WW3 has jumped the fence. This is it. Buckle up

originally posted by: Yossarian
You bring a passport with you if you want it to be found. That's fairly straightforward.

In terms of war, how can you wage war on a mindset that has infiltrated itself into and amongst civilians? Who do you target? How do you find them? ISIS are not an army in uniform with a physical base. They cannot be "wiped out".

Exactly, and they do not work for just "Muslims" , none of them ever have.

So much BS going on , on this planet it is insane....

a reply to: ParasuvO

And just who will be attacked this time ???

Civilians all over the Western world, going to concerts or sporting centers, or airports or conventions or night-clubs.

Attacked by untraced but very significant online/cellular coordination-organized sleeper cells. Are you not paying attention to this stuff?

I don't watch any media, it's all propaganda.

When people tell me, did you hear what just happened in France? My response is, I am not surprised.

There will be more terrorist attacks and there is nothing no one can do about it.

I live my life simple, with very little stress. I turned off mainstream media over 12 years ago, I found it to be nothing but propaganda to promote fear.

That is exactly how the elite control the mass population is by using fear. This has been going on for centuries, nothing new.

Just look at Religion and how fear is used to control congregations, Government from around the world use the same examples to pass more laws to take more freedoms away from humanity.

I do not see WWIII happening in my life time, The Globalist, The Worlds Biggest Corporations, The international Banking Cartels, are woven together already by internationals laws and Treaties.

NWO is almost at your door steps, yet most people cannot see it. As more and more technologies merges with computers and internet, you will see paper monies disappearing as this is now happening. It is a transition that most people do not see happening right under their nose. It is a gradual thing that has been going on for several decades now.

The Globalist know Nuclear weapons are far to dangerous to uses against humanity, they will never be used.

Who needs an Army these days? The United States does not. We have drones that we can fly anywhere, anytime, taking out infrastructures, or large groups of people anywhere in the world, without losing a single soldier.

Very few people are needed to fight a war these days.

Remember folks, it is all about fear and fear controls people.

Democratic debate erupts into argument over foreign policy, terrorism

Yeah - the debate is now taking place. The site linked above has minute by minute transcription going on.

Talk to you later, folks.
I'll be back with more commentary.

Yeah, you guys - you should watch this Dem Debate. It's blowing up.

a reply to: crazyewok

The problem is that gorilla wars cant be won, the enemy within is unidentifiable, until the attack occurs, The terrorist know that this strategy will cause incredible changes to the Western society, and will require the West to be on a permanent War footing . The laws will change, and have changed, and will change more and become more oppressive. This has done, and will cause more recruits to join the extremist cause. Which is strange at a time when civil unrest from increasing economic pressures ,to find political solutions would have been almost a certainty. The more the likes of Syria, get bombed the more recruits to the cause, ending in a never ending spiral of hatred , for the family members killed in such attacks.
The West has a permanent problem caused by questionable foreign policy decisions. The policy makers are not dumb and have a long term plan, and know within a reasonable probability what these decisions will cause , along with the likely consequences . So what's the agenda?

a reply to: Informer1958

Very few people are needed to fight a war these days.

How many people flew those planes on 911? Eight or something?

Eight yesterday in France.

And then what do we need? A bunch of pilots, and a lot of bombs. I know that's a massive oversimplification, but still, it's an interesting point, as opposed, to say, Gettysburg.

a reply to: crazyewok

invade New Zealand right about now

Invade New Zealand and you invade Australia but i know here you are coming from . The thing that i cant get my head around is how the freaking hell can someone from the west get into Isis territory in the first place . Do they get a free pass to join the caliphate . Its like some kind of freaky monty python version of monopoly . Jihadis to the left , refugees to the right , oh your a yazidi . Well then go to jail go directly to jail , no freedom from persecution for you . Where are they getting their supplies from , take your pick , Turkey , Saudi Arabia , they did not capture it all , and i wont even go into their 4WDs . Something is not right . As stated before , how in the hell do wanna be jihadis cross into the caliphate .

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

WAR SUMMIT is now gathering. Officially, world leaders are mustering.
ISIS even said 'we are here in the name of Allah, and for what you've done in Syria'...

Yikes.

A war? But ISIS has no nation, only some holding areas in nations it itself is attacking. I don't want to be either anti-Islamic people generally or inflammatory, but jihadists are in most places in Europe already. How would a war work against a terrorist force within borders? Some communications may be made via the Dark Web, giving some amount of security to terrorists, but it seems most communicating must be done in person nowadays.

What kind of war can there be against terrorists operating on domestic soil like this?

I'm loathe to compare the situation to the noble French Resistance but that kind of situation indicates a lot about what can and can't be done against the real threat in this - an underground network who are here already. In 2nd World War France, the Resistance were most successful because the Nazis were in the dark. It showed what can be done in secret, when the people in control don't know who to target. Even back then, Nazis had probably most French phones tapped (not that there were many then), but it shows that those kind of communication methods amongst an underground aren't really necessary at all. I feel horrible making a situation analogy between ISIS in the west and French Revolutionaries.

2. NihilistSanta wrote, on page 1:
"No one else finds it strange that a passport was found next to one of the suspects (from OPs source)? I don't know but that causes red flags to go up for me. Its so convenient now all that is missing is to find another suspect clutching a manifesto. "

Yes, you have to wonder each time about your response to these kinds of things and ask when responding - "that's if this all isn't set up anyhow", or about the extent to which it may be. It took me a long time to get to this stage. I used usually not to be able to hold the thought seriously that serious tragedies in the news can be planned at times using complicity, or at times using further involvement, of home or ally authorities to enact them. But now I know, I think I can say. They can be planned. Authorities in our part of the world make and also cover up much. Many are involved in satanistic meetings and groups, agreements and rituals, and decision making which is not at all allowed in their job descriptions and is never reported in their official work records. It can be a case of these people using the systems in the authorities, and where not everyone in power is involved. But there are also a lot of people further down the chain of command who are involved on the ground, and can be just as secretive and committed as those few above.

I'm not suggesting here that the Paris attacks are this - I have no idea. And they really do look like some insane jihadis, OK made by Bush and Blair in the first place probably, just going mad on a terrorist killing spree for their cause, taking revenge for French airstrikes.

But, as NihilistSanta pointed out with the passport - it's lax and negligent actually to forget this possibility.

Of course, it's important also because the refugee passport of Greece is anyway a terrorist manifesto itself, that the killer was a Syrian refugee, entering Europe in Greece. Just as 1000,000s of genuine refugees from war and ISIS terror itself have done.

That's a major point. ISIS doesn't want any Syrians to be able to enter Europe at all anyway, but for its own members, for creating terror. ISIS wants to keep all normal Syrians in Syria and rule and control them by terror and real torture involving murder and mutilation. ISIS wants Europe to block Syrians from making it to become refugees in Europe. For every refugee lost to Europe, ISIS loses a potential member of its intended new state in Syria & Levant, another digit in its power status figures.

So the terrorist dies with a refugee passport on his person. It's probably no mistake, to them a forseeable part of the disgusting propaganda manipulation intended to terrorise Europe against receiving more of genuine refugees, fleeing war and fleeing ISIS. ISIS would be very happy with any general anti-refugee attitudes & acts. Most islamist extremists in the ME also believe that if Islamic people who live in the west are not "serving" Jihadis goals, they should have to move to an Islamic state.

3. In any case:
There is no "war" or anything to become a war, which is new. It's just another strike, maybe going back to 9/11. And just mentioning that event, 9/11, is enough to question that what was behind what you see in the news is the same as what we're being told.

What difference could there be in a current response by western countries to "war on terror"?
It's the same. (Except hopefully, it might not be as mindless and destructive and further provocative from the west, but then pigs might fly).

As the OP's post indirectly referred to, the French leader is again stating some kind of grey, blurry, indescribable kind of war (seemingly furthering GW Bush's agenda of more than questionable appropriacy which has even nearly disappeared in Obama's leadership. Thankfully.)

Surely it's not surprising the "war on terror" would lead to these kind of things, though. David Cameron, meanwhile, from today's media, announces a Shoot to Kill policy to terrorists in the UK (and notably, of course, to any British citizens listening of a nervous or aggressive disposition). Subsequent to a foreign event, nothing on British soil.

It seems to me the mad Western leaders, some of whom at least in part created this whole situation, like to spar with / compete against terrorists to be the most provocative and also to causing the most fear in Western populations.

Though despicable murders occurred in Paris, is there nothing new going on in the bigger picture? Some more heinous attacks, subsequent to an illegal war in the ME (which though was nothing to do with France), and subsequent to some western ME air stikes. At least western nations might, just might, get the right targets this time, in ISIS. Not like Iraq and its half a million to a million dead who had nothing to do with terrorism before the Iraq invasion. (But now, very many of them have very much to do with terrorism, as ISIS, and not for no reason whatsoever.)

So we see - if there's talk of a war, a grey, indistinguishable war with no discernable front, it's nothing new and indeed the USA / UK can be seen to have started that over a decade ago in respect of the then quiet people in the wider region around Iraq. (Maybe not so with Afghanistan. Maybe though, depending on how integrated the so-called Illuminati aspect of that was with people in the US & UK govts: How much those govts were involved in and / or lied about 9/11.) Bear in mind what we're seeing now - the insane terrorist people in Syria & Levant - comes from people significantly made that way by Bush, Blair etc in a most evil, illegitimate Middle Eastern criminal war. As even the biggest, self-obsessed liar in the western world, Blair, has himself admitted recently. Most importantly (especially for those who will hear no western evil re 9/11) that war and its tit for tat results which continue to worsen was created by "using" 9/11, lying about it totally, then lying about non-existant WMDs.

Great points. I think your comparison with the french revolution and the French Resistance tactic was very good.

There is one thing I don't feel like agreeing with though-

originally posted by: bw1000
ISIS doesn't want any Syrians to be able to enter Europe at all anyway, but for its own members, for creating terror. ISIS wants to keep all normal Syrians in Syria and rule and control them by terror and real torture involving murder and mutilation. ISIS wants Europe to block Syrians from making it to become refugees in Europe. For every refugee lost to Europe, ISIS loses a potential member of its intended new state in Syria & Levant, another digit in its power status figures.

I am not convinced of that.
I think they might see some real benefit to the wave of Syrian refugees.
It spread the potential of power further.

Consider that guerrillas need a support system to rely upon in the masses. In Europe, they have some- the arab communities/ghettos provide some support. But they would need more for a bigger offensive.
One of the tactics usually used to gain support is to turn the people against the current ruling power, so that they join under the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" notion.

When the Syrians leave (some of them!), they are opposing "ISIS" (I am used to saying Daesh. I'll use the american term here). Here, they will find themselves in poor conditions, crowded and unprotected, the time needed to find housing and aid leaves them vulnerable to growing violence, and gang warfare within the camps.

As the rumor they had heard back in Syria was that over here, one doesn't need to work and everyone is provided for, (I know this because arab friends who visit back home tell me it is frustrating for them to constantly have to counter that perception- nobody believes they actually work for a living!)
-They quickly feel angry and disillusioned, cheated and treated unjustly, because they are not quickly being provided for comfortably, as they assume everyone else is.

So with time, they become more and more disgruntled with the government of their host country, and feeling more and more desparate, and in pops the guy who who is "an enemy of my enemy", and promises "if you help me out, we'll crap all over these evil Germans/French/Swedes/Greeks/Italians, etc."

Bam! More points for ISIS! Why keep the dissenters at home and try to constantly control them, when you can just let them go abroad (with whispers of a magic place of milk and honey) and just let them be converted?

a reply to: Bluesma

I'd written that ISIS doesn't want Syrians to leave Syria for Europe - but for its own members.
As you indicate, also, probably also allowing for future members to be brainwashed into doing their bidding.
That's important too, I guess, and more chilling than I'd contemplated.

Just thinking, they'd also probably be happy of a certain amount of Syrians entering Europe in order to hide amongst them more effectively.

Though still, ISIS would not be willing for more Syrians to enter Europe and leave their intended, future ISIS land, than they'd think beneficial to themselves and their goals. None allowed but those whom they want, probably. That's what I was trying to express.

(Then, on the other hand, these are calculated concerns. ISIS can be about madness and impulse amongst, within, from a status quo, as much as anything else, I think. These are tortured people - very, very confused, bitter, angry, once helpless victims of a hideous, evil, criminal war against their people. People turned psychopathic by a western presence that has left them wanting revenge, but from trauma. They are confused.)

Syria was a relatively affluent, educated, conservative country with reasonably westernised, independent, reasonably individualistic attitudes. Even amongst the poorer classes, these type of attitudes filter into and can still be fairly representative. My opinion is that the vast majority of these refugees from Syria are generally unlikely to be future members of ISIS. Especially for those who will not forget exactly what they're fleeing. a refugee from Syria doesn't need to suffer under ISIS itself in Syria and flee from ISIS to be very aware how vile they are there and completely unlike how Syria and Syrians were. Nearly all refugees would be aware of this, and my estimate is that very few would have sympathy for ISIS.

It is not these people, most often, who are likely to form any part of a future underground ISIS in the west, but others who have suffered directly from the West attacking they themselves and their families and friends, in Iraq. Also the idealists of Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan and other countries.

a reply to: Bluesma

... But, yes, what you're saying must be an intended part of how ISIS see themselves in the future in the west.
Scary.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
No one else finds it strange that a passport was found next to one of the suspects (from OPs source)? I don't know but that causes red flags to go up for me. Its so convenient now all that is missing is to find another suspect clutching a manifesto.

O.O Am I actually agreeing with you?! What the...?!? Maybe the world really is about to end, because I agree 100% with this post.

Every time I see examples of a passport coincidentally showing up at the scene of a crime, I get suspicious. It's probably because I have a passport & they're not something you carry loosely or just dangle on a keychain (if that were even possible).

There are a lot of different possibilities to consider with the passport thing.

One thing I like to do in conjecture of intent is to simply look at what the actual effects and results are, and consider who might want those and why.

(there is the most superficial and obvious explanation one could point at and some have- that in Europe, we can't use a drivers license for ID. If you are a foreigner, and do not yet have your "Carte de Séjour", which take a while, you must carry your passport. I had to for so long, I still carry it with me, despite having now french nationality and official ID card. But assuming a terrorist isn't going to be prepared in case of being stopped by cops between his point of departure and attack point, we'll put that aside)

What type of talk and speculation has that provoked?

From what I see- it has a lot of people focusing on the question of Syria, and what could Syrians have against France specifically?
(the cries of the gunmen in the concert hall, also, feed this focus)

So people who previously had no idea what exactly the french have been doing in Syria, are asking and finding out, and pointing out recent military actions in Syria.

Today, the young people I know (including my own daughter, I see) are putting up accusations and condemnations of France for their evil operations in Syria.

So.... I ask myself, who benefits from the people here becoming critical and angry of the french government?
Who would like to see them as the proclaimed enemy and oppressor of the Syrian people?

I know who comes to my mind.

Personally, I am not going to add to the cries of France being the evil doer there, because last year, I sat and listened to our Syrian friend tell me emotionally that his family was living in hell, with corruption and extremists tormenting them and putting them in mortal danger, and proclaiming that the US and France just HAVE to do something to help them.
Well, they're trying. The very nature of these tactics is making it hard to be effective, but I am sure that someone who didn't listen to a Syrian plea for their intervention would jump to the conclusion that the good people of Syria never wanted anyone else in their business.

I keep hearing people mention ww3 and nostradomus, not that I believe he really predicted much. He said nothing of "ww3" but did mention a "3rd great war"

Don't really have much of a point but... all the pieces are there

a reply to: bw1000

Excellent post. Thanks for taking the time and thought to write it.

a reply to: Bluesma

They're saying the Egyptian passport was from a victim, not an attacker.

Egyptian passport found in Paris belongs to victim
Egyptian passport found at Paris stadium belongs to critically injured victim, not suspect: Ambassador

And this new article is claiming the Syrian passport is a fake (it's in the middle of the article, which is fairly long).

The official said another one of the assailants had a Syrian passport, a document that Greek officials have said he used to enter Europe in October on the Aegean island of Leros along with a record flood of refugees fleeing the war-torn Middle East. Sky News later quoted a Greek official as saying the passport was fake, although the attacker probably did use it to pass through Leros.

French officials: Manhunt in Europe for at least 1 suspect ‘directly involved’ in Paris attacks

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yep I am still hung up on that issue. I might have let it go but the news has been certain to repeat the fact so many times it is sounding like propaganda.

I am kind of shocked by the responses of some ATS members. Normally pacifistic peace loving types are calling for war and internment. This is what these types of psyops are designed to do. Bypass logic and reason by appealing to baser emotions like fear.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

WAR SUMMIT is now gathering. Officially, world leaders are mustering.
ISIS even said 'we are here in the name of Allah, and for what you've done in Syria'...

Yikes.

How does this generate WWIII?

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Nah, as long as President Obama is in office, his goal is to prevent any kind of retaliation that causes any real impact on terrorist groups. He will not send any formidable military response to the middle east to combat and "eliminate" terrorism. So it will never end, he is a soft President, and a dangerous one who is afraid to take the battle to the enemy. He is probably at the G20 summit talking the French President out of any actions that would fight the terrorists that assassinated all those people a few days ago. He's the kind of guy who say's, if someone spits in your face, just shake their hand...

He is a Wuss.