When armed terrorists attacked Charlie Hebdo headquarters over Muhammad cartoons on January 7, unarmed police officers were forced to flee for their lives. When armed men attacked people gathered in Garland, Texas, on May 3 over Prophet Muhammad cartoons, armed police cut them down — and the Daily Mail reported that the body of one was left lying the street while police searched for explosives.
The difference between Garland and Paris can be summed up in one word: guns.
On January 7, CBS News relayed reports from Britain’s Telegraph newspaper that the first two officers to arrive “were apparently unarmed” and “fled after seeing gunmen armed with automatic weapons and possibly a grenade launcher.” The UK’s Independent reported that “three policemen arrived on bikes but had to leave because [the attackers] were armed.”
BBC reported the Paris gunmen killed 12 in their attack on Charlie Hebdo headquarters; that number includes 8 Charlie Hebdo “eight journalists, two police officers, a caretaker and a visitor.”
Moreover, the terrorists were able to continue their attack at different points in and around the city for the next 48 hours.
On January 19, Breitbart News reported that French police were demanding more guns as well as guns that were more powerful. The Charlie Hebdo attack was very lopsided — in favor of the terrorists — because of policing and arms policies, and had revealed a very important point: Gun control was not working.
Fast forward to Garland, Texas on Sunday, where approximately 75 attendees gathered in the Curtis Culwell Center to attend a contest for the best cartoon of Muhammad. The contest was sponsored by New York-based American Freedom Defense Initiative.
Just before the contest ended, two armed men allegedly drove up near the Culwell Center and shot and wounded a security guard before both were killed by heavily-armed Garland PD.
According to a City of Garland May 3 press release:
As today’s Muhammad Art Exhibit event at the Curtis Culwell Center was coming to an end, two males drove up to the front of the building in a car. Both males were armed and began shooting at a Garland ISD security officer. The GISD security officer’s injuries are not life-threatening. Garland Police officers engaged the gunmen, who were both shot and killed.
There was no prolonged, two-day pursuit of attackers, nor were there unarmed police officers dodging bullets on their bicycles. But there were plenty of guns in the hands of good guys who were keeping watch over the cartoon contest and who were charged with stopping any bad guys with guns who might show up.
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/03/guns-the-difference-between-garland-and-paris/
this story only works because most Americans dont know that all french police ARE armed.
and some have guns with burstfire or full-auto selectors on them – unlike most country’s.
Well, first off we know the Charlie Hebdo shooting was a blatant false flag, and I’m betting this one is also. They are trying to make the cops look like good guys (anybody buy that?) and once again demonize Muslims. The whole event was nothing but a provocation of Muslims.
But come on, if you were going to attack some event, would you just drive right up in your car and start shooting? Or would you approach on foot in a concealed manner, taking up covered firing positions and pick off targets as they are acquired? Could these “shooters” have really been so mad about the cartoons that they threw all regard to personal safety out the window and just drove right up to the front? I doubt it.
Breitbart pushes that Hedbo WASN’T a false flag. Typical shill breitbart site.
“As today’s Muhammad Art Exhibit event at the Curtis Culwell Center was coming to an end, two males drove up to the front of the building in a car. Both males were armed and began shooting at a Garland ISD security officer. The GISD security officer’s injuries are not life-threatening. Garland Police officers engaged the gunmen, who were both shot and killed.”
First of all, if you were a terrorist, why would you wait until AFTER the event is over in order to start shooting up the place? Wouldn’t you do it while it’s going on in order to inflict maximum casualties?
Second of all, if you were a terrorist, why would you drive up and immediately reveal yourself so quickly by shooting a ridiculous security officer?
Third of all, how did the Garland PD get there so fast to gun them down and if they were already there, wouldn’t a terrorist be a little more discreet about killing a security guard so as not to alert the police and wouldn’t they have had alternate plans to deal with the situation?
Fourth of all, if a terrorist planned on shooting up the place like that, you would think that he would have had a lot more men than just him and his partner.
This is all nothing more than a false flag shooting. Plain and simple.
Can we PLEASE STOP CALLING HOAXES, False Flags? False Flags are “real” attacks blamed on someone else. HOAXES ARE “staged” events where there was NO ACTUAL ATTACK.
There is that distinction.
I think its strange that we have a wounded security guard and two dead suspects…not a very successful mission for them. Why attack a heavily guarded event in such a moronic matter.
Gotta get the pigs some good PR. At least for the idiots that still believe this shit. Come on people. Wake up. I’m really starting to get worried about the amount of morons still breathing eating this shit up. Maybe they will be first in line to go to FEMA Inn.
So far, I haven’t seen anything that convinces me that this “attack” took place in Garland. I looked at some of the pictures and video at Daily Mail (yeah, I know), and any views of the supposed dead bodies were always blocked with digitized squares. Plus the photos from the “incident” look staged or composed, with some in uniforms and military dress smiling for the camera. Looks to me like another drill made into a hoax courtesy of commie news, and perhaps a guard who shot himself in the leg.