Exquisite timing around yet another general election marks the latest ‘terrorist’ attack in Paris, writes Pam Barker
Pam Barker | Director of the TLB Europe Reloaded Project
As predicted, the dominant narrative of the Establishment – that we are constantly under terrorist threat, that we need to maintain tight security at all times – got reestablished last night as a radicalized shooter killed one policeman on the iconic Champs Elysées and wounded another, plus a tourist, around 9pm. He was killed in turn. We now have MSM images of the famous Paris landmark closed under flashing lights of police cars. The heart of Paris no less has been attacked, a symbol of the French state killed, according to the psychological conditioning of the situation.
Three days ago, it was declared that two radicalized young men belonging to ISIS, who were planning an ‘imminent’ terrorist attack on right-wing presidential candidate Francois Fillon, had been arrested in Marseille before getting the opportunity to enact their plans. Fillon has been determined to be the most vulnerable of the presidential candidates to terrorist attack. Hence, we’re being treated to propaganda MSM views of polling stations having extraordinary security measures applied. The new minister of the interior, Matthias Fekl has promised deployment of another 50,000 police and soldiers during each round (there are two – April 23 and May 7) of the presidential elections.
According to an RT report published this morning, President François Hollande declared at 11:30pm last night that he was ‘convinced’ the Champs Elysées shooting was a terrorist attack, and then ISIS obliged him by publishing their responsibility for it. Thirty-nine year old Karim Cheurfi (pictured), renamed Abu Yousif al-Belgiki by ISIS, was the perpetrator, well-known as an extremist by French authorities for having attempted to murder police, for which he was arrested in 2001 and released early in 2016. Not exactly a piece of personal identification conveniently placed in the pocket, which European terrorists seem famous for carrying when they expect to get killed, but the car he was driving at the time of the attack was registered in his name.
BFMTV continuous news coverage just ran the ticker quote “rien ne doit entraver l’election” (nothing must stop the election), as if we are facing the fight of our lives just to be able to drop our ballot paper in the box on Sunday. Voting, the exercise of democracy, has become no less than a heroic act. Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve has been on TV giving the official rallying cry of the oppressed using phrases like “our enemies”, “our security”, “unity is needed more than ever”, &etc.
French law forbids the candidates from campaigning 48 hours before the vote, which means that they are required to disappear off our screens by tonight. (Reporting of polls had to stop last night.) That is to say, the timing of the attack has permitted 24 hours of candidate response, and has indeed obliged the main candidates to respond in an appropriate way. Has it manipulated their response?
The precise details of the attack are still being determined, of course, as police conduct a number of investigations, so the MSM is going to be fully distracted with this reporting for the rest of today and tomorrow (Saturday) until Sunday’s vote. Tight but perfect timing.
And timing is really everything – timing around elections. I maintained in another article that the likely orchestrated string of March ‘terror’ attacks (letter bombs in Berlin and Paris, a high school shooting in the south of France, the attack on police by a local ‘terrorist’ at Orly airport (pictured), followed by the attack on police at the Houses of Parliament in London several days later) began exactly on the day that Geert Wilders’ party and other eurosceptic ones took a significant number of seats in the Netherlands general election, and five weeks before the first round of the French presidential elections this Sunday. There was no time for our media to react to the anti-EU tone of the Dutch election. Our attention was wrenched away, re-conditioned around the terrorist-security-state of emergency narrative.
As for our candidates this morning, Marine Le Pen reacted with a predictably vehement speech (as she did following the March attacks), calling for the restoration of national borders and vowing to deport suspects who are deemed a threat to national security, of the ‘fiche S’ category. Fillon is also hardening his tone against ‘Islamic terrorism’ and ‘Islamic ideology’ saying he’s ready to take on the challenge posed by terrorists. It took until 12:30pm to hear from Emmanuel Macron, whose agenda à la Merkel calls for open borders. In a very wooden, rather uncomfortable speech lacking the conviction and animation of Le Pen, he asserted a commitment to enacting a variety of security measures. Media coverage then cut him off in mid-stream in expectation of a response, the second of the day, by PM Bernard Cazeneuve (pictured).
In a remarkable speech at 12:50pm, he came out expressly to criticize Marine Le Pen’s and Francois Fillon’s responses to the attack while attempting to defend his own government’s conduct through the series of false flag attacks since 2015. But Le Pen was the real target of his attack, whom he accused in essence of lying, hypocrisy and of exploiting the attack to create fear and division, and score political points. Such high-level political intervention in a campaign is usually unheard of, so Le Pen must be really worrying the establishment.
Haaretz this morning reaffirmed the notion that Le Pen, one of the favorites in the presidential race that the Establishment certainly does NOT want to see elected (see the French freemasons’ recent response against her here), is the candidate once again most likely to benefit from the attack. She has certainly been afforded a useful opportunity at the very last minute, just as she was a month ago.
It’s hard to know if Le Pen IS the huge threat she appears to be because these attacks do indeed serve her agenda giving her the perfect opportunity to vilify immigration, Muslims, open borders, the EU, etc. against the globalists who want more EU and more immigration. Yet clearly the reactions of the freemasons and the French PM also suggest that they’re trying hard to neutralize this advantage. It’s rather like the constant questioning that takes place around Trump in the independent media: is he really an enemy of the globalists, neoconservatives and Israel, etc., or is he somehow part of the game on an entirely different level? Le Pen does generally play into the pro-zionist, anti-Muslim agenda, so the question remains somewhat open to me. But we can be too devious in our analyses.
The first round of the French presidential elections takes place this Sunday.