Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action. — Ian Fleming
Fun fact: What do 9/11, the London 7/7 bombings, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber and this week’s Brussels event all have in common?
A company based in the Netherlands called ICTS.
ICTS is an aviation and general security services firm established in 1982 by former members of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, and El Al airline security agents. They have a major presence around the world in airport security, including operations in the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Japan and Russia.
ITCS subsidiary Huntleigh was responsible for security at Boston’s Logan Airport on September 11, 2001, providing gate and baggage security services for United Airlines.
They were also responsible for security in the London bus network on July 7, 2005, when suicide bombers attacked. Two of its subsidiaries, ICTS UK and ICTS Europe Systems, are based at Tavistock House, Tavistock Square in London, scene of the London Stagecoach bus bombing that day.
For more information, read: Former Israeli Intel Operatives Run Security at Brussels Airport
- On September 11, 2001, ITCS allowed several hijackers to board United Airlines flight 175 at Boston’s Logan Airport, which was flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Center.
- In December 2001, ITCS allowed “shoe bomber” Richard Reid to board a flight in Paris bound for Miami with explosives hidden in his shoe.
- On December 25, 2009, “underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab showed up at Amsterdam’s Schiphol airport with a one-way ticket to Detroit on Northwest Airlines, no luggage and no passport, yet ICTS allowed him to board the flight despite the presence of explosives in his underwear.
- On March 23, 2016, ICTS was responsible for security operations at Brussels Airport, where more than 30 people were allegedly killed.
How should we think about these facts? Are they happenstance? Mere coincidence?
But what do the Israelis say about the Brussels event?
Benjamin Netanyahu is taking full advantage, linking what happened, attributed to ISIS despite no independently verified proof, to Palestinian resistance he falsely calls “terrorism.”
For more information, read: Netanyahu on Brussels Blasts
Israeli Minister of Science, Technology and Space, Ofir Akunis, said Europeans lost sight of “terrorism of extremist Islam” by focusing on boycotting Israeli goods instead allowing the attacks to take place. Is this somehow inferring that the Brussels bombing was a retaliation for that EU regulation?
For more information, read: Israeli Minister Facebook Rant Blames Brussels Bombing on EU Labeling of Illegal Settlement Goods
Less than 24 hours before the Brussels event, the US House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to declare that the Islamic State is committing genocide against Christians and other minority groups in Iraq and Syria.
Now that the United States officially recognizes the acts of ISIS as genocide, what do we do next?
Well, the next logical step is to stop them. However, in order to do so, we must first understand where they came from.
As Americans cower in fear over the perceived threat from men, women and children attempting to escape ISIS from war-torn Syria, the majority of people are ignoring the reason there are refugees in the first place.
The US created and funded the terrorist regime in Syria that would be used to destabilize the region and create a specific advantage for American interests over China and Russia.
Here is a rare drop of truth in the sea of lies that is the corporate media:
A plan to create and arm an active resistance to Assad was put in place four years ago, and the result was a radical group of jihadists who, in turn, morphed into ISIS, all thanks to the United States.
In a 2015 interview with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymor Hersh, Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, director of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) between 2012 and 2014, confirmed that his agency had sent a constant stream of classified warnings to the civilian leadership about the dire consequences of toppling Assad. The jihadists, he said, were in control of the opposition. Turkey wasn’t doing enough to stop the smuggling of foreign fighters and weapons across the border. “If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic,” Flynn told me. “We understood ISIS’s long-term strategy and its campaign plans, and we also discussed the fact that Turkey was looking the other way when it came to the growth of the Islamic State inside Syria.” The DIA’s reporting, he said, “got enormous push-back”’ from the Obama administration. “I felt that they did not want to hear the truth.”
Former Marine Vincent Emanuele’s acknowledgment of U.S. responsibility in creating ISIS comes in an article posted on TeleSUR’s English website, in which he hoped to answer the often raised question of “Where did ISIS come from?”
“I saw my fellow Marines kill innocent people, torture innocent civilians, destroying property, mutilating dead bodies, running over dead corpses, laughing and photographing people while doing so,” he said. “For me it was very simple. I sat there in Iraq and I asked myself ‘How would I behave?’ ‘What would I think if I was in the shoes of the Iraqi people?’”
For more information, read: The U.S. Government Finally Admits that the Thugs They Armed in Syria Have Committed Genocide
Just days after arresting French-born Belgium national and terror suspect Salah Abdeslam in Brussels, a coordinated terror attack unfolded in the very same city, killing at least 28, and injuring many more.
European officials are linking the attack to ISIS, though it is unclear whether or not Abdeslam’s network—which carried out the November 2015 Paris terror attacks—was directly involved.
All of the Brussels suspects have been under the nose, on the radar, and in the prisons of Western security agencies on and off for years, yet were still able to carry out at least one high profile terrorist attack—possibly two, and with the vast majority of the suspects involved having traveled to Syria to fight alongside ISIS before inexplicably being allowed to re-enter Europe and rejoin society without consequence—as if inviting them to take their extremism to the next level.
The Guardian’s “Brussels Attack: Were They Revenge for Abdeslam’s Arrest?,” attempted to link the bombings in Brussels to the arrest of Abdeslam and the Paris attack terror network. The op-ed acknowledges that these terrorist attacks are being carried out by locals—Europeans—using local resources.
Should the Brussels attack be linked to this same terror network, it will greatly complicate efforts by some to leverage this tragedy to further their agendas against refugees and even to change the dynamics of the war in Syria itself.
Should the Brussels attack turn out to be the work of this ISIS-linked terror group, considering the familiarity European security agencies had with all the suspects long before even the 2015 Paris attacks, indicates criminal negligence at best, and complicity at worst.
But even if the attacks are the work of foreign ISIS militants, one should consider the West’s admitted role in the creation and perpetuation of ISIS in the first place.
In Europe, where the flames of a “clash of civilizations” are being furiously and intentionally fanned, ISIS serves as a constant implement to empower extremists on both sides, while drowning out the voices of unity, moderation, and peace in the middle. It allows for a growing police state and xenophobic tendencies to flourish at home, while justifying further war abroad.
While some Western newspapers are already trying to frame the Belgium attack as “incompetence” by European security agencies, there must be a better explanation as to why this “war with ISIS” continues to drag on, when the source of ISIS’ fighting capacity appears to be within rather than beyond the West—and aiding rather than opposing Western special interests.
For more information, read: Brussels Attack: The True Implications of ISIS Links
Yet another terrorist attack in Europe has been blamed on Islamic extremists and ISIS and yet another instance of the suspects in the attacks having been previously known to security services and intelligence agencies in the years, months, weeks, and days leading up to the event. That is exactly what happened in Brussels, Belgium on March 22, 2016.
Lending credence to those who suggest that the Brussels attacks were false flags (meaning directed, orchestrated, or allowed by Western intelligence agencies), it is being reported that, yet again, the perpetrators were known to police and security services prior to the attack. This suggests a number of possibilities in the false flag vein such as:
- That the security services knew an attack was being planned and allowed it to continue.
- That the intelligence agencies organized the attack from the very beginning.
Building a case for the false flag argument sees a number of points to be made that, while not conclusively proving that such is the case, they do provide a good reason to question the official narrative.
The identities, criminal history, and jihadist history of the assailants were already known to security services prior to the attacks: Khalid and Brahim El Bakraoui, the two men suspected of being blowing themselves up during the attack on the airport, had been arrested for violent crimes in Belgium prior to the attacks but were both curiously released.
While records of violent crimes is not a direct connection to terrorism, both brothers were known to authorities prior to the attacks and were considered “wanted” by police. Indeed, an anti-terror raid at the brothers’ apartment complex took place in mid-March where an Algerian immigrant with ties to ISIS was killed.
The incriminating material found after the attacks: As any good pair of patsies would do, the suicide bombers were careful to leave a trail of bombs, ISIS flags, and suicide notes behind them ensuring that their connections to ISIS would be found and used to maximum effect.
While the information above is not evidence enough to conclusively demonstrate that the Brussels attacks were false flags, it is enough to suggest that the official narrative of the events be looked at through skeptical lenses, particularly when Western intelligence agencies and governments have repeatedly sponsored false flag terror attacks in the past in order to justify wars or police state crackdowns at home.
For more information, read: Possible Signs of False Flag in Brussels Now Emerging
One of the first videos published by Belgium’s mainstream media, was, according to reports, from the CC security surveillance cameras at Brussels airport. The video report was released at 9:07am, one hour after the first bomb attack at the airport.
The video was fake. What Derniere Heure and La Libre published was footage from a January 2011 terror attack at Moscow International airport.
Journalists and media editors are fully aware that surveillance videos at an airport are under the jurisdiction of the airport’s security authorities. They are not normally released immediately after a terror attack.
There was no way the media could have got hold of the surveillance videos in the immediate wake of the attacks. Moreover, following the attack, the airport was closed down.
In another words, the airport surveillance video would not have been available to the media less than one hour after the terror event.
What Derniere Heure did was to take the Moscow International airport video, remove the audio in Russian, change the date and broadcast it on the Internet and network TV at 9:07 AM.
The second fake surveillance video at Brussels Maelbeek metro station: The terror attack in the afternoon of March 22 at Brussels Maelbeek Metro station was reported by mainstream media including CNN.
In these reports, video footage from a 2011 terror attack in Minsk, Belarus was used by network TV and online media to describe what was happening in the metro station at the time of the attacks. According to the Independent:
“CCTV footage that was shared after the Brussels attacks, believed to show video from inside Maelbeek Metro station, has been proven fake. As news emerged of the third explosion in the Belgian capital, which targeted the station situated near EU offices, many began sharing what they believed to be footage of the bombing. However it was soon discovered that the video in fact came from the Minsk Metro bombing of 2011 that killed 15 and injured over 200 people.”
The Independent’s report is based on a fallacy. It was the mainstream media that published the Moscow and Minsk video footage. It was thanks to incisive social media blog reports that the use of fake videos by the mainstream media was revealed. The more fundamental question:
Can we trust the mainstream media reports concerning the Brussels terror attacks?
Watch the videos and read more: Media Manipulation: More Fake Video Reports of the Brussels Terror Attacks