It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Charlie Hebdo terror attack likely a false-flag says Israeli investigative journalist

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 02:26 PM
Below is a transcript from yesterday’s Barry Chamish – Kevin Barrett interview. (Chamish’s words are in boldface.) Extracts from the first interview pointing the finger at Netanyahu have been published in We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo! Free Thinkers Question the French 9/11.

Yes, well, at the beginning of this year, in early January, we had a shooting in Paris, at a staff meeting at Charlie Hebdo magazine, which had been going bankrupt while attacking Muslims and to some extent Christians with blasphemous and pornographic images for the past couple of years – and the more it did that the more bankrupt it went, but somebody was keeping it afloat – anyway, that magazine got shot up. A bunch of people got killed, including the editor Charb. And then an orchestrated public relations campaign immediately blossomed. Millions of people marched in France holding identical placards, practically all with the same font, saying “We Are Charlie Hebdo.” It looked like a mind control thing, whether or not it was a false flag....

It would seem that January’s false flag in Paris has backfired.

Though a right-wing, pro-Zionist Israeli, Barry Chamish is known for his fearless exposés of corruption at the top of Israel’s power hierarchy. When someone like Chamish, who hates Netanayahu’s Labor Zionist opponents with a passion, nonetheless singles out Bibi as a suspect in the Charlie Hebdo psy-op / false flag op.

In We Are Not Charlie Hebdo, twenty-one leading public intellectuals refuse the invitation to identify with "Je Suis Charlie." Jews, Muslims, Christians, Protestants, Catholics, atheists, people of the left and right, progressives and traditionalists, people from many different countries and ethnicities – all have united to say "we are NOT Charlie Hebdo." Most suspect the whole affair was a false flag operation or psy-op. (Evidence for that interpretation is presented in the book.)

If you question what governments tell you…if you doubt the
mainstream media version of events…if you are NOT Charlie Hebdo…
then this book is for you.

edit on 10-4-2015 by wasaka because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 02:32 PM
Does it surprise anyone this article comes from Veterans Today? This is hardly proof of any false flag, and just really highlights an interview that (surprise surprise) damns the jews for their (perceived) involvement in the attack.

I've read a lot of Veterans Today. It claims to be a website for "Military Foreign Affairs". But you start digging into site, and you find something else entirely: myriad claims that there was a conspiracy behind 9/11 (Israel orchestrated it, in cahoots with the American government), that the American government is a puppet (of Israel), that the Holocaust never happened or was greatly exaggerated (Jews made it up to manipulate non-Jews), and, more recently, that Julian Assange, the man behind Wikileaks, is a pawn (of Israel).

In short, it does not surprise me that VT would take an anti-isreal stance regarding the Charlie Hebdo attack, given their history.
edit on 10-4-2015 by ScientificRailgun because: Added more.

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 02:39 PM
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Thanks for clarifying that about the source being questionable.

I was beginning to become very disappointed.

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 03:31 PM
AHEM, the sources is a couple of radio interviews
the 1st

veterans today is merely passing it along
just as the OP is doing

“We need to remember the threats of Benjamin Netanyahu, who announced in no uncertain terms that if France recognized the existence of Palestine we would have terrorist attacks in France. He declared to the French people on August 7th, 2014, in an interview with i-Télé: “This is not Israel’s battle. It is your battle, it is France’s battle. It they succeed here, if Israel is criticized instead of the terrorists, if we do not stand in solidarity, this plague of terrorism will come to your country.”
If we do not understand Netanyahu’s statement as a disguised threat, it is absurd, since there is obviously no reason why recognizing Palestine and standing in solidarity with Gaza would provoke Islamist attacks in France. But there is every reason why it would provoke reprisals from Israel. It is at the very least bizarre that this “prediction” or “threat” from Netanyahu—who is leading today’s march—should come true.” Alain Soral, from a talk delivered January 11th, 2015, transcribed and published in the book We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo! Free Thinkers Question the French 9/11
from the VT article

required study for the incredulous:

edit on 10-4-2015 by AdamuBureido because: added comment

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 04:46 PM
a reply to: AdamuBureido

This is bang on!


posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 05:06 PM
I am NOT Charlie Hebdo

Something didn't sit right with me during that whole attack.

I think the video of the man getting shot point blank with fully auto and no blood really did it for me .

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 05:27 PM
I dont know what to think. Its not that false flags dont happen. I just think we are grasping at straws.

The whole "no blood" thing is a bit much. The officer is dead and died that day on video. I have seen the unedited footage several times, the officer was shot dead. I dont know much about guns, though I know its not like hollywood depicts it.

People dont go flying backwards and explode in blood.

Was it a false flag? I dont know. Frankly I havent seen anything credible that would point to it being that.

Until then I am not going to give the benefit of the doubt to terrorists.

Then there is this

edit on 4 10 2015 by tadaman because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 06:19 PM
a reply to: tadaman

I think you need to adjust your settings mate, and get a new set of glasses.

When I watch the original unedited version - short version here there is no way he is shot in the head. Longer videos show no blood anywhere, until the next day when blood was 'put there' - see this video.

I am happy to debate it, but what I see does not appear to be a headshot. Sorry.

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 06:36 PM
a reply to: hmmmbeer

yeah I thought the same. It looks like the shot hit the side walk. I dont think he died from the head shot. He was shot up pretty bad already. I think he just died a little later on. I dont understand the argument for no blood = false flag.

Are people saying he is not dead? was an actor and everyone who knew him was one too? That he was shot up but killed elsewhere?

It doesnt make sense. Is it an inconsistency? maybe. at best a minor one.

I heard people argue that they used blanks. Thats absurd. Either the shot went through his skull and hit the sidewalk or just missed and hit the sidewalk. It was real bullets at any rate.

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 07:00 PM
ScientificRailgun, do you think Einstein was anti-Jewish or anti-Israel for writing his concerns about the zionist parties that continue to rule Israel to this day? Some people fall into trap of failing to distinguish between ruling parties, religions and countries but thats just a matter of education, Personally I don't see the point of Muslums going out their way to bring on more hatred so one should ask themselves who really benefits from Hebdo terror attack.

Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.

Co-signed by Albert Einstein


Note I side with True Torah Jews who's slogan is that the state of Israel does not represent Jews or Judaism
edit on 10 4 2015 by glend because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 07:05 PM
a reply to: tadaman

Well there doesnt seem to be an autopsy for him, and his parents were not allowed to see the body. There is no blood or visible damage to him - he appears to be quite OK using his arms to shield. It really is very odd.

posted on Apr, 10 2015 @ 10:00 PM
Took him long enough to figure out the obvious ...

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 01:10 AM
a reply to: AdamuBureido

You havent actually refuted anything. You think by parroting a bad source that somehow the actual argument is enforced or substantiated in any way? Thats is laughable.

Yes they repeated what was said. THE POINT IS, the information was they are repeating nonsense.

I cant believe you didnt see that. its like you dont even care. You are just trying to take up space with nonsense.

edit on 4 13 2015 by tadaman because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 02:36 AM
a reply to: tadaman

What are you on about??? The OP used VT as a 'source' but it was a 2nd hand source, so even if VT is not 100% trustworthy the original sources are! You are the time/space waster. The information is not bunk. Please retract your comment.

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 03:10 AM
a reply to: wasaka

A few points worth considering about Charlie Hebdo :

- The lawyer of Charlie Hebdo is Richard Malka. Mr 'Freedom-of-speech' in France now ... He is also the lawyer of Prime Minister Valls against comedian Dieudonné, the lawyer of Dominique Strauss-Kahn in the Carlton affair, the lawyer of Clearstream financial company against journalist Denis Robert...
What are his wages as a lawyer ? It's worth knowing since it's the price of freedom of speech in France now, as asked by cartoonist Lindingre from the other french cartoon journal 'Fluide Glacial'.

- The 'Hyper Casher' store changed ownership the day before the attacks : article (article in french)

- Charlie dropped cartoonist Siné for picking the wrong target for a joke : Jews. Since then Charlie is targeting all religious communities but the Jews. Don't bite the hand that feeds ... Who are the stockholders of Charlie Hebdo parent company ?

More details and more examples in this thread :
Why is Charlie Hebdo OK, but not Dieudonné ?


posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 11:30 AM
What is your definition of a false flag? If it is true that international terrorism as a whole has been funded by the side which claims to oppose it, then there is nothing but false flags, even if some operatives act without direct orders they are triggered by propaganda sustained by western powers and enabled by terroists networks again funded and sustained by western powers through allied proxies.

posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 09:05 PM
This is a good compilation of documented facts about the Charlie Hebdo event...

Many many many smoking guns... The biggest one being the suicide of a cop related to the affair later on the same day... Another one is about the handcuffs tying the hands of the black guy who was executed in the Jewish supermarket... Another is the blatant cover up of an accomplice who was identified because he shot someone who survived... and so on...

new topics

top topics


log in