It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Haven't there been internal conflicts in our military between the Navy and other branches, Mr. Lear? I've heard this from different sources, but don't exactly understand the nature of the conflict besides some cout stuff, so if this mirrors your thoughts, any elaboration on the idea would be appreciated.
Originally posted by johnlear
Things will come to a head soon because U.S. Special Forces have planted about 450 nukes in various parts of Iran mostly around their nuclear facilities. These nukes are to be triggered by an Israeli satellite at the beginning of the war. (The reason the nukes are buried is to limit collateral damage.) Israel will take the blame for dropping nukes even though many of us know that they are already there and that they are 'ours'. All that is needed now is an excuse to launch the war. If the war is launched and the nukes detonated then 'the good guys' lost.
Also, traces of highly enriched uranium, which can be used for the core of a weapon, were discovered through environmental samples taken at another facility. Previous traces were found to have been the result of used and discarded centrifuge equipment the Iranians bought from Pakistan.
source: washingtonpost.com
Olmert, Bush agree on Iran deadline
Ynet learns that Bush told Olmert US time limit for action to stop Iran's nuclear program fits Israel's own timetable, but American diplomats make it clear diplomacy will be given chance
Yitzhak Benhorin Published: 05.25.06, 08:47
(WASHINGTON) US President George W. Bush agreed that plans for American intervention to halt Iran's nuclear program are congruent with a timetable discussed with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert during talks in Washington.
According to Israeli intelligence assessments Iran will acquire the necessary nuclear technology to build a nuclear weapon within a year, Olmert said during the talks.
source: ynetnews.com
Originally posted by johnlear
Snoopy, please give me a reference here and maybe I can help you. Basically the altimeter is set during preflight to the local baromatric pressure so that it reads the exact altitude of the airport. When climbing through 18,000 feet the altimeter is reset to an arbitrary but universal setting of 29.92 inches of mercury so that all airplanes are flying at an altutude from the same reference. Descending back down through 18,000 feet the altimeter is reset to the local barometric pressure at which the airplane is landing.
Please let me know what the question and issue is. Thanks.
Of the UAV or the missile? Its unlikely that the missile had a radar altimeter per se
That's involves individuals who KNOW that a plane is coming, where it's coming, etc. You also have to take into account where these witnesses were located, as this will tell a whole lot as to whether some are fabricating their story
But was the plane a Boeing 757, engine fully-throttled at 400 feet?
Originally posted by johnlear
You are correct. the internal conflict was and is between the Israeli faction (or supporters) who helped engineer 911 and those who were/are against it. The Israeli faction is so strong that some believe it is essentially useless at this point to fight. The faction against the Israeli takeover of the U.S. including Congress and the U.S. Armed Forces were located in the area of the Pentgon that was hit/bombed. I understand it was primarily Navy but it could have been others. The fight is not over and it goes on daily between the 2 factions. But it is going on in near total secrecy.
There is currently an internal war raging in the global intelligence community regarding the alien agenda. This is between negative and positive factions. From my understanding one of the main negative factions is a group centred around MI6 and the CIA called ‘Aquarius‘. This group is covering up the truth, blatantly lying and discrediting or murdering anyone who gets too close to exposing what is going on. There is also a positive group centred around naval intelligence called ’Comm 12’ which is leaking accurate information regarding the alien agenda into the public arena.
When the missile (not plane) hit the pentagon on 9-11, it hit the naval intelligence section of the building. This was part of the internal war between Aquarius and Comm 12 being played out.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
It was the PNAC's desire to have a new "Pearl Harbour" in order to advance their global domination agenda:
www.newamericancentury.org...=%22PNAC%20rebuilding%22
Who they got to carry it out and who led the operation is up in the air.
I think Cheney was in the driver seat given some quotes from the day in question.
Bush is just a taliking head. electable via. name recognition then able to appoint PNAC members to all important positions and 2 supreme court judges.
PNAC/Cheney could have used CIA or Mossad to carry out the operation with a VERY small force. (tens of people).
Originally posted by mf2hd
I second that, definately PNAC and their sick "New Pearl Harbour" wish. They masterminded the attack and used their old friend Osama to carry it out. he might have been even unwiting accomplice in a sense that he didn't know he was being steered by the PNAC.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Originally posted by mf2hd
I second that, definately PNAC and their sick "New Pearl Harbour" wish. They masterminded the attack and used their old friend Osama to carry it out. he might have been even unwiting accomplice in a sense that he didn't know he was being steered by the PNAC.
Why bother actually involving him? why not just use him as a scapegoat?
Why do we not see any video of the "19 hijackers" boarding any planes? Why are they not on the manifests? Why was their DNA not recovered?
They wanted to go to Afghanistan and he was already implicated in the 93 bombing... so the perfect scapegoats... Osama and Al Qaeda.
Originally posted by ferretman2
There are some really stupid statements here...........I suppose Bush was responsible for the 1993 world trade bombing also?...the bombing that failed?
Why didn't the 'planted' explosives go off then?
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Why bother actually involving him? why not just use him as a scapegoat?
Why do we not see any video of the "19 hijackers" boarding any planes? Why are they not on the manifests? Why was their DNA not recovered?
They wanted to go to Afghanistan and he was already implicated in the 93 bombing... so the perfect scapegoats... Osama and Al Qaeda.
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
The "sick new Pearl Harbor wish" is not anything of the sort. What PNAC said was that a massive transformation of the US military wouldnt happen absent an event like Pearl Harbor. It wasnt calling for nor planning any kind of attack. It was merely assessing the political realities of spending the kind of money it would take to transform the military for their assessment of 21st century threats.
to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro as part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose anti-Castro initiative. The plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state sponsored terrorism (such as hijacked planes) on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the highest ranking member of the U.S. military, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer.
... the 9/11 Scholars for Truth whose membership includes up to 75 leading scientists and experts from universities across the US.
... believe a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century, set on US world dominance, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran.
Mr. President, September Eleventh was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathies.
All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property, and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection, and intelligence systems – and even hunts its opponents abroad. September Eleventh was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?
All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbors of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9/11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatized by the attacks – some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity, constantly talking about the possibility of new terror attacks and keeping the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic?
American citizens lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work, and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?
Some believe that the hype paved the way – and was the justification – for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of media. In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly – for the public to, finally, believe – and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.
Will the truth not be lost in a contrived and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values? Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well?