MEN (AND EVEN WOMEN ) IN BLACK – and in flak jackets at a bloody scene that was not anticipated? And you tell me this was a terrorist act? Unless, of course, if for “terrorists” you enjoin that I read “Illuminati mercenaries”.
Patsies, dupes and useful idiots; professional executioners; privatised command structure; and controlled corporate media – the Paris mayhem had all the key aspects of the successful execution of a false flag terror operation
The Charlie Hebdo siege was not a prolonged, grandstanding affair. It lasted less than a minute, 40 seconds to be precise. This included the “street side” horror – the make-believe killing of the “Muslim” policeman. The whole incident took place practically in a flash. Yet in that twinkling of an eye, we had a man who was lounging in the comfort of his apartment couch record on video a “graphic” portion of the whole grisly affair. And not only that: there was another party, as yet unnamed, who filmed related developments on the street (see accompanying pictures) from some rooftop perch.
The party that was filming from the rooftops not only trained their cameras, or mobile phones so went the spin, on the street below but on the concrete rooftop itself as well. What did we see? We saw a frenzy of activity on the rooftop, of a cast of about 8 to 10, similarly-clad people who were moving helter-skelter in an apparently choreographed manner that suggested advance drilling. Even more curious, at least two of these people were spotting body armour – bullet-proof vests. The video even shows one such man ducking and diving for feigned cover.
Meanwhile, amid all this agitated activity, one guy is busy texting on his mobile phone in a cool, calm, and collected manner to report to the command structure – the shadowy elements of the whole scheme who were the instigator and bankroller.
There were yet more bizarre happenings. Down on the street, three policemen heave in sight. None of them engages the two gunmen in a fire fight but all move right in their direction as if to somewhat reinforce them. The two gunmen do not fire at the police either but are busy chanting “Alahu Akbar!”, “Alahu Akbar”, in a outlandishly overdone, obviously impressionistic manner. Moments later, the gun men encounter a police car as they round a bend.
They are seen to be unleashing volleys of lead at the car, which frantically reverses in retreat and speeds away. What is stranger than fiction is that the windscreen shows no cracks from this barrage of AK 47 fire and none of the policemen in the car sustains injuries.
Yet the shooters are expert marksmen who so efficiently dispatched 12 people only a while ago! Firing at such close quarters, they inflict not a single casualty nor occasion the slightest dent to the car. This is a classic Hollywood set superimposed on a real life precincts.
But there is more. The video was not shot in a rash, amateurish way and by terrified witnesses cowering on a roof above the scene: it had been skillfully touched up, with intermittent splicing in of scenes which are unrelated and are not sequential. At one stage, two totally different scenes, the rooftop scenario and the street take, appear in the same frame! Even a wholly visually impaired Stevie Wonder would tell without strain that what we saw on the videos were not live events but movie-style drills recorded in advance.
There is simply no way the videos would have been shot from several vantage points, from perfect angles, and with the acoustics of the shootings so loud one gets the impression the people who were filming stood right beside the attackers to crisply catch the sound bites.
That the 15 seconds-long video itself was even shown to us (through France24 TV: you can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUuYSft1fOw) was simply in mockery of mankind – that we guys are so dumb we cannot even see a clear-cut situation of the Illuminati playing Hollywood on us! For as long as we remain in wilful Cimmerian darkness, the Reptilians will always have a field day on a planet we call our own.
FRENCH SECURITY SEEMINGLY INDIFERRENT There are still other anomalies about the Paris attacks that bolster the case of a false flag operation. The Charlie Hebdo shootings happened on Richard Lenoir Boulevard. This is not an obscure backstreet. It is a buzzing-busy street, with double lanes in either direction, with 5 to 6-floor buildings bearing down on it. It is therefore odd that on that January 7 morning, it was practically devoid of traffic, as though it had been tactfully cordoned off by accomplice police. The traffic seemed to have vanished into thin air on a street where cars move bumper to bumper virtually round the clock.
Typically, when a red-flag event like this occurs, maybe a dozen police vehicles will be scrambled, with high-pitched sirens wailing away non-stop. In the Charlie Hebdo incident, the first to be deployed were bicycle-mounted cops. When the SWAT vehicles at long last turned up, they were no more than two! It is also intriguing that all the men who responded spotted French Foreign Legion haircuts, which is far from a hallmark of ambulance drivers and emergency medical technicians.
There is also this other aspect the international media has almost totally neglected to highlight, or simply purposefully shielded – that the attacks did not exactly catch the French authorities off-guard. At about 11:00 a.m the previous day, the Algerian government had tipped them off on an imminent “major terrorist operation on French territory”.
That the Algerian government did have some smattering about the planned massacre need not raise eyebrows: the Kouachi brothers were French nationals of Algerian origins and the Buttes-Chaumont jihadist recruitment cell, to which the brothers belonged, in the main comprised of Franco-Algerians. Having been so timeously warned, why didn’t the French government issue a nationwide alert 24 hours before the Charlie Hebdo carnage took place?
WHY WAS SURVEILLANCE CALLED OFF? The Kouachi brothers were not come-from-nowhere mischief-makers. They were very well-known to the British, French, and US security services. In point of fact, they had been under surveillance for a very long time. They had been on a British watch list for the last four years with a view to prevent them from entering the UK or transiting through a UK airport.
In the US, they had been logged on a database of known or suspected international terrorists, called TIDE (Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment system), and also appeared on the famous No-Fly List. Cherif Kouachi for one was expressly forbidden from venturing outside France’s borders after it emerged that he had travelled to Yemen in 2011 reportedly to hone his skills in the handling of weapons.
For men with extensive links to jihadist groups as the Kouachi brothers were, the all-seeing eye of the law should have focused on them like a search light. Yet in December 2013, DGSI, the French equivalent of FBI, mysteriously suspended wiretaps and any other such surveillance of the two brothers. Reason? “Because there were other priorities”, said a government official. The double-speak in such a statement as far as I am concerned is that the brothers were left to their own devices so they could zero in on a new Illuminati-sanctioned priority – to wreak havoc at Charlie Hebdo, an event in which, it turns out, their only role was that of sacrificial lambs.
As for Amedy Coulibaly, the swashbuckling hostage-taker at a kosher grocery where four people perished at his hands (or rather at the hands of the police as some reports say), his case probably raises even more questions than that of the Kouachi brothers.
In July 2009, Coulibaly loomed large at a PR event that was hosted by the then President Nicholas Sarkozy. Coulibaly, a French of Senegalese descent, was one of 9 young French men who were being feted by the president for a most mundane reason of having been “signed up by a local factory”.
It is curious that at the time, Coulibaly was already an ex-jailbird. He had served time in a French prison – from 2005-2006 – where he had shared a cell with Cherif Kouachi. The event clearly was stage-managed to canonise him in a somewhat oblique fashion. It was part of constructing a cover for the sanguinary activities that were already in the works and which were a collaboration between the Illuminati and the jihadists.
The synchronised Charlie Hebdo and Kosher supermarket attacks were a culmination of it all. Both the Kouachi brothers and Coulibaly served the same Luciferian masters who unbeknownst to them regarded them as little more than pawns in the cosmic chess game.
Coulibaly’s kosher grocery siege was not haphazard: it was directed, to give the ostensible impression that in the greater scheme of things, it were the Jews who the “terrorists” had targeted. Very clever operators the Illuminati are.
THE LAUGHABLE ID FIND The French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve suggested that the Kouachi brothers would not have been so expeditiously nabbed had they not committed one fatal mistake. This was that one of the two, Said, forgot his identity card in their Citroen C-3 getaway car. The moment this came to light, I couldn’t help snicker in amusement. The Illuminati’s now we-don’t-care attitude is such that it matters little if their broad-daylight lie is not sophisticated enough. The blithering idiot that was Cazeneuve even had the audacity to call this “their only mistake”!
For starters, terrorists do not carry IDs that bear their real names. They always use assumed names using sophisticatedly forged IDs. Trust me, if, for instance, you hear that 911 “mastermind” Mohammad Atta’s ID was scavenged from the carbonated debris of the Twin Towers, whose steel core even had to turn from solid to liquid at that hyper-temperature of the cascading inferno – and was even found in pristine condition to boot, then that terrorist act was perpetrated not by Muhammad Atta but by the likes of the CIA and Mossad.
Moreover, the Kouachi brothers were not cut from the mould of suicide bombers. We know they were cowards, or at the very least cowardly. They were certainly people of low mental ability who had bungled previous terrorist activities leading to their arrest. They were not even religious fanatics: a bloke who knew them well said he didn’t see them at the mosque in two years.
The two Kalashinikova-wielding cold blooded killers did not set much store by baring their handsome or ugly faces. When they burst into the Charlie Hebdo offices, they were clad in masks. The guys who killed in those offices and who we saw strutting their stuff in the middle of the mysteriously deserted street did not want their identities known. So why leave your ID at the crime scene, and in so clumsy a fashion at that (as if your IQ is in single figures), when you wanted anonymity from the very outset?
To the discerning, a category to which I happily append my signature, that ID was not an identity card left by Said Kouachi: it was a planted identikit. The Kouachi brothers were framed. The Charlie Hebdo shooters were not remotely related to the Kouachi brothers: they were patsies or scapegoats – the Lee Harvey Oswalds and Muhammad Attas of the whole charade. This is so thunderingly obvious.
Western Police and Intelligence officers are past masters at planting such “ham sandwich” evidence as it is called to support false narratives and incriminate innocents. As someone so roundly put it, “What are the odds that skilled terrorists who have just carried out an ultra-professional special-forces style attack will accidentally leave their ID card in the abandoned getaway car? Answer: Effectively zero … The discovery of Kouachi’s ID does not implicate him; it exonerates him. It shows that he is an innocent patsy who is being framed by the real perpetrators of the attack.”
MURDER DRESSED AS SUICIDE On the evening following the day of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, a police commissioner going by the name Helric Fredou, who had been assigned charge of investigations into the attacks, reportedly committed suicide in the solitude of his office using a police revolver. He is said to have blown his brains to bits.
Although his office was part of an office block, no one heard his gun go off, a rather odd thing given that the gun was not fitted with a silencer. He was an experienced law enforcement agent, having been an anti-terrorist Special Branch officer since 2011 and deputy director of the regional police service since 2012.
Earlier in the day, Fredou had called one of his family members expressing concern at certain fishy developments in his investigations. Curiously, the Western media did not report his death despite the fact it had been announced on TV 3, the third biggest news network in France, till three days later.
Now, if you think Fredou did terminate his own life on account of a history of “depression” of some sort, a suggestion even his own doctor rubbished, then I’m afraid you don’t live on this planet but in fairy tale land in another realm of existence. Fredou’s mother has been denied access to his autopsy report when the law entitles her to it. She has been told in no uncertain terms that she will never ever set her eyes on the covertly classified report. She won’t because if she did, her suspicions would become fact – that her son was murdered in cold blood just like the Charlie Hebdo victims whose savage mortality he was investigating.
AND TO THINK YAYI BONI DID CRY? Sometime in December 2014, the French parliament overwhelmingly passed a motion urging government to recognise the existence of a Palestinian state. Palestine has been under occupation since 1967 and its government relegated to an “authority” as opposed to a sovereign state. On December 30 2014, France went ahead to vote for a UN Palestinian resolution calling for a “full IDF (Israel Defence Force) withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines by the end of 2017”.
The previous month, Israel Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu had warned that “Recognition of a Palestinian state by France would be a grave mistake”. The accent, apparently, was on the term “grave”. Was the Charlie Hebdo attack the immediate comeuppance of the French government’s positive stance towards the Palestinian bid for statehood? It could explain why French President Francois Hollande initially didn’t want Netanyahu to take part in the solidarity march of January 11 2015.
Talking of the solidarity picket march, it was graced by the “The Six”, an ominous Illuminati number. These were the leaders of African francophone countries of Mali, Niger, Togo, Benin, Gabon, and Senegal. Benin president Yayi Boni was even seen weeping copiously as he marched along with more than 40 other leaders when he never shed a single tear when only next door in Nigeria in the same month Boko Haram pulled off its deadliest single day of terrorism, with 2,000 people killed like flies. The Nigeria President himself, “Bad Luck” Jonathan, sent fawning condolences when hitherto he had not said a single word on the barbarities Abubakar Shekau and his band of genocidal thugs were wreaking on the country.
How did the attacks in France so thoroughly bury the atrocities in Nigeria? My mind boggles. Please help me out.
The much-anticipated opposition unity talks that will see Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) engage Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF), and Alliance for Progressives (AP) are expected to kick off any time from now.
According to informants, the talks, which were preceded by-elections negotiations, aim to be as inclusive as possible. As the talks start, the UDC, composed of Botswana National Front (BNF), Botswana Congress Party (BCP) and Botswana People’s Party (BPP), insist on retaining its preferred model of Umbrella; on the other hand, the BPF is proposing a PACT; and AP is in favour of an alliance model.
BPF is reportedly sceptical on the umbrella model and wants cooperation with the flexibility to allow other parties to join hands with UDC but without necessarily contesting elections using UDC symbols and colours.
BPF, which is currently the fastest-growing party, seems to be focused on self-actualization, self-preservation and securing institutional capacity in case of any political calamity. Although often profitable, cooperation politics can often leave individual political parties battered by political events and weakened beyond meaningful survival.
Discussions with some BPF members suggest that the party has big ambitions and harbour serious intentions of taking the BDP by its horns-all by itself-one day. “The position by some of our leaders is that the future of the UDC remains uncertain. The position and advice are that we should not put all our eggs in one basket. And the party elders think the pact model of cooperation is the safest under prevailing circumstances. Some, however, are worried that we should not overestimate our worth despite being the fastest-growing party in the country.
However, the matter is yet to be concluded once we receive the official invite,” revealed a BPF member of the NEC. Asked about the specifics of the pact idea, another high ranking party official revealed that the party Patron, Lt Gen Ian Khama and his brother Tshekedi Khama are among those who are for the election pact model.
BPF Spokesperson Lawrence Ookeditse has earlier this year told this publication that: “We have not settled on a model yet.” He also added that as a party, they are ready and willing to work with UDC, “but we will have our thoughts on how the cooperation or the talks should transpire, and they too will tell us their preference, and we will sit on the table to see how best to work together”.
AP heads into these negotiations with proposals of its own. On the model part, AP has expressed flexibility but want its partners to consider other models. AP believes that beyond the umbrella model, the coalition could also have a matrix to ensure that opposition parties select the best candidates for parliamentary and council seats.
AP, a splinter party of the beleaguered Botswana Movement for Democracy (BMD), asks for the constituencies allocated to BMD in the previous talks before it was kicked out on the eve of the 2019 elections.
AP, which garnered a popular vote of under 40 000 in the 2019 general elections, is confident that it brings tremendous value to the UDC, and state power could be within reach in 2024. To reconcile the various interest of political parties, the leaders have agreed to engage political experts in a bid to arrive at the best decisions.
“There will be no conveners because parties in the past believed that they (conveners) took decisions on behalf of the constituent parties, though they are not representing any. So, the idea is to rope in political experts to direct UDC and the negotiating parties as to which path of cooperation model to follow,” a highly placed informant said this week.
UDC convener Lebang Mpotokwane has also defended the umbrella model in the past, noting that it creates fewer problems for the participants. The negotiations will be the fourth opposition cooperation talks since the 2009 elections. The opposition has held talks in 2011, 2012 and 2017. The 2012 talks resulted in Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC), which has been anchoring negotiations since then.
When the Chairperson of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Governing Body invited member states to submit candidates for the vacant Director-General post for consideration, Botswana developed a keen interest.
It swiftly mobilized to beat the deadline, but the unions, upon consultation, nominated Justice Key Dingake as their preferred candidate, much to the government’s disappointment, who then decided to dump the whole issue altogether.
In accordance with the Rules governing the appointment of the Director-General and the decisions made by the Governing Body at its 341st and 342nd Sessions, the Chairperson of the Governing Body calls for candidates for appointment to the office of Director-General of the ILO through communication to all Governing Body members and all ILO Member States and candidatures must be submitted by a Member State of the ILO or by a regular or deputy member of the Governing Body.
The deadline for submission was on Friday, 1 October 2021, and candidatures were to be sent by postal or electronic mail to the following address to the Chairperson of the Governing Body. This publication had established that when Cabinet sat to discuss the issue, it was resolved that the unions as key stakeholders should be consulted and requested to submit a name for consideration. They did and offered Justice Oagile Key Dingake-a distinguished scholar and labour law expert whose contribution to the country’s labour fraternity is unparalleled.
When asked this week to share their side of the story, the unions said they were first invited to partake in the process by the government but never got a response after they nominated judge Dingake as an ideal candidate.
“We sent our correspondence to the Minister of Employment, Labour and productivity, Mpho Balopi, with our suggested name being Justice Oagile Key Dingake, but since then we never got a response,” said unionist, Tobokani Rari who further expressed disappointment at how the government has handled the matter.
Rari said that while he would not want to impute any improper motives to anyone, the developments rekindled memories of the government’s hostility towards Judge Dingake, who has been forced by circumstances to take his skills and wealth of experience to the benefit of other countries. Balopi did not respond to questions sent to him and did not pick this publication’s calls at the time of going to press.
Cabinet insiders say Dingake’s name spoilt the party and dampened the spirits. “In the list of nominated names, he was the leading candidate, but I guess the powers that be could not imagine themselves campaigning for him and doing all they did for the Executive Secretary of SADC Secretariat, Elias Magosi.”
Dingake’s sin, observers say, has always been his progressive, independent mind and family’s political background, all of which have always stood in his way to progress to the country’s judicial ladder’s ends.
It is understood that also in the mix and preferred by the state was former Attorney General, judge, and now Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Botswana to the United Nations and other international organizations, Dr Athaliah Molokomme, who also has a background in human rights advocacy.
But insiders say many believed that the country should export Dingake to represent the country given his decorated experience and background. As a lawyer, Dingake represented 90% of Trade Unions in Botswana, drafted numerous Collective Labour Agreements, later presided overall trade disputes, including Collective Labour Agreements, and made determinations as Judge of the Industrial Court of Botswana.
Dingake has also written and lectured widely on trade, labour and human rights and holds numerous citations and awards for his work regarding peace, human rights, and social development. Had he contested and won, he would have been the first African to lead the ILO.
The ILO is built on the constitutional principle that universal and lasting peace can be established only if based on social justice. The ILO has been the source of such hallmarks of industrial society as the 8-hour day, maternity protection, child labour laws and a whole range of policies promoting workplace safety and peaceful industrial relations. Unique among UN organizations, the ILO has a tripartite structure involving governments, employers and workers.
ILO Director-General elections events lineup…
At its 341st (March 2021) and 342nd (June 2021) Sessions, the ILO Governing Body approved the following timetable for the appointment of the Director-General because the current term of office of the Director-General will come to an end on 30 September 2022:
1 July 2021: The Chairperson of the Governing Body calls for candidatures 1 October 2021: Last date for the reception of candidatures A week in January 2022: The Chairperson of the Governing Body conducts interviews with candidates for the position of Director-General based on the format and principles contained in document GB.342/INS/6 and the guidance provided by the Governing Body at its 342nd Session 14-15 March 2022 (344th Session of the Governing Body): The Governing Body conducts candidate(s) hearings 25 March 2022 (344th Session of the Governing Body): The Governing Body conducts the ballot for the election of the Director-General 1 October 2022: The term of office of the Director-General commences.
Botswana and the European Union (EU) appear to have been at each other’s throats behind the scenes since last year, with the EU saying it held several meetings with Botswana to convince her to address human rights issues.
This is contained in a 2020 Human Rights Report that reveals broad divisions in contentious issues boiling behind the scenes between Gaborone and the Union. According to the report, which was released recently, the EU says it “continues to follow closely three main human rights issues in Botswana: the application of the death penalty; the rights of LGBTI persons; and gender equality.”
“Botswana remains part of a small group of countries – in Africa and globally – which continue to retain the death penalty both in law and in practice. Three executions were recorded in 2020,” the report says. According to the report, the Botswana Government indicated that a public debate on the application of the death penalty should be part of its ongoing work towards developing a Comprehensive Human Rights Strategy and the related National Action Plan.
The report says further progress on the rights of LGBTI persons’ seen in 2019, when Botswana’s High Court decriminalised same-sex consensual relations, is still pending, subject to a final court decision over a government appeal.
“Finally, gender-based violence and the need to advance gender equality and women’s rights in society remain another challenge for the country. In response to the high incidence of gender-based violence – which has intensified in many countries during the current COVID-19 pandemic – the President and the First Lady launched a public campaign to fight gender-based violence and to promote equality,” the report says.
The report says the EU did not fold its arms and watch from the sidelines the human rights issues in question are concerned but confronted Botswana to have the contentious issue addressed. “The EU continued to engage with the Botswana Government, multilateral organisations, non-governmental organisations and the broader society in Botswana in three main areas: the death penalty, gender-based violence and empowerment of women, and rights of LGBTI persons, as well as on the support of media and implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations,” the report says.
The report says that in addition to ad hoc consultations and human rights-oriented outreach efforts, the EU engaged with the Botswana Government on human rights formally in the context of the Article 8 Political Dialogue, which took place in February 2020.
“The dialogue offered an opportunity to exchange views on EU’s and Botswana’s experiences concerning the three EU priority areas in Botswana (capital punishment, gender-based violence and rights of LGBTI persons) as well as other human rights challenges, while also exploring opportunities for EU-Botswana cooperation on human rights issues in the context of the EU-Africa partnership and at the multilateral level,” the report says.
In parallel to engagement with the government, the EU said it continued to maintain dialogue with representatives of civil society focusing on human rights and with UN organisations and other partners of the country.
“The EU continues to be the driving force behind the Gender Dialogue (in principle co-chaired with UN Women and the Gender Affairs Department in the Ministry of Immigration, Nationality and Gender), which brings together various stakeholders to discuss gender issues to chart a way forward regarding partnerships. The EU has also used public diplomacy efforts to stimulate broader dialogue in the country on human rights issues,” the report says.
The EU said it continued to provide financial support to projects funded through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, with activities focused primarily on helping Botswana tackle gender-based violence, strengthen the notion of gender equality in the country, and promote participation in political processes.
“With six projects already underway, the EU signed two new programmes, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, to support victims of gender-based and domestic violence and defend the rights of marginalised people, with a combined budget of EUR 430,000,” the report says. It says one of the projects is designed to offer care services to victims of gender-based violence and provide clinical services, counselling, shelter, and a referral system for legal and social assistance. Another project provides legal, medical and psychosocial support to refugees, undocumented migrants and indigenous people.
It says Botswana remains an important like-minded partner for the EU on the human rights agenda at a multilateral level. “The country’s positive role on human rights in the multilateral context would be further strengthened by initiating a domestic process of reflection about the signature and ratification of several pending core human rights conventions and/or optional protocols (e.g. the Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearances, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Optional Protocol of the Convention against Torture, etc.)” the report says.
But the report acknowledged that Botswana is a stable and well-established democracy with a legal framework and institutions designed to guarantee respect for human rights in society. It says human rights complaints are addressed by the courts, with the government accepting decisions and implementing relevant rulings.
“Although the media scene in the country is relatively undeveloped, the World Press Freedom Index has noted a further positive trend concerning the role of the media in society (as was also the case in 2019) and has improved Botswana’s ranking from 44th to 39th place (out of 180 countries),” the report says. Meanwhile, this week, President Dr Mokgweetsi Masisi met with the EU delegation led by the managing director for Africa of the European External Action Services, Ms Rita Laranjinha.