Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
09-08-2007, 05:00 PM, (This post was last modified: 09-08-2007, 05:31 PM by rsol.)
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!

Air Force official fired after 6 nukes fly over U.S.

Quote:WASHINGTON - A B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear warheads and flown for more than three hours across several states last week, prompting an Air Force investigation and the firing of one commander, Pentagon officials said Wednesday.

Rep. Ike Skelton, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, called the mishandling of the weapons “deeply disturbing” and said the committee would press the military for details. Rep. Edward J. Markey, a senior member of the Homeland Security committee, said it was “absolutely inexcusable.”

“Nothing like this has ever been reported before and we have been assured for decades that it was impossible,” said Markey, D-Mass., co-chair of the House task force on nonproliferation.

The plane was carrying Advanced Cruise Missiles from Minot Air Force Base, N.D, to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of a Defense Department policy not to confirm information on nuclear weapons.

The missiles, which are being decommissioned, were mounted onto pylons on the bomber’s wings and it is unclear why the warheads had not been removed beforehand. Earlier, the Associated Press erroneously reported the bomber was armed with only five warheads.

This is the scary bit

Quote:Investigation to take weeks

The Air Combat Command has ordered a command-wide stand down on Sept. 14 to review procedures, officials said. They said there was minimal risk to crews and the public because of safety features designed into the munitions.

In addition to the munitions squadron commander who was relieved of his duties, crews involved with the mistaken load — including ground crew workers — have been temporarily decertified for handling munitions, one official said.

The investigation is expected to take several weeks.

The incident was first reported by Military Times newspaper group.

“There is no more serious issue than the security and proper handling of nuclear weapons,” Skelton said in a statement Wednesday. “The American people, our friends, and our potential adversaries must be confident that the highest standards are in place when it comes to our nuclear arsenal.”

Skelton, D-Mo., said his committee will pursue answers on the classified matter “to ensure that the Air Force and the Department of Defense address this particular incident and strengthen controls more generally.”

Please note the date September 14th. They have decided to publish a date for a command wide "stand down" As You well know, the air force were doing "exercises" on the day of sept 11.

Its bad enough To have them standing down but to publish on MS NBC?!?!? They are either nuts and deciding that the only people in the world needing to worry about terrorists are us or, they could be setting themselves up with a "warning sign" for "experts" to study later.

The most paranoid country in the world, lets the entire planet know when everyone in the top brass is going to be real busy. Watch out for the 14th and onward.
09-08-2007, 06:19 PM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Nothing happens by accident, as the saying goes.

Hope you're wrong.
09-08-2007, 07:16 PM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Good eye, if this is what it sounds like, we could really be in for it here in North America
Big Attack. Martial Law. Dictator Bush. It lines up, its the right timing.
and with the Superhighway taking shape, borders will be closed around the entire continent.
It'll happen fast, and frankly, Im not ready for it.
09-09-2007, 11:17 AM, (This post was last modified: 09-09-2007, 11:19 AM by DJOldskool.)
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Yep that is yet another potential clue pointing to the days around 911.

I think we should have a false flag warning system

blue - very little chance soon

green - no specific threats but general chance

yellow - info about pionting to iminant threat

red - Its on, info suggests certain iminant threat, or we are being strawmanned

Wad ya think?

Edit: I think the current threat is yellow
09-10-2007, 05:53 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
We're always being strawmanned
09-10-2007, 11:46 PM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
[Image: 91407.jpg]

I did this just there on a word processor, I doesn't take a genius to figure out what it means. I could be over doing it but seriously, it IS very odd and intriguing indeed.

09-11-2007, 12:03 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Oh my god, nuclear false flag may be immement That's fucked up about the wingdings format too. Damn it I hope we're wrong!
[Image: paulbanneroc1.gif]
09-11-2007, 01:34 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Quote:[Image: 91407.jpg]

I did this just there on a word processor, I doesn't take a genius to figure out what it means. I could be over doing it but seriously, it IS very odd and intriguing indeed.

I never said I was a genius......what does it mean?
09-11-2007, 02:19 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
This seems pretty serious.

The flow of Osama's videos in last days is unusual, as is everything around the missing nukes and command to all fighters and bombers to stay grounded on sept. 14 "to search for the sixth nuke".

US air will be without defense, surely on purpose.

Let's hope we are all wrong.
One day Chuang Tzu and a friend were walking by a river. &Look at the fish
swimming about,& said Chuang Tzu, &They are really enjoying themselves.&

&You are not a fish,& replied the friend, &So you can't truly know that they
are enjoying themselves.&

&You are not me,& said Chuang Tzu. &So how do you know that I do not
know that the fish are enjoying themselves?&
09-11-2007, 02:59 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Some interesting reading:

Quote:Was a Covert Attempt to Bomb Iran with Nuclear Weapons foiled by a Military Leak?

On August 30, a B-52 bomber armed with five nuclear-tipped Advanced Cruise missiles traveled from Minot Air Force base, North Dakota, to Barksdale Air Force base, Louisiana. Each missile had an adjustable yield between five and 150 kilotons of TNT which is at the lower end of the destructive capacities of U.S. nuclear weapons. For example, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of 13 kilotons, while the Bravo Hydrogen bomb test of 1954 had a yield of 15,000 kilotons. The B-52 story was first covered in the Army Times on September 5 after the nuclear armed aircraft was discovered by Airmen. What made this a very significant event was that it was a violation of U.S. Air Force regulations concerning the transportation of nuclear weapons by air. Nuclear weapons are normally transported by air in specially constructed planes designed to prevent radioactive pollution in case of a crash. Such transport planes are not equipped to launch the nuclear weapons they routinely carry around the U.S. and the world for servicing or positioning.

The discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists, the first time in 40 years that a nuclear armed plane had been allowed to fly in the U.S (see: ). Since 1968, after a SAC bomber crashed in Greenland, all nuclear armed aircraft have been grounded but were kept on a constant state of alert. After the end of the Cold War, President George H. Bush ordered in 1991 that nuclear weapons were to be removed from all aircraft and stored in nearby facilities.

Recently, the Air Force began decommissioning its stockpile of Advanced Cruise missiles. The five nuclear weapons on the B-52 were to be decommissioned, and were to be taken to another Air Force base. An Air Force press statement issued on September 6 claimed that there "was an error which occurred during a regularly scheduled transfer of weapons between two bases." Furthermore, the statement declared: "The Air Force maintains the highest standards of safety and precision so any deviation from these well established munitions procedures is considered very serious." The issue concerning how a nuclear armed B-52 bomber was allowed to take off and fly in U.S. air space after an 'error' in a routine transfer process, is now subject to an official Air Force inquiry which is due to be completed by September 14.

Three key questions emerge over the B-52 incident. First, why did Air Force personnel at Minot AFB not spot the 'error' earlier given the elaborate security procedures in place to prevent such mistakes from occurring? Many military analysts have commented on the stringent security procedures in place to prevent this sort of mistake from occurring. Multiple officers are routinely involved in the transportation and loading of nuclear weapons to prevent the kind of 'error' that allegedly occurred in the B-52 incident. According to the Air Force statement, the commanding officer in charge of military munitions personnel and additional munitions airmen were relieved of duties pending the completion of the investigation. According to Kristensen, the error could not have come from confusing the Advanced Cruise Missile with a conventional weapons since no conventional form exists. So the munitions Airmen should have been easily able to spot the mistake. Other routine procedures were violated which suggests a rather obvious explanation for the error. The military munitions personnel were acting under direct orders, though not through the regular chain of military command. This takes me to the second question

Who was in Charge of the B-52 Incident?
Who ordered the loading of Advanced Cruise missiles on to a B-52 in violation of Air Force regulations? The quick reaction of the Air Force and the issuing of a public statement describing the seriousness of the issue and the launch of an immediate investigation, suggests that whatever occurred, was outside the regular chain of military command. If the regular chain of command was violated, then we have to inquire as to whether the B-52 incident was part of a covert project whose classification level exceeded that held by officers in charge of nuclear weapons at Minot AFB. The most obvious governmental entity that may have ordered the nuclear arming of the B-52 outside the regular chain of military command is the last remaining bastion of neo-conservative activism in the Bush administration.

Vice President Cheney has taken a very prominent role in covert military operations and training exercises designed for the "seamless integration" of different national security and military authorities to possible terrorist attacks. On May 8, 2001, President Bush placed Cheney in charge of "[A]ll federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction, consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies". Cheney subsequently played a direct role in supervising training exercises that simultaneously occurred during the 911 attacks ( click here).

According to former Los Angeles Police Officer Michael Ruppert, Cheney had a parallel chain of command that he used to override Air Force objections to stand down orders that grounded the USAF during the 911 attacks. Ruppert learned that the Secret Service had the authority to directly communicate presidential and vice presidential orders to fighter pilots in the air thereby circumventing the normal chain of command. (Crossing the Rubicon, pp. 428 - 429). Furthermore: "It is the Secret Service who has the legal mandate to take supreme command in case of a scheduled major event - or an unplanned major emergency - on American soil; these are designated "National Special Security Events"." ( click here).

Ruppert and others have subsequently claimed that 911 was an "inside job;" and Cheney through the Secret Service, played a direct leadership role in what occurred over 911. Consequently, it is very possible that Cheney played a similar role in circumventing the regular chain of military command in ordering the B-52 incident. It is likely that the B-52 incident was part of a contrived "National Special Security Event" directly controlled by Cheney by virtue of the authority granted to him by President Bush, and through the Secret Service which has the technological means to by pass the regular chain of military command.

An Exopolitical Perspective
If Cheney is identified as the architect of the B-52 incident, was he acting alone in a covert operation that bypassed the regular chain of command, and involved the nuclear arming of the B-52? In terms of my own analysis of 911 as an inside job, there is reason to believe that a more deeply entrenched parallel system of government exists than what has been created by Cheney through the Office of Vice President and the Secret Service (read article). Cheney and his neo-conservative allies could not have gained the necessary degree of bureaucratic and public control necessary for conducting the 911 operation in the eight month period between his assumption of power and the 911 attack, unless tacitly supported by a more entrenched system of parallel governmental power. This more entrenched parallel government is deeply nested within the military-industrial-educational complex and controls covert projects beyond the need the know of most civilian and military officials.

Evidence for the existence of covert projects outside of the regular chain of military command is illustrated in the case of Vice Admiral Tom Wilson who was J-2, head of Intelligence for the Joint Chief of Staff. In 1997, Dr Steven Greer and former Astronaut Dr Edgar Mitchell had a private meeting with Admiral Wilson about classified projects related to extraterrestrial life. Greer claimed that he had been given a "secret document that had a list of the code names and projects names dealing with the extraterrestrial connected projects." When Wilson checked to determine if the projects existed, he was denied access. According to Greer:

Once Admiral Wilson identified this group, he told the contact person in this super-secret cell: "I want to know abut this project." And he was told, "Sir, you don't have a need to know. We can't tell you." Now, can you imagine being an admiral, J-2, the head of intelligence for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at the Pentagon, and being told, "We not going to tell you"? Well, he was shocked and angry. (Steven Greer, Hidden Truth, Forbidden Knowledge, 158).

The existence of a parallel governmental system using military personnel for its own purposes has been suspected for some time as illustrated in comments by Senator Daniel Inouye at the 1987 Iran-Contra Senate hearings: "There exists a shadowy Government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, it's own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of the national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself."

There is more recent testimony by two retired military personnel, Clifford Stone and Dan Sherman, who claim that they were routinely tasked to perform classified duties outside of the regular chain of command, and these were related to extraterrestrial life and technology. The existence of a parallel system of government that circumvents the regular chain of military command in approving highly classified covert projects predates the rise to power of Cheney and his neo-conservative allies in the Bush administration. It is likely that Cheney was influenced by a "shadow government" in formulating policies such as the 911 attacks and the B-52 incident as part of a wider global agenda by the shadow government. Consequently, in response to my second key question, the B-52 incident was not an 'error', but was actually ordered by Vice President Cheney who acts as the most public face of a parallel system of government that operates through compliant political operatives. I now move to my third key question.

Why were the nuclear weapons sent to Barksdale AFB? If initial reports that the weapons were being decommissioned, but were mistakenly transported by a B-52 bomber, then the weapons should have been taken to Kirtland Air Force Base. According to Kristensen, this is "where the warheads are separated from the rest of the weapon and shipped to the Energy Department's Pantex dismantlement facility near Amarillo, Texas." However, it has been revealed by a reliable source that Barksdale AFB is used as a staging base for operations in the Middle East. This is circumstantial evidence that the weapons were being deployed for possible use in the Middle East.

There has been recent speculation concerning a possible attack against Iran given reports that the Pentagon has completed plans for a three day bombing blitz of Iran according to a Sunday Times report . The Report claims that 1200 targets have been selected and this will destroy much of Iran's military infrastructure. Such an attack will devastate Iran's economy, create greater political instability in the region, and stop the oil supply. A disruption of the oil supply from the Persian Gulf could trigger a global economic recession and lead to the collapse of financial markets. In a synchronistic development, there have been reports of billion dollar investments in high risk stock options in both Europe and the U.S. that would only be profitable if a dramatic collapse of the stock market were to occur before September 21. Similar stock options were purchased weeks before the 911 attack in 2001, and investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for possible insider trading. The combination of the Sunday Times report and the Stock market option purchases is circumstantial evidence that plans for a concerted military attack against Iran have been secretly approved and covert operations have begun (read article).

Seymour Hersh in May 2006 reported the opposition of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.

In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran's uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. …. "Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning," the former senior intelligence official told me. "And Pace stood up to them. Then the world came back: 'O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.' (read article).

Given earlier opposition by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it is likely that the present attack plans for Iraq drawn up by the Pentagon don't involve the use of nuclear weapons. In order to circumvent the regular chain of command, opposed to a nuclear attack, it is very likely that Vice President Cheney contrived a "National Special Security Event" that involved a nuclear armed B-52. This would have given him the legal authority to place orders directly through the Secret Service to the Air Force officers responsible for the B-52 incident.

Conclusion: Exposing those Responsible for the B-52 Incident
Consequently, there is considerable circumstantial evidence to argue that the nuclear armed B-52 was part of a covert operation, outside the regular chain of military command. The most plausible authority responsible for this was Vice President Cheney. He very likely used the Secret Service to take charge of a contrived National Special Security Event involving a nuclear armed B-52 that would be flown from Minot AFB. The B-52 was directed to Barksdale Air Force base where it would have conducted a covert mission to the Middle East involving the detonation of one or more nuclear weapons most likely in or in the vicinity of Iran. This could either have occurred during a conventional military strike against Iran, or a False Flag operation in the Persian Gulf region.

The leaking and discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 at Barksdale was not part of the script. According to a confidential source of Larry Johnson, a former counter-terrorism official from the State Department and CIA, the discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was leaked. Johnson concludes : "Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran? I don't know, but it is a question worth asking."

While the general public is likely to be given a watered down declassified report by the Air Force over the B-52 incident on September 14, the real investigation will reveal that it was part of a covert operation that intended to bypass the regular chain of command in using nuclear weapons in the Middle East. This will likely result in a furious backlash by key figures in the regular military chain of Command such as Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and the Commander of Central Command, Admiral William Fallon, who have direct responsibility for the conduct of military operations in the Middle East. The US. Air Force, the Secretary of Defense and Commander of Central Command, is now aware of what was likely going to be the true use of the B-52 and the responsibility of the Office of the Vice President. It is very likely that the exposure of the B-52 incident will lead to an indefinite hold on plans to attack Iran given uncertainty whether other nuclear weapons have been covertly positioned for use in the Middle East. Significantly, public officials briefed about the true circumstances of the B-52 incident will almost certainly place enormous pressure on Vice President Cheney to immediately resign if it is found that he played the role identified above. It is therefore anticipated that in a very short time, the public will learn that Cheney has resigned for health resigns.

The forthcoming September 14 Air Force report will likely describe the B-52 incident as an "error" and an "isolated incident" as foreshadowed in the September 6 press statement. This will create some difficulty in exposing the actual role played by Cheney and more entrenched government interests that supported him. There will be a need for continued public awareness of the true events behind the B-52 incident in order to expose the actual role of Cheney. Only in that way can Cheney be held accountable for his actions, and the more deeply entrenched shadow government that tacitly supported his neo-conservative agenda be exposed. Regardless of whether Cheney's role as the prime architect of the B-52 incident is exposed to the public, the official backlash against his covert operation should force his resignation. In either case, a very dangerous public official would be removed from a powerful position of influence. More importantly, the world has been spared a devastating nuclear war by courageous American airmen who revealed the true contents of an otherwise routine B-52 landing at Barksdale, AFB headed for a covert nuclear mission to the Middle East.

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D
Kona, Hawaii

Will the U.S. Attack Iran Before September 21? - Are CIA Front Companies Investing $4.5 Billion to Profit from attacking Iran?

By Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

There has been much recent speculation that the Bush administration is about to authorize a massive preemptive aerial assault against Iran. According to Alexis Debat, a national security expert, the Pentagon has prepared for airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran that would in three days destroy Iran's military infrastructure ( ). Such an assault has been long in preparation and was recently fully completed according to a Navy whistleblower currently serving on a U.S. aircraft carrier. The whistleblower, a female officer, said that "all the targets have been chosen, prioritized, and tasked to specific aircraft, bases, carriers, missile cruisers and so forth" (see: ). Asked why she would risk her career to disclose such sensitive information, she replied that most Naval officers are opposed to the strike but are ignored by more senior officials and the Bush administration.

What gives these reports of an imminent attack against Iran greater credibility is an August 2007 purchases of almost 4.5 billion dollars in particular type of stock called 'put options' and 'call options' which are based on a dramatic shift in the U.S. stock market (see: ). Essentially, a "put option" is where an investor speculates that the market will drop dramatically, say 30-50%, whereas a "call option" is where the investor bets particular stocks will rise just as dramatically. If the stock fails to dramatically shift either up or down by September 21, then the investors stand to lose much from their investment. Such an investment is very unusual and has many market analysts puzzled as to why someone would risk such a large sum unless they had some insider information.

A similar stock market event happened in the weeks before 911 when anonymous investors made great profits when they successfully 'predicted' a dramatic drop in airline and insurances stocks, while also 'predicting' dramatic increases in stocks of corporations producing military armaments (see: ). The investments were so suspicious that they became subject to an insider trading investigation by U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) but the no one was ever identified or charged. This was despite a determined effort by the SEC to find who was behind the mysterious investments.

The parallels with 'put" and "call option" purchases just before 911 has led to much speculation that the recent $4.5 billion investment is based on insider knowledge of another 911 event before September 21. This has led to speculation that a catastrophic event is about to occur in the U.S. Another explanation for a dramatic shift in the stock market is that China will desert the US currency leading to a collapse in the US dollar. Both explanations would essentially lead to a collapse in some U.S. stocks, while other stocks would rise.

A more plausible explanation for the mysterious billion dollar investments is that hidden investors have insider knowledge that an attack against Iran will occur before September 21. If an attack occurred along the scale described by emerging reports, then the U.S. stock market would collapse as oil prices escalated dramatically. This would spark a global recession, and cause great hardship to many Americans who would find their investments and jobs at risk.

It is very likely that the planned massive aerial attack against Iran's military infrastructure and underground nuclear facilities will use bunker busting nuclear weapons. The question is, what can be done to prevent a preemptive military attack on Iran that may use tactical nuclear weapons to destroy its nuclear facilities?

In 2006, a similar effort to stage a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran was prevented by a revolt of the generals. According to Seymour Hersh:
"In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran's uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. …. "Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning," the former senior intelligence official told me. "And Pace stood up to them. Then the world came back: 'O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.' " .
It may be significant that General Peter Pace was not reappointed as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Pace was opposed to a nuclear strike against Iran. Was he not reappointed in order to clear the decks for a more permissive environment within the Joint Chiefs of Staff for an attack that could use tactical nuclear weapons? It appears so given the coincidence of reports of an imminent attack and purchase of $4.5 billion in stock options predicting a collapse in the US stock market.

The current military plans available to the public mention only conventional munitions but it is more likely that some tactical nuclear weapons will be used to take out Iran's deeply buried nuclear facilities. The effect of tactical nuclear weapons to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities would be devastating. Radioactive contamination would disperse widely affecting the health of many. At the same time, Iran's military and much of its civilian infrastructure would be destroyed by conventional munitions. This would restrict Iran's abilities to cope with the health and humanitarian impact of the use of nuclear weapons, and destruction of nuclear facilities.

The question to be asked is "who are the hidden investors with insider knowledge that can gain them billions in short term profits?" This answer will give an important clue to the long term agenda being played out, and the actors involved. In the case of 911, similar investors were able to evade detection from an official investigation by the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC launched an unprecedented investigation that deputized "hundreds, if not thousands, of key players in the private sector" (see: ). According to a former Los Angeles Police Officer, Michael Ruppert, what effectively happens when individuals are deputized is that they are sworn to secrecy on national security grounds. This was a very effective way of keeping secret what was discovered in the SEC investigation. What kind of investor would have the power to subvert an SEC investigation in this manner? The most likely answer is the CIA.

CIA front companies annually supply funds for a black budget used to fund covert national security projects . The black budget has been estimated to range between 1.0 to 1.7 trillion dollars annually which is funneled through the CIA to various military-corporate entities fulfilling such projects (see: ). The massive size of the black budget is needed to fund a second Manhattan Project - projects related to technologies so advanced that many claim them to be extraterrestrial in origin. Credible whistleblowers have come forward to claim the existence of such technologies and of a high level government cover up of extraterrestrial life (see: ). They claim that most Congressional officials are not briefed on extraterrestrial related projects due to national security concerns. Consequently, Congress is not aware of or permit appropriations for a second Manhattan Project, funds therefore need to be generated in alternative ways.

The CIA is able to perform this function of secretly raising revenue through the 1949 CIA Act which authorizes the CIA to expend funds "without regard to any provisions of law". The CIA therefore does not have to follow any legal requirements for the funds it procures from various sources, and funnels to military-corporate entities directly responsible for the second Manhattan project.

There needs to be public opposition to a preemptive military attack against Iran, and exposure of the underlying agenda behind it and those intending to profit from it. An informed public is the best safeguard against unwarranted abuses of executive power such as a preemptive attack against Iran that does not have the support of the American people or Congress. In addition to raising public awareness, it will be very helpful for individuals to project thoughts of peace and goodwill to the Middle East, and especially to Iran. The Princeton Project on Global Conscious Project at Princeton University has demonstrated the effect of large numbers of people placing their attention in ways that can impact on global events (see: ). If millions of people could project a positive vision of peace and harmony to Iran and U.S. military forces in the region, then such a preemptive attack may be prevented.

The period leading up to September 21 will be critical for the whole planet as the signs are all too evident that a preemptive attack against Iran, almost certainly involving nuclear weapons, is imminent. The humanitarian cost in terms of possible radioactive fallout, and casualties from the destruction of Iran's military and much of its civilian infrastructure may be catastrophic for the Persian Gulf region. Furthermore, the U.S. and global economy will go into a deep free fall in the event of dramatic increases in oil prices and further instability in the Middle East. Out of this looming tragedy, investors with possible CIA connections and insider knowledge, plan to profit in ways that may be used to secretly fund a second Manhattan Project.

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D
Kona, Hawaii

Forward as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications. Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.

One day Chuang Tzu and a friend were walking by a river. &Look at the fish
swimming about,& said Chuang Tzu, &They are really enjoying themselves.&

&You are not a fish,& replied the friend, &So you can't truly know that they
are enjoying themselves.&

&You are not me,& said Chuang Tzu. &So how do you know that I do not
know that the fish are enjoying themselves?&
09-11-2007, 04:03 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
at the risk of sounding NAIVE ::::
explain the winging thing please, i dont get it
i know 911 makees planes and towers or something but what does a file and a keyboard mean??
09-11-2007, 04:05 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Yeah the 07 looks kinda like a suitcase next to a bomb but I don't get the other two
[Image: paulbanneroc1.gif]
09-11-2007, 04:40 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
I see what looks like a webcam, although you could think it a trackball.... then I see a open folder, or some might call it a directory.... then I see document (i.e wordprocessor) files... then a closed folder, then a terrible looking keyboard.

However if I stand on my head whilst looking at it I see suitcased nukes, a UK police car with a hosepipe coming out of it, some lines of cocaine perfectly aligned on a mirror and a big brother style camera filming us all... I am absolutely shitting myself (not a good idea when standing on ones head!).
09-11-2007, 04:56 AM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
thyre gonna film documents being blownup by a suitcase bomb upside down?
doesnt exactly send shivers down my spine.
but it does remind me of Team America for some reason.
09-11-2007, 10:10 PM,
WARNING: Possible terror attack alert!
Regardless of if that wingdings font picture is indicative of something going to happen or not, there is cause to be suspicious that there may be a nuclear false flag on the 14th. I'll certainly be pleased if I'm wrong & there isn't.
[Image: paulbanneroc1.gif]

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Details About Chemical Attack In Damascus You Won’t Be Hearing On BBC Or Sky News Frank2 4 905 09-20-2013, 03:51 PM
Last Post: Frank2
  US attack on Syria delayed after surprise U-turn from Obama drummer 2 478 09-01-2013, 09:37 AM
Last Post: mexika
  Big Brother Alert - Cameras in the Cable Box to Monitor TV Viewers datars 1 279 07-02-2013, 08:47 PM
Last Post: mexika
Video DHS Practices Mowing Down Civilian "Zombies" During Anti-Terror Training drummer 0 391 04-11-2013, 10:36 PM
Last Post: drummer
  Father Of Murdered Navy Seal in Benghazi, Recounts Days After Attack datars 0 401 10-28-2012, 08:11 AM
Last Post: datars
Exclamation Today's Set-up for a Nuclear False Flag Attack CharliePrime 13 2,248 06-21-2012, 05:37 PM
Last Post: SiLVa
  Israel, US & UK Consider Attack On Iran: Corporate-Fascists Clamor for Iran War B4Time 50 6,397 04-17-2012, 01:07 AM
Last Post: FastTadpole
  Former German Minister Says Building 7 Used To Run 9/11 Attack Solve et Coagula 2 692 02-27-2012, 04:08 PM
Last Post: icosaface
  C.I.A. Demands Cuts in Book About 9/11 and Terror Fight TriWooOx 0 380 08-26-2011, 09:37 AM
Last Post: TriWooOx
  Norway Terror Attacks a False Flag Solve et Coagula 0 397 07-25-2011, 08:57 PM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)