Charlie Hebdo has broad shoulders
by
Thierry Meyssan
While
millions of French just came to stand without hesitation in defense
of freedoms of expression and worship, politicians and the press,
which one and the other constantly undermine them, have seized the
opportunity to recover their virginity. For Thierry Meyssan, the
government has led an extensive manipulation to cast itself at the
head of a great popular event and is now looking for ways to justify
a new military operation in Libya.
14
January, 2015
In
three days, in France, a group of four or five people claiming to be
both al-Qaeda in Yemen and the Islamic Emirate (Daesh) massacred the
editorship of Charlie Hebdo and murdered a municipal police officer
and more hostages in three different situations. France, which had
not experienced such violence since the attacks of the OAS, over 50
years ago, responded while crying "We are all Charlie!" by
shooting three terrorists and organizing a huge demonstration of
several million people.
The
President of the Republic, François Hollande, hosted the leaders of
the political parties represented in Parliament. He appealed to
French national unity and attended the event, along with fifty heads
of foreign governments.
In
a previous article [1], I observed that the mode of operation of the
terrorists had nothing to do with that which is practiced by
experienced jihadists, but rather resembled that of a military
commando. I concluded that, as a result, no matter who they were, the
only thing we need to know is who commanded them. I would like, in
this second article, to return to the reactions aroused by this case.
The
suspension of the right to protest
At
the moment of the announcement of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, January
7, 2015 at noon, Prime Minister Manuel Valls decided to implement the
Vigipirate attack Plan at Ile-de-France. This comprises a hundred
automatic measures and about two hundred other options. Among the
chosen measures, the Interior Ministry announced the postponement of
all authorized demonstrations. The authorities feared that terrorists
might fire on the crowd.
However,
a far-left party called to demonstrate immediately in support of
Charlie Hebdo. After a few hours of hesitation, the Commissioner of
Police authorized a rally that would number 100 000 people. Even
stranger: the Prime Minister declared a national day of mourning for
the next day, January 8th. Many rallies were organized by government
to celebrate a minute of silence. Still more surprising: the
Socialist Party called for a broad national demonstration on Sunday
the 11th, which attracted more than 2 million people in Paris.
Thus,
the government could ban demonstrations because they might be
dangerous to their participants, but its members could organize a
huge one, inviting leaders of foreign governments without fear for
their safety.
This
manipulation confirms that, contrary to its declarations, the
government knew precisely the extent of the threat and knew it did
not concern gatherings.
They
thus prefered to retain only this extraordinary popular movement for
freedom.
National
Union
In
this crisis situation, the right and the left agreed to participate
together in a national event. But for what values or against whom
will they demonstrate?
We
discover that the leaders of the left and right shared the
anti-religious, anti-national and anti-militarist values of the very
leftist Charlie Hebdo. We knew that its founder, Philippe Val, was a
friend of the Sarkozys. Suddenly we discover that its new manager,
Charb, was the companion of a right-wing minister, Jeannette Bougrab.
The
latter was the guest of TF1’s journal. Very moved, she tells of her
love. Then she presents Charb’s anti-religious convictions as a
secular commitment in the face of Islamism, before comparing her
friend to Jean Moulin and requesting that he be buried with him in
the Pantheon. She ends by revealing that the couple had thought to
leave France and start a new life elsewhere. We are left stunned. In
a few words, Jeannette Bougrab just showed her contempt for her
fellow citizens, assimilated secularism to the anti-religious
struggle and put an anti-national comedian on an equal footing with
the founder of the National Council of the the Resistance. The Charb
family may well protest as it will but doubt has been cast.
And
so that we may well understand what is the "national union",
seen from the right and the left, socialist leaders declared that the
National Front would be excluded from the "republican"
demonstration. Have we really understood the enormity of the
proposal? Political leaders evoke the Republic to exclude their
rivals. Ultimately, the FN joined demonstrations in the provinces.
The
International Union
By
inviting all sorts of Heads of State and government leaders to open
the event with him, President Hollande intended to give it an air of
solemnity.
Among
these present, one counted David Cameron and Benjamin Netanyahu,
whose states wield omnipotent military censorship; or again the US
Secretary of Justice, Eric Holder, whose country loves freedom of
expression so much that it bombed and destroyed numerous TV stations
from that of Belgrade to the Libyan networks; Turkish Prime Minister,
Ahmet Davutoglu, whose country banned the construction of Christian
churches (even if it seems set to soon authorize one); or again
Benjamin Netanyahu who congratulated al-Qaeda fighters treated in
Israeli hospitals; once again without forgetting Eric Holder, Ahmet
Davutoğlu and King Abdullah of Jordan, whose States reorganized
Daesh in January, 2014.
So
what were these folks doing in Paris? Certainly not defending freedom
of expression and worship which they actually fight.
Freedom
of expression
It’s
not only the political class that took the opportunity hog the
blankets. So did the press. It sees in Charlie Hebdo an example of
the very freedom of press it keeps trampling, self-censoring
constantly and always showing solidarity with crimes committed abroad
by the government.
The
French press is indeed numerous, but extremely conformist and
therefore not pluralistic. This is so right up to the unanimity with
which it presents Charlie Hebdo. For, contrary to what it claims, the
satirical newspaper proclaimed its opposition to freedom of
expression, notably when it was petitionning to ban the National
Front or campaigning for censorship of the internet.
Anyway,
we can only be grateful that the press has finally come to the
defense of those who are attacked for what they have said.
About
the jihadist trail
Continuing
its investigation in the wrong direction, the press provides a
profile of terrorists and forgets to look into their sponsors.
Without cracking a smile, it explained that this wave of attacks is a
collaboration between al-Qaeda members in Yemen and Daesh, even
though the two organizations have been engaged for a year in a fierce
war that has killed at least 3,000 victims in both camps.
On
this subject, I am surprised at these references; we should soon find
a new one that connects the attack to Libya. Indeed, if François
Hollande follows in the footsteps of George W. Bush, he should attack
Yemen although France has no great advantage in such a project.
However her personal chief of staff, General Puga, is preparing a new
military intervention in Libya.
This
target is much more logical. France could then reap the benefits that
it hoped to obtain from its first intervention. And it would end the
US project of remodeling the "Broader Middle East" as
published by Robin Wright in The New York Times in September, 2013
[2] and begun by Daesh in Iraq and Syria.
Thierry
Meyssan
Translation
Roger
Lagassé
Thierry Meyssan French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace Conference. His columns specializing in international relations feature in daily newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic, Spanish and Russian. His last two books published in English : 9/11 the Big Lie and Pentagate
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.