” I question whether the Charlie Hebdo assassins were in fact the Kouchi brothers.

And now we have another set of brothers in Paris – the Abdeslam brothers.

paris brothers Salah Abdeslam (26) and Brahim Abdeslam (31)

Allegedly, Brahim blew himself up at the Comptoir Voltaire in the French capital, a cafe close to the Bataclan concert hall, and brother Salah is “still on the run.” A  third brother, Mohammed, has fronted the media, claiming he was not involved. Salah, now the most wanted man in Europe, apparently told a friend (an unverified source) in Brussels that the attack had gone too far and that he regretted his part in the atrocity. Amazing.

The Mayor of Molenbeek, Francoise Schepmans, says the brothers were “not social rejects…  They were boys who had an education, who were given work – a family who were given housing and despite all that they fell into radicalism, into terrorism.”

Reports indicate that Belgium police questioned the two brothers – exactly when has not been revealed – but both were released because they didn’t appear to represent any threat, and the French authorities were not informed!

Interestingly, the Tsarnaev and the Kouachi brothers were known to police.

There are more brothers:

Abdelhamid Abaaoud and YounesAbdelhamid Abaaoud and his 13 year-old brother Younes.

Abdelhamid, the alleged “mastermind” behind the Paris terror attacks, had persuaded his 13-year-old brother to travel to Syria to be recruited by ISIS. The MSM reports that Abdelhamid was killed in a police raid in the Paris suburb of St-Denis on Wednesday 19 November – six days after the attacks. He was the head of a terrorist cell in Verviers that was dismantled by Belgian police in January 2014, and was sentenced, in abstentia, to 20 years — along with 32 other jihadists.

“Brothers in Arms” is the title of a 1985 song by Dire Straits’. These are some of the lyrics:

“…Through these fields of destruction
Baptisms of fire
I’ve witnessed your suffering
As the battle reached higher
And though they did hurt me so bad
In the fear and alarm
You did not desert me
My brothers in arms…

…We are fools to make war
On our brothers in arms”

So who is making war? It has already been demonstrated in many ways that the Boston brothers were not the perpetrators of the Marathon bombing. One bro was killed in custody; the other is on Death Row.

Regarding the very well-shared drama of the Charlie Hebdo shootings ten months ago, how would we know who did it?  After the hooded “assassins” escaped and disappeared (leaving an ID card). A day later the “suspects” – brothers Said and Cherif Kouachi – surfaced without hoods to steal water and petrol. They were then hunted down and were shot dead by police, in a warehouse. (Any reason not to just smoke them out?)

We might have learned more about the Charlie Hebdo “event”, but Helric Fredou, the police commissioner who was investigating the Charlie attack, committed “suicide” in his office. (No investigation required?)

Our Gumshoe writer Mary W Maxwell holds that the creators of these “terrorist” psy-ops are now deliberately choosing brothers. The reason, she says, is that the public is able to automatically understand that family members will act together. They become a formidable team. And in the Boston case, the story was expanded to say that the big brother took the little one (Jahar) under his wing and schooled him in religion – and bombs, of course.


State of Emergency

Now France is under a nationwide state of emergency. The last time this happened was in 1961 when army generals attempted a coup d’état during the Algerian war. On Monday the government might extend the powers for several months.

This means that exceptional powers are given to authorities – including the right to: set curfews, limit the movement of people, forbid mass gatherings, establish secure zones, monitor and close public spaces, and it can also allow for controls to be imposed on the media.

But the media are controlled anyway.

Powers are given to the security services and police to act without judicial oversight. This reminds me of the the states of emergency back in South Africa.

Below is Mary explaining that since “Bataclan,” we, in Australia, live in a police state:


    • Dear Fredrick,
      I sampled the first and second of your links.
      I don’t see any background given for the author, Mike King. What is Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba?

      Now I will attempt a rebuttal to his theory that if ISIS hits almost every nation (even Norway with a beheading or two) but never strikes Israel, then ISIS is “of” Israel. I do understand that ISIS is a western creation, and I’ve seen reports (undocumented but which I take to be accurate) that wounded ISIS soldiers are cared for in Israeli hospitals. Nevertheless, I offer this alternative view:

      Let’s say I am the baddy and I am not Israel. But I want everyone to think Israel is the baddy. Wouldn’t it be smart for me to do just what Mike King describes? I allow my ISIS boys to hit every nation except Israel. This will “prove” that Israel is the instigator of the attacks.

      Mae Brussell noted, soon after Jack Ruby killed Lee Harvey Oswald, that Jack Ruby had been chosen for that assignment, by non-Jews, because he had a Jewish name. I forget how she heard about that from an insider, but it sounded completely sensible to me.

      Elias Davidsson (who is an outstanding protector of both Muslims and Jews – a rare feat) has even gone so far as to hypothesize that Larry Silverstein could have been chosen to play a big part in 9-11 because his name is not “O’Malley.”

      I am not saying here that Davidsson refuses to believe that 9-11 is “Jewish.” I’m saying he makes a logical case as to how the finger can be pointed cleverly. And I know how you love logic, Fredrick, as you have lectured me in my living room on that topic a few times.

      (Note: I can’t go along with Elias’s using sarcastic quotes when he says Larry ‘admitted’ to pulling Building 7. I say Larry ADMITTED to pulling it.)

      As for the second link you provided, again the Hecuba question about the person who did that fab job of putting together the pictorial dichotomy. It is compelling to see Neocons on one side, BRICS on t’other. Personally I don’t like to get my persuasion via visuals, but never mind that. Is it a picture of reality?

      Truly I have an open mind on this. But so far I’m sticking with my understanding of the world, that one set of Bozos is organizing the whole thing. Not two sets. If two sets, why wouldn’t they have knifed each other, not to mention droned each other? Did you see the photo of Obongo and Putin sitting practically knee-to-knee at the G20?

      Mainly I can’t believe Russia is the enemy of America, as I am still smarting from finding out that the Cold War was faked. I feel that if my Dad had known that, he could have forged ahead with some new thoughts but oh no, we were all firm in the belief that avoiding a nuclear clash with Khrushchev was top priority. Waste of friggin’ time, that was. So yes, my view is prejudiced by my personal history. (Whose isn’t?)

      Still, as I said, I am still educable. Pray tell, is David Rockefeller playing both sides of the Neocon-BRICS match? Have you read, in my Prosecution for Treason, about the gift Rocky got from China during Commie rule? To repeat, I say there is only one organizer of ALL the activity. Not two.

      And I claim it must have started at least as early as 1796, as that is when Edward Jenner “fired the first shot.”

  1. http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/11/16/globalist-racketeering-gearoid-o-colmain-reveals-the-deep-state-agenda-behind-the-paris-attacks/
    also no coincidence that Friday the 13th (9-11?) a trifecta of ‘wag the dog’ was in full swing. The Boston bombing innocent kid Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s hearing set for Dec. 1st for 2 things – a new trial and restitution for ‘victims’. and a lady admitted guilt for lying and larceny about being a BMB false ‘victim’, was sentenced in MA court (now on court file) receiving $80-90K in restitution, and of course, the ‘refresh’ of terror in Paris to have that influence Dzhokhar’s Tsarnaev’s court appearance, plus a ‘neat and tidy’ intro to G20 2 days later. Mary, to your knowledge legally, if even one ‘victim’ is found, charged and convicted of being false, doesn’t it behoove the court to investigate whether others were also false ‘victims’? then the court circus could begin to unravel the truth by flushing out all the crisis actors, Craft participation and much, much more?

    • Dear Jana
      Re “doesn’t it behhove the court to investigate…”
      As far as I know, in America a court does not invesigate. A court adjudicates.
      Re friday the 13th, what is the trifecta to which you refer?

      P.S. if you had to bet right now on whether Jahar wil fry, what would you bet?

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion