Saturday, 19 December 2015

PARIS: FACT OR FRAUD (Pt. 4)

People and Places



Inaccessible in France?


Rather strangely the blog analytics tell me of all the countries (mainly in the northern hemisphere) that have accessed it, France is seldom one of them. I cannot account for this. Perhaps it is a language or cultural thing or something else. Hopefully this will change, as only the French people can address the issues raised in this article and previous articles regarding the terrorist incidents in Paris on the 13th November, 2015.  The lessons however should be of interest and applicable to all.


Introduction

Previous parts to this article can be found here:

Pt. 1  http://veaterecosan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/parisfact-or-fraud-one-introduction-1.html
Pt. 2  http://veaterecosan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/paris-fact-or-fiction-part-2.html ; and 
Pt. 3   http://veaterecosan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/paris-fact-or-fraud-pt.html .

This  fourth part, addresses the awful incidents at the Belle Equippe Restaurant where it is claimed nineteen (19) people were murdered and touches on some other recent developments. The incidents at the Bataclan Theatre where one hundred  and thirty (130) died of bullet wounds and other injuries and many more were presumably physically or mentally scarred will have to be dealt with in another article. As will the dramatic events at the Comptoir Voltaire Restaurant, where a suicide bomber (Ibrahim Abdeslam, 26) was said to have blown himself up (only injuring one other person) and the final shoot-out in the Rue de Corbillon, in St Dennis, where several people died and a building was wrecked.

One of the many questions posed and not answered by the French authorities is what happened at around ten o'clock in the evening after all the other attacks at Boulevard Beaumarchais, where apparently at least four people were shot dead not otherwise accounted for or discussed by the media or government sources.


How Reliable are the Reports?

Some have suggested that the reported deaths and injuries are unreliable. I make no such claim and believe the greatest sympathy and respect should be extended to those that have suffered. However as we noted in the earlier articles, there are many questions arising from the inconsistencies, incompatibilities, unlikelihoods and contradictions the official story contains, that demand answers if the truth is to be revealed and individuals are not to be unjustly accused, targeted and killed, whilst the real perpetrators escape unrecognised and unpunished.

There are major problems with the official story in relation to all of these events. There is also considerable confusion, indeed impossibility, with the vehicles and who was driving them and how they were used. This will be explained below but suffice it to say that overall the police version cannot be true, although aspects of it maybe.

Map from AP here: 

https://twitter.com/AP_Interactive/status/665389432065912832/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


Embedded image permalink

Maps were published early on but not updated. Few contain all the relevant information so (with a lot of help from Google Earth to whom due credit afforded) I tried successfully to construct my own - but transferring it here proved impossible. That is a shame because it clarifies the locations much better. To locate the two sites refer to the above.

Image 1. Stade de France & St Dennis



Image 2. The Right Bank Locations



(Note: Unfortunately despite my feeble efforts I am unable to transfer the Google Earth location maps referred to above to this blog for some reason which is a great pity. However the exercise has helped to clarify in my own mind the relative locations of the different sites and rectify some of my misinterpretations.)

STOP PRESS:    LATEST UPDATES (As of 19.12.2015)

Weapon with Mob and CIA Connections

At least one of the guns used in the November 13 terror attacks in Paris was purchased by Century International Arms and then re-exported to Europe. One of the largest arms dealers in the United States, Century Arms has close ties to the CIA and has faced charges in America and Europe of involvement in illegal arms deals.
(See: http://www.globalresearch.ca/weapon-used-in-november-13-paris-attacks-came-from-cia-linked-arms-dealer/5496747)

Early Misinformation

To illustrate the point, this quote from http://uk.businessinsider.com/paris-shootings-explosions-2015-11?r=US&IR=T.  

"At least 112 people were reportedly killed inside the Bataclan theater, a popular concert venue in the 10th Arrondissement where six to eight attackers held people hostage. There have been conflicting reports regarding the number of fatalities. Estimates ranged between 120 and 150 late Friday into Saturday morning. Dozens were killed in shootings at Le Cambodge restaurant and Le Carillon bar in the 10th Arrondissement, and Les Halles shopping center. Other attacks were reported near Rue Faidherbe, Boulevard Beaumarchais, and Rue Albert. The French prosecutor's office says eight extremists are dead after the attacks — seven of them from suicide bombings. A police operation to free the hostages inside the Bataclan, which is a short walk from the old offices of Charlie Hebdo."

Note the over-estimate of the number of attackers at the Bataclan. Four became the standard for some time across all platforms, eventually settling for three (I think) Note also eight attackers are all said to be dead, 'seven from suicide bombings'. This of course proved incorrect and one managed to escape and the story had to be amended. Nor do the witness statements support the government's view that all the attackers wore 'identical bomb vests'. None of the three described (two at the Belle Equippe and one at Casa Nostra)  were said to wear them. To the cynical this suggests there was an agreed story that subsequently kept having to be amended to adapt to the facts as they were revealed.

Unreported serious incident at Boulevard Beaumarchais

The third point of considerable interest is the reference to the incident at Boulevard Beaumarchais, where reports state four people were shot dead but virtually nothing can be found about it. Why the absence of information? Who were the people who died and by whom? Were they civilians or terrorists?

I came across, this incident on Boulevard Beaumarchais by a different route. (See image below) Apparently four people were shot dead here at about ten o'clock i.e. at the end of the other incidents but try as I may I can find nothing other than a cursory reference to it.  It remains something of a mystery - suspicious even - as the timing and location would appear to suggest a connection.

This image comes from:  http://www.vox.com/2015/11/13/9732700/paris-attacks-shootings-hostage with the following caption: 'A general view of police at the scene on Boulevard Beaumarchais following a shooting on November 13, 2015 in Paris, France.'




Bonne Biere and Casa Nostra Confusion

For some curious reason few if any of the early reports or maps seem to specifically refer to the shooting and five murders at the Bonne Biere. 

On the 20th November papers carried the story of a video emerging of the 'carnage' seconds after the attack at 9.32 pm. It confirms that five died and eight injured.  However it would appear that the five deaths ascribed to the Casa Nostra actually happened a few hundred yards to the north west. (Unless that is five were killed at both locations which now seems contra-indicated?)

The newspapers for some reason remain confused for some time. This is from the Guardian on the 18th November: "At the Casa Nostra pizzeria on rue de la Fontaine au Roi, at least five people were shot and killed. At least 19 died in an attack on La Belle Équipe bar in rue de Charonne." You would have thought after five days the would have been sorted. The two premises are some hundreds of yards apart after all. It's almost as if the script was not updated. After acting so brutally at the first three locations, not killing anyone at the Casa Nostra, comes as rather a surprise.

Man dies in his flat from 'stray bullet'

The Independent reported on the 18th (the same day as the shoot-out in St Dennis) as follows:

"A 52-year-old man killed when a bullet coincidentally flew through his open window during the Paris attacks has been found dead in his flat. Stephane Hache, 52, lived in a small studio overlooking the Bataclan concert hall where Isis jihadists killed almost 90 of their victims, Ouest France reported. The newspaper said his body was found over the weekend, at least day after the attacks on Friday night."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/paris-attacks-man-52-found-dead-in-his-flat-after-being-shot-by-stray-bullet-that-passed-through-a6739531.html

Perhaps it's worth noting the window was open on a November night and he was shot in the back. Will anyone bother to check out what weapon the bullet matches. And in his back presumably means at least he wasn't looking out of his window at the time. Or was he? How are we to know? Can we be sure he was not shot for some extraneous or related reason?

The St Dennis 'Denouement' 

As regards the final shootout at  8 Rue de Corbillon, in St Dennis, on the 18th November will have to be left to another article (the fifth!) Suffice it to say here the alleged the 'mastermind' of the multi-faceted operation (Abdelhamid Abaaoud) and a female accomplice, his cousin Hasna Ait Boulahcen were both killed in the heavy handed police action. 

As previously noted it now seems government policy to kill alleged terrorists, rather than capture and interrogate them. Others have noted that in FFOs any individuals that are set up to take the blame are invariably removed from the scene one way or another. The question must be asked: "Is this what happened here?"

Subsequently it should be noted the story that Hasna blew herself up, from which we were to infer she was deeply implicated as a suicide bomber, was later specifically contradicted by the Paris Prosecutor, but not before the idea had been planted in the public mind. 

Two days after the event and a week after the attacks on the 20th November, he announced that in fact another (third) man at the premises blew himself up, probably killing her in the process.  Immediately after pleading for help and denying any romantic relationship with Abaaoud, the police shout, "We are going to shoot" followed by gunfire and an explosion, by which it is alleged she was blown into the street and killed. 

An alternative very real possibility, supported by an audio recording, is that she was a relatively innocent victim trapped by the police operation and killed by their bullets of which more than 5,000 were fired apparently! That sounds like 'over-kill' if ever I heard it.(See: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/isis-paris-attacks-hasna-ait-boulahcen-did-not-blow-herself-in-saint-denis-raid-a6742666.html )

As with criminal accounts, multiple changes in the story line should be treated with considerable caution. 

Abandoned Cars

The only (?) trouble with this story is that photographic evidence widely circulated, runs completely contrary to this story! 

As can be seen in the second image below, the car identified in the text as the Black car used in the attacks is being examined at a completely different location to the residential street in Montreuil where it was claimed to be located in the early morning of the 14th November i.e. next day. 

This car in fact appears to be a Renault Clio not a Seat? It is possible however that the two could be confused. (The Renault and Seat models can be compared here: https://www.renault.co.uk/vehicles/new-vehicles.html and here: 
http://www.seat.co.uk/?seacmp=10_BRAND_Misc_Exact:GOOGLE:Misc:seat+car+models:NA:NA&dns=true&gclid=CjwKEAiAndSzBRDp5P232v-qtHkSJABw-VdtCE5IpGQA9xuklkcUS7izQBe0MrOAqHXTn4ZDQJaXvBoCK1Tw_wcB

The story is that the Montreuil car, said to be the black Seat attack car, containing three Kalashnikov rifles, was brought to the attention of the police by a concerned neighbour. The only problem with this story is that the photo of it shows it was NOT a Seat and probably not black! The Telegraph reports it thus: 


"Here it was spotted by a Belgian resident who noticed its Belgian number plate. Her curiosity was aroused as she did not recognise the car and, believing it to be suspicious, looked inside and saw the weapons. She then called the police."
Yes you read it right. These careful, ruthless killers thoughtfully left their weapons in full view rather than either taking them with them or at least putting them in the boot out of sight. This presumably was to assist the police in tracking them down as quickly as possible. Of course if the police story is correct, by the time the car was parked only Salah was left, all seven others having been shot or blown themselves up.

But even this has now been changed to include a 'ninth attacker'. Perhaps this was Abaaoud, although they have also subsequently claimed he was directing the Bataclan attack on site, which makes him being in the Seat (?) impossible - although the Montreuil car is not a Seat anyway! I hope you are keeping up with me on this! Simply put none of the official story hold water.
I repeat, the shots of the Montreuil car being removed in the night, is clearly NOT a Seat. It appears to be a Citroen C3 to me but I could be wrong. In that case another obvious question arises. Why would the resident have contacted the police, or the police have responded so quickly in the middle of a terrorist incident, when this make and model car was at no time implicated in the attacks. The suggestion is fanciful. 
(Citroen models here: http://www.citroen.co.uk/new-cars-and-vans/citroen-range?&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Brand&gclid=CjwKEAiAndSzBRDp5P232v-qtHkSJABw
VdtJh3lApEkKaoYVpgnMhuefZCP5T2ltE5ShMDPtbTiBxoClqnw_wcB)

Further witnesses claim that police smashed a window to get into it. This would simply not have happened if they had known this was the getaway car, as a first principle in such cases is as far as possible to retain the crime scene in as pristine a condition as possible. See for yourself below: 



"The Seat (Renault?) car was used at two of the six locations attacked on Friday - a bar on rue de la Fontaine-au-Roi where five were killed, and a restaurant on rue de Charonne where 19 died." From:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11997099/Paris-attacks-Guns-empty-magazines-found-in-abandoned-car-in-city-suburb.html

Meanwhile we have this image of a black Renault Clio that better fits the description quite different to the model shown above and in a quite different location obviously being treated as the implicated vehicle. It appears to have been abandoned in a hurry on some unnamed street. 

In contrast this photograph below, from CNN apparently, published not more than two days after the incident, is no longer available it would seem on the page credited with it. (See: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/14/world/what-happened-in-paris-attacks-timeline/) 
It can still be accessed here though (Note the text - http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/151117104520-paris-fugitive-suspect-car-found-atika-shubert-newsroom-00002619-large-169.jpg) 

This image was taken in daylight so we must assume it was either before or after the attacks - presumably after, in which case it would have to be the 14th November and well after the the putative attack 'Seat' was removed from Montreuil. This is crucial evidence that conflicts with the official story that it was found the next morning in Montreuil! 

Can I also draw your attention to the perhaps significant inclusion of the descriptor "assets" above which I have highlighted. Assets is of course a term applied to those that assist in clandestine operations. Ole Dammegard (See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN89lVPkli0 ) a Swedish journalist who for many years has studied 'False Flag Operations' (FFO) following the assassination of the Swedish Prime Minister, Olof Palme in 1986 has drawn attention to this indicator in other incidents. Is that what it indicates here?

The government must have known the Montreuil car story was false but has never corrected it. Why would the government lie about such an important fact? 

It suggests strongly that it was part of an agreed narrative to make it appear one car was responsible for all but the Catalan raids travelling in a South Easterly direction and abandoned to the North East. So if the car was planted, why not at least make sure it fitted the description? That's difficult to answer. Was it to facilitate it being placed there without creating immediate alarm or descriptions of the driver(s)? Or was it just hoped no one would notice and it would act as a decoy to keep photographers and reporters away from the real car used? (A multitude of other images (four can be found in this Telegraph article dated 15.11.15 here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11997099/Paris-attacks-Guns-empty-magazines-found-in-abandoned-car-in-city-suburb.html) illustrate how all the attention was focused the next day on the Montreuil parking space - now filled with an Audi but with glass from the broken window on the ground to fill the pages, whilst the real car is hardly noticed. (How this technique reminded me of Chevaline!)


http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/151117104520-paris-fugitive-suspect-car-found-atika-shubert-newsroom-00002619-large-169.jpg

Questions

The question must be posed why was the story about the Seat car being abandoned in Montreuil when the evidence suggests the car removed wasn't even a Seat, and that the Seat/Renault was somewhere else entirely? The facts of course undermine the official story completely.

If we still believe the official story that Ibrahim, Salah and a third person unknown were in the Seat (?) we still have to ask how if they did the shooting at four premises in the North West of the Right Bank they were able to get across town and over a mile in distance in under two minutes? The suggestion is quite unrealistic. The timing and distance clearly precludes it. If the car at Montreuil was not the Seat as claimed, the Suicide Event  by Ibrahim further east is also undermined, as how would he have got there if not in the Seat in which it is claimed he was travelling in?

If it was impossible for the attackers in the black Seat (Renault?) to have carried out the Belle Equippe outrage, we have to conclude a second team was responsible there, supported by what appears to be a reliable eye-witness account. If this is true it obviously drives (yet another) cart and horses through the official story.

We therefore conclude that the vehicle retrieved in the Montreuil area was certainly not the black Seat car reported to have been involved in the Casa Nostra shooting and was probably a Citroen C3. If this latter car was involved in the Paris outrage it has not been referred to or been explained in any of the official accounts. It now seems possible that the car used in the attacks was not a Seat at all but a Renault (Clio?) and may have been used by "assets".

This is all deeply suspicious and undermining of the official account.

THE BELLE EQUIPPE (9.35 PM)
92 Rue de Charonne, Paris


9.36pm (2136 hrs) “Attackers shoot diners on the terrace outside the Belle 

Equipe Bar killing nineteen people. (Suggested attackers: Abdelhamid 

Abaaoud. Brahim Abdeslam. Unnamed Attacker.)


'Trendy': The fated La Belle Equipe café, where at least 19 people were killed in Friday night's attacks, was described as 'sober and refined' when it opened in 2014


Belle Equipe Attack

So then pressing on we come to the attack carried out at the most south westerly point at the Belle Equipe Restaurant, where at least nineteen (19) customers sitting outside were shot dead.

The Telegraph account claims that the same team drove from the Casa Nostra, around a mile to the North West – apparently past the area of the Bataclan concert venue – to launch another attack, this time on La Belle Equipe bar in Rue de Charonne where at least 19 people died after the terrace was sprayed with bullets at around 9.35pm. 

This is the quote from the report filed on the 15.11.2015. Please note the deaths at the Bonne Bier are not referred to and again are attributed to the shooting at the nearby Casa Nostra, where probably no one died!


"A black Seat car used by the terrorist gang who fired at people in restaurants during the attacks on Friday - killing 38 - was found abandoned in the early hours of Sunday morning in the eastern suburb of Montreuil, three miles from the scene of the attacks.The Belgian-plated car - the second vehicle police have found linked to Friday's attacks - is thought to have been used in the shootings of customers at Le Petit Cambodge and Le Carillon bar - where 14 died - followed moments later by the attack on La Casa Nostra, where 5 were killed, and the nearby Belle Equipe, on Rue de Charonne, where 19 were gunned down, according to prosecutor Francois Molins." (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11997099/Paris-attacks-Guns-empty-magazines-found-in-abandoned-car-in-city-suburb.html)
Do I need to repeat that the Belle Equippe is not in fact 'nearby' as stated but over a mile distant?
This also accords with the Times report which also puts this attack at 9.36 as follows. It should be noted that the car used for the Bataclan attack is the 'black Seat' where as it is claimed Ibrahim Abdeslam, his brother Salah and a third unidentified (the ninth!) was also in the car. 

So the police story is that this team attack three restaurants in the north east then travel SW, covering the mile or so in no more than two minutes to carry out the Belle Equippe attack before dropping his brother off at the Voltaire to blow himself up, before continuing with his anonymous mate to the area of Montreuil just outside the city boundary. The Seat (?) was apparently found abandoned there on early the next morning on 14 November. 

Problems with the Official Account

There is a BIG problem with the official version of this most terrifying and catastrophic attack and not only the doubt in respect to the suggested attackers. (We should not forget the official story is that it was the black Seat here from which the gunmen attacked, yet it is contended that it was Saleh and Ibrahim (plus another) in that car on its way to the Cafe Voltaire! There number of the murdered and injured hopefully accurately reflected in the reports but there is very serious doubt over how it is explained. As always an inaccurate official version must inevitably point to incompetence or implicating deceit.

Neither the eye-witness description of the killers or of the car support the official line. The two men are described as being in their mid-thirties, white, muscular, calm and with a military disposition. Rather like the shooter at the Casa Nostra, they are informally dressed with no suggestion of either face masks or protective gear, although the description of black clothes would mean this is a different man from the Casa Nostra attacker, who appears in white on the Daily Mail video clip. 

Their approach is well controlled, almost casual, with the passenger doing the shooting and the driver assuming a defensive position resting on the roof of the car. (This would suggest the car approached in the same general direction as the small Renault in the picture above).

When the shooting was over, they calmly drove off in the direction of the Bataclan, which raises the question as to whether this team was involved in the massacre there or elsewhere? What is absolutely clear is that the witness statement does NOT support the story that Abdelhamid Abaaoud or Brahim Abdeslam were involved in this incident, or that the black Seat car was even used! 

The direction of travel is also diametrically opposite to that stated by government and police. They say it was on its way north east to Montreuil by way of the Voltaire Restaurant, whereas witnesses say they went off north west in the direction of the Bataclan or in another in the direction of the Charonne station.

Given the importance and veracity of this information, not least because the witness is named, one is fearful for his safety. People who's observations and memories do not fit government accounts in such situations frequently do not fare well. Let us hope he is not 'persuaded' to change his mind or suffers some inexplicable 'accident'. 

Rather significantly, it is reported that the gunman also fired up at buildings to discourage anyone looking out. This technique was also described at some of the other French incidents, which might point to the same team or at least a common well rehearsed methodology. The account at http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/paris-attack-witness-says-black-6834503 is so important I am reproducing it in full.

'Two heavily armed ISIS pulled up in a black Mercedes-Benz and calmly slaughtered scores of ­innocent diners in a Paris bistro ­before driving away. An eyewitness has told how 20 (me: actually 19) people were executed in a calculated attack on a busy restaurant in the heart of the French capital as they ate at tables on the pavement. A shocking description of the assassins and their barbaric assault came as the first eyewitness accounts emerged last night.


A Reliable Witness (One)?
Mahoud Admo said: “The gunman showed no emotion at all as he began spraying bullets into the diners. He just kept reloading his machine gun and firing, without saying a thing. Mr Admo, 26, who was staying at the Salvation Army hostel in Rue de Charonne opposite the Le Belle Equipe, told how gunmen executed patrons in a drive-by attack.
Trembling as he recalled how the massacre unfolded, he said: “I was just in my room and had the window open on to the street below. I could see lots people sat outside the bar eating dinner and enjoying a drink. The place was full of people just enjoying themselves.”
At about 9.30pm a new looking black Mercedes pulled up outside with dark tinted windows at the back and the passenger and driver windows down. I could clearly see the passenger’s face as he was not wearing a hat or mask.
As soon as the car stopped he quietly opened the door and got out in front of the restaurant.That is when I saw he was holding a machine gun that was resting on his hip. I could not take in what I was witnessing.
People outside spotted the shooter approaching with his gun and tried to run inside but he shot them down in the doorway. Then people inside moved forward to see what was happening and he sprayed more bullets into them. I was trying to catch them on my camera phone but the gunman saw the light on my mobile and I ducked down behind the wall as they fired at my hotel. The gunman calmly reloaded his weapon several times. He then shot up at the windows in the street to make sure nobody was filming anything or taking photographs. It lasted over six minutes”
He fired lots of bullets. He was white, clean shaven and had dark hair neatly trimmed. He was dressed all in black accept for a red scarf. The shooter was aged about 35 and had an extremely muscular build, which you could tell from the size of his arms. He looked like a weightlifter. He was not wearing gloves and his face was expressionless as he walked towards the bar.”
The driver had opened his door shortly before the shooting began and stood up with his arm and a machine gun rested on the roof of the car. He stood there with his foot up in the door acting as a lookout. I would describe him as tall, with dark hair and also quite muscular. They looked like soldiers or mercenaries and carried the whole thing out like a military operation. It was clear that they were both very heavily armed and the gunman was carrying several magazines on him. They both then coolly sat back in the car and sped off in the direction of the Bataclan Theatre.” '

Apart from all the other features of this very full and convincing account, you will notice the car is described as travelling in a north westerly direction, not as the official account has suggested coming from that direction.

A Reliable Witness (Two)?

Meanwhile a completely different account emerges as reported by the Daily Mail here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3318086/11-dead-terrorists-open-fire-Paris-restaurant.html#ixzz3uImQ6ZINIn this, the witness describes three men dressed in black coming out of the restaurant, returning to their car behind a bus. 

Unfortunately this account carries far less weight, indeed gives the impression that it or the reporting of it is completely bogus! Note if reliable, he claims to arrive after the shooting has begun and that the three gunmen are all inside the cafe. That they emerge again whilst he is tending to a dying victim, that they start firing again yet he is completely unharmed despite his opinion that the “shots became more violent and accurate”. 

Then he had “a little meeting with the killers” after he had “hidden behind a bus”. He says they came out and walked past him and it, to their car. Not only is there no description of the car, we are left wondering how he could be hiding behind a bus if they walked past it, not to mention how he had managed to get there with three killers on the loose or what the bus was doing there, stationary at the time? 

The sequencing of this account just does not work, nor is there evidence from the dead and injured mainly outside, that the gun men ever entered the premises. Nor would it be expected that three gunmen would enter it as at least one would have remained outside by the car for sure. 

This account therefore in my mind shouts fabrication and falsehood presumably to support the agreed fantasy of the three ISIS gunmen. It prompted me to research the author a little more from which the following rather interesting biographical information is obtained.

The account is by Sebastien Jeannerot, surely the same 'Theatre Director' (at http://www.sebastien-jeannerot.com/#!biography/c13dnwho has this to say about himself (Google translation): 
"2010 - present
Biography
About me ...
On August 15, 1980 on the fourth floor of the building side courtyard of 36 rue Albert Petit in Bagneux, Sébastien was born in the bowels of French show business, plunged into the mythical home of Mr. Eddie Barclay Records, where his mother managed since 25years artistic pool and the entire staff Barclay. He grew up without knowing even with the greatest artists of the French scene ...

He grew up in the recording studios of the label where it quickly takes the taste of the show.:"

Then there are these examples of his work also on his web site. Some have claimed that the whole thing is a hoax set up with 'crisis actors'. I do not accept that view but never the less I find it strange that one 'seeded' but very unreliable 'eye-witness' account, comes from someone very clearly in that line of work - that is directing and appearing in bloody theatrics!

In 2014, and on tour in 2015 he happened to be directing the George Orwell's '1984'! A critic writes, "The time of interrogation has arrived." How weird is that?


"1984" piles up again for a sixth and final season in Paris! Compulsory show ... to be missed under any circumstances! 1984 - BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU ... "1984 adaptation of the famous novel by George Orwell, worth a last round in Paris. Welcome to the era of Big Brother, an era ... in close resonance with our news ... a little too much for my taste. "

Sébastien Jeannerot - Art Director

THE PRESS :

An impressive sight - Le Figaro        
A totally successful bet - 20 minutes
For one terrifying news - Les Trois Coups
The time of interrogation has arrived! Froggy Delight
ur news ... a little too much for my taste.Sébastien Jeannerot - Art Direct










Another critic has this, "Sébastien Jeannerot Winston is an outstanding, full of nuances, enthusiastic, idealistic, terrified, shot while Swan Demarsan O'Brien made ​​a cynical wish. It's exciting, confusing, realistic and disturbing, with strong scenes that take guts and chill the blood."

So we must conclude that Mr Jeannerot is first and foremost an actor in a provincial theatre company.

The Witness Account by a 'Theatre Director' (as reported by the Daily Mail)

'Sebastian Jeannerot, 35, a theatre director, was approaching the Belle Équipe cafe as the attack was taking place. 'At first I saw a girl sleeping on the table holding a glass of beer. Then I saw a hole in her face, and I realised she had been shot,' he said.

'I ran over to help and I saw big pools of blood, all the people were piled one on top of the other. People were screaming and crying, asking for help.

'There were no cops, nobody, all I could do was say "are you OK?" again and again.

'I saw one girl struggling to breathe, she was choking on blood, asking for help for her friend who was already dead.

'The shots starts again so I ran with some other people and hid behind a bus for many minutes.

'The shots became more and more violent and more and more precise. So long and loud. Then it stopped and went quiet. Then I had a little meeting with the killers.

'Three guys came out wearing black and went past the bus towards a car. They looked young and very professional, wearing black.'


The 'Hero' Story.

The Mail's main story-line is the bravery of a man who lost his life saving that of his girlfriend. If true I take my hat off to him. But we also need to treat such stories with a degree of caution.

Journalists love the 'hero story' in such events. Indeed true heroes deserve to be lionised, but they also tend to be chosen or even created, to provide heart warming and positive aspects, to an otherwise depressing subject. It is the newspaper equivalent of the film thriller 'happy ending'. 

However there can also be a more sinister purpose, namely that of misdirection. Certain agencies are able to 'feed' the press with a prepared story of courage and self sacrifice as a way of diverting attention away from what actually took place. 

The good act is used to camouflage and distract from the bad one. After all there is only so much available newspaper space even for the biggest news story. It takes over the narrative so that awkward questions are not asked and the subliminal 'good triumphs over evil' message is maintained. 'The devil is in the detail' but few examine or question it. 

Other Reports

The article does include one useful fact as follows: "Two gunmen showered La Belle Equipe café with ‘around 100 bullets’ shortly before 8.40pm on Friday, as part of a series of coordinated attacks that paralysed the French capital." 
( http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3319334/Hero-La-Belle-Equipe-Frenchman-died-throwing-bullet-save-woman-s-life-massacre.html#ixzz3u8JyfsWs  )

(Video of the event is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0rBDYAPCpY )

Notice how this specifically contradicts the earlier story of three ISIS gunmen dressed in black
2010 - present
2010 - present

  

'Heavy.com' has this: "The gunmen were outside of La Belle Equipe when they started shooting. They aimed for people who were sitting on the terrace of the cafe. One witness said the shooting lasted about three minutes, the BBC reported. Then the gunmen reportedly got back in their car and headed in the direction of the Charonne station."

Mercedes or Seat?

A significant question here is whether a Mercedes car could have been confused with a Seat, after all both are described as black? However they are very different shape and design and any man with a modicum of car knowledge are unlike to do so. I don't know where Mr Admo originates from, but if from a North African or Middle East country, Mercedes are extremely common there. Further the darkened windows referred to distinguish it from images of the alleged Seat (of which more later)

In any event, even if Mr Admo incorrectly identified the Mercedes, the suggestion that the black Seat at the Casa Nostra was the same one used at the Belle Equippe appears to me to be completely out of the question. To do so it would have had to cover over a mile of Paris Friday night traffic in only a minute or two, a feat that even a police car on an emergency call could not achieve I would suggest. The video of the former suggests 9.34 as the time they left the Casa Nostra and the Belle Equipe attack is said to have started at 9.35 pm (indeed Mr Admo states "about 9.30") lasting between three and six minutes.

So the claim that it was the Casa Nostra team that also carried out the Belle Equippe attack is subject to serious question. Of course if they didn't do it, another team would have been required. 

We might also note that the 'official version' reports 'all 7/8 attackers wore suicide vests'. Neither the shooter at Casa Nostra or at Belle Equippe were seen wearing them. If he didn't and he couldn't have been part of the team that did the shooting at the Belle Equippe, one wonders if the two observed here did either. Why then did the police make the claim? The question must be asked: Was it was part of an agreed fictitious story-line or just another misinformed assumption? Either way it doesn't look good does it?

We therefore conclude different teams in different cars  were employed for the  Belle Equipe (a black Mercedes) in the SE and  Le Petit CambodgeLe Carillon and Casa Nostra  (a black Seat) in the NW of this Right Bank area of Paris. Or was the 'Seat' actually the Renault Clio later abandoned which the police claimed was used by the attackers. Why given the time that has elapsed since have these anomalies and contradictions not been explained?

Copyright Tim Veater. All rights reserved.

No comments:

Post a Comment