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.

 

Obama: "I'm Concerned About a Loose Nuke Being Detonated in Manhattan"- prep for a false flag?

page: 13
47
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by CharlieSpeirs
 


Thanks for that. It is so hard to find reasoned response on anything to do with Obama.

I think it is pretty clear that an objective analysis of his presidency will not treat him well. But it is a result of him being a mediocre to poor President. No question.

But he is not some evil genius or part of some master plan. He is more the Jimmy Carter of this generation. Not the antichrist.

Who was it that originally said that - and I am paraphrasing - "I dont fear the country with a thousand nukes, I worry about the group with one". The point being that a terrorist group that pursues a nuclear weapon, they likely have a plan to use it right away. Not part of a national defense strategy. Not that I am happy about that either.

The point being that the criteria for an outrageous statement from Obama seems to be: Whatever he says.

(Repeat, I am NOT a fan.)
edit on 28-3-2014 by Leonidas because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 08:01 AM
link   
I dont think there's anything to it, but unless you'd received word of a possible attack why on Earth would you be so specific and create fear.

Just shows him as either withholding info or irresponsible with his words.



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Leonidas
 


Thanks pal!!!

He's not the best President, that's true...
He is far from the worst I'd imagine though!!!

At least he's decided to look into the NSA & Israel/Palestine with an objective view point, rather than ignoring it!!!
Which not many have done, that include a long list, not only Presidents but Prime Ministers over here too!!!
He gets credit from me for that!!!


The point being that the criteria for an outrageous statement from Obama seems to be: Whatever he says.

Spot on, we share this opinion too!!!
He's damned if he does, & damned if he doesn't!!!
That's an unfair way to deal with anybody, pure bias IMO!!!


Peace Leo!!!



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   
When someone says they are concerned about something its always because they have become aware of something that has given rise to their concern!!!

By sharing the concern in advance of any event one both prepares the informed and demonstrates a sense of advanced empathy and also a we're in this together (its not my fault kinmanship)!!!

Strange thing for a POTUS to say (being specific too) with him being prompted in someway with something concrete and substantial!!!

On the otherhand it may be nothing and just scaremongering with another purpose in mind!



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   

RP2SticksOfDynamite
When someone says they are concerned about something its always because they have become aware of something that has given rise to their concern!!!


I can't believe on a site where people claim to want to know the truth so many on this thread are willing to turn a blind eye to the inaccuracy of the OP due to the context and full quote not being given.


edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago3111pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)

edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago3111pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   

opethPA

RP2SticksOfDynamite
When someone says they are concerned about something its always because they have become aware of something that has given rise to their concern!!!


I can't believe on a site where people claim to want to know the truth so many on this thread are willing to turn a blind eye to the inaccuracy of the OP due to the context and full quote not being given.


edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago3111pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)

edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago3111pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)


Response was in context.
If quote was innaccurate or half empty then my comments dont apply!



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by opethPA
 


Uh, there was video AND a full article linked. I don't suppose it was the fault of the OP if people didn't watch / and read it.
edit on 28-3-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   
well the turkish politcians have just been found to be talking about commiting a fales flag on their own soldiers
to get the party started in syria
www.abovetopsecret.com...
there is vidio there too
guess who's on the same team as him?

and thats after the false flag gas attacks in syria..wasn't assad at all..ooops



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 06:25 PM
link   

opethPA
Having just saw the section of the speech he was giving I was amazed at how out context the OP really is.

These two scenarios are not the same:

1. The POTUS saying out of nowhere "I am concerned about a nuke in Manhattan"
2. The POTUS answering a question about how concerned he is with the actions of Russia, "Russia is doing something wrong but it's not my biggest safety concern. I am more concerned with a nuke going off in Manhattan than I am with the actions of Russia"

Context is key when reporting information and in this case the context of the statement was not given. The OP left out a key word in what was said and that was more.



edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago3111pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)


Having actually read your posts in this thread I find it imperative to point out the the OP was not providing a news story, he linked to a news story (the title of anyone's OP must be the same as the article you wish to discuss) pasting also a relevant paragraph from the story he linked (see section 15c. of the T&C * Proper Attribution ) where concerned the portion he wished to discuss as well as embedding the video relevant to the portion of the news article he wished to discuss.

Then the OP asked a list of questions and basically asked are these things a concern? Then opened the topic up for discussion of those points when he said:



"What do you think ATS"


He was well within the T&C's **, and everything he did was according to the T&C's and relevant to the questions he wanted to ask and discuss with others.

It is the fault of posters who do not read the OP followed by reading the links given then listening / watching the video before commenting. Anyone who read his link and watched the video would have known the exact context of the statement, and the OP quoted the part where the article stated it was during a press conference at the Hague. That was a big clue to anyone reading right there.

The really big second clue for anyone who had even a passing glance at the video was the great big banner behind the people speaking that said "Nuclear Security Summit" "The Hague, The Netherlands". You didn't even have to turn on the video to see that. There was no one being mislead by the OP.

You could have joined the discussion and simply said that you believed the OP misunderstood the context in which the statement was given and why you believed such and gone into your feelings / non-concern about the statement of the President. Instead you chose to berate the OP for asking to discuss a statement made by the president of the united states in which he was concerned. That is what ATS is - a discussion forum. So before berating anyone in the future, perhaps you should try to enter into an intelligent discussion first.

You might be surprised that you occasionally have just that, intelligent discussion. Until you do, you will never find intelligent discussion with anyone. Also - for your good information: the OP is not even American and no where in his OP did he indicate that he simply despises Obama or that this was in any way an Obama bashing thread. Perhaps you should take your own advice and become fully informed of the facts.



** The T&C's State, in section 15c.. that no more than 10% of any source article be quoted. From a 202 word article, the OP quoted almost 20% of the article - exactly 39 words. That was nearly twice what is allowed per site rules.


It is apparent to me that the OP gave the members of ATS the credit of being intelligent enough to read links before discussing. I would personally expect more of ATS members than to berate someone for giving them the credit of having intelligence.
edit on 28-3-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


Hardly. I seldom worry about things I have no control over...there's little point to it.

But there are folks, who we pay to worry about such things, who are.

It is, however, something that should be of some concern, don't you think?



posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 09:29 PM
link   

OpinionatedB
Having actually read your posts in this thread I find it imperative to point out the the OP was not providing a news story,


That is a fair point, sorry to the OP for blaming them for starting this thread.
The original source material did a horrible job using that headline, it is not what was said .



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


No, I don't think.

How I die is not my main concern, but how I live... I am not willing to lower my quality of life in order to make certain that it will be a bus and not a terrorist who kills me because either way, I'm dead.

Freedom and the quality thereof are what matters.


edit on 29-3-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 05:58 AM
link   

opethPA

OpinionatedB
Having actually read your posts in this thread I find it imperative to point out the the OP was not providing a news story,


That is a fair point, sorry to the OP for blaming them for starting this thread.
The original source material did a horrible job using that headline, it is not what was said .


I agree with the OP creator that it is a discussable point - that statement was way too specific. You would imagine that the president would have generalized more, and specified less - yet he specified. It does put into the mind automatically that the President must be privy to some information concerning a possible terrorist attack.

People's minds tells them that the government has information which they are not speaking about openly - a direct result of the specific nature of the statement, which was made to appear as if it was a mere slip of the tongue. The subconscious thought whispers "They know something - the government has enough information to stop this attack from happening" when you hear that quote. Projecting THAT thought with the sentence was intentional. Once they have the populous thinking this on a subconscious level, then people are willing to hand over more of your constitutional rights and grateful they handed over the one's already given.

It's psychological warfare in its most basic form. If the above was not the intention, the statement would have been general rather than specific (ie: "I am more concerned with terrorists wielding suitcase nukes than I am about a nation like Russia").

Speech writers know psychology - and Obama as well every other President - spends a LOT of money for the best possible speech writers. Some speech writer spend a lot of time, utilizing all his/her knowledge, to make that speech as effective as possible. I don't find it merely coincidental that fear is a direct result of hearing that speech. Although some would like you to think it is.

I simply disagree that it has anything to do with a false flag, that speech did two things, told Russia that they are not seen as a threat and told the American populous that the loss of constitutional rights was worth it because it keeps them safe. A very effective speech indeed.



BTW. I gained respect for you.

edit on 29-3-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Bilk22
reply to post by Danbones
 


Bush would never have made such a stupid remark.


I think Barack has bush covered in the public speaking department. May i remind you of some of George w. Bush's best quotes?

such as "They misunderestimated me"

or the classic "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

this 9/11 conspiracy jackpot "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

I have no words... "There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on --shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Idiosonic

Bilk22
reply to post by Danbones
 


Bush would never have made such a stupid remark.


I think Barack has bush covered in the public speaking department. May i remind you of some of George w. Bush's best quotes?

such as "They misunderestimated me"

or the classic "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

this 9/11 conspiracy jackpot "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

I have no words... "There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on --shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."
We can go back and forth with misspoken words such as Barry's 57 states, etc. They're both part of the same system that's destroying this nation. However Bush would have been lambasted in the press for the remark Barry made about a nuke in Manhattan. Yeah he probably would have said "nucular" bomb though if he had

edit on 70251Saturdayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Bilk22

Idiosonic

Bilk22
reply to post by Danbones
 


Bush would never have made such a stupid remark.


I think Barack has bush covered in the public speaking department. May i remind you of some of George w. Bush's best quotes?

such as "They misunderestimated me"

or the classic "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

this 9/11 conspiracy jackpot "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

I have no words... "There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on --shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."
We can go back and forth with misspoken words such as Barry's 57 states, etc. They're both part of the same system that's destroying this nation. However Bush would have been lambasted in the press for the remark Barry made about a nuke in Manhattan. Yeah he probably would have said "nucular" bomb though if he had

edit on 70251Saturdayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)


Agreed. Hopefully 2016 wont be another drastic swing of the pendulum that seems to go from Bad Democratic President to Bad Republican President.

Sixteen years of bad presidents hasn't helped anybody. Especially since the people are voting for a person or Party, but electing a "Behind the scenes machine" that couldn't give a rat's ass about Democracy and is more interested in repaying all the promises they made to get into power in the first place.

Wow. That was a little cynical. Sorry.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Leonidas

Bilk22

Idiosonic

Bilk22
reply to post by Danbones
 


Bush would never have made such a stupid remark.


I think Barack has bush covered in the public speaking department. May i remind you of some of George w. Bush's best quotes?

such as "They misunderestimated me"

or the classic "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

this 9/11 conspiracy jackpot "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

I have no words... "There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on --shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."
We can go back and forth with misspoken words such as Barry's 57 states, etc. They're both part of the same system that's destroying this nation. However Bush would have been lambasted in the press for the remark Barry made about a nuke in Manhattan. Yeah he probably would have said "nucular" bomb though if he had

edit on 70251Saturdayk22 by Bilk22 because: (no reason given)


Agreed. Hopefully 2016 wont be another drastic swing of the pendulum that seems to go from Bad Democratic President to Bad Republican President.

Sixteen years of bad presidents hasn't helped anybody. Especially since the people are voting for a person or Party, but electing a "Behind the scenes machine" that couldn't give a rat's ass about Democracy and is more interested in repaying all the promises they made to get into power in the first place.

Wow. That was a little cynical. Sorry.
It's difficult to not be cynical. "The government" has become "the revenuers" for their own purposes and not for the people. I was a diehard conservative and still am in the ways that would be expected in terms of fiscal responsibility and moral positioning. I'm not talking bible-thumping conservative. I'm a live and let live person. But I now see no distinction between liberal or conservative. Actually, Obama really opened my eyes more clearly at what is really happening. He's no different than what ever came before and that was the eye-opener.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


True enough. Though I'd prefer to die in my bed of over exertion in my mid 90's, rather than from radiation poisoning from a nuclear bomb, or a dirty bomb...

Living well? Works for me.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Danbones

Obama: "I'm Concerned About a Loose Nuke Being Detonated in Manhattan"
Speaking at a brief news conference in the Hague, President Obama said he's more worried about a loose nuke being detonated in Manhattan than he is about Russia:


www.weeklystandard.com...

Are we being prepped for a false flag, and is Obama is telegraphing to Putin that he would happily start world war three just to spite Russia...because the US has been caught supporting alciaduh in syria and nazis in Ukraine, and is against the democratic process as expressed in Crimea?
or is the president really afraid Russia would start a MAD event?

what do you think ATS?


edit on Tueam3b20143America/Chicago26 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on Tueam3b20143America/Chicago32 by Danbones because: spedding


I think you are kidding yourself if you expect anybody to believe there was a democratic process carried out in Crimea. What is democratic about having armed soldiers standing around at the polls and then already marking some ballots ahead of time. They ended up with 123% of the people voting even though the Tatars didn't vote. How do you get 123% voting unless your counting the Russian soldiers who were there and aren't Ukrainian. You shills are a joke!



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Bilk22
 


I agree he would have. probably because of his supposed involvement in the 9/11 attacks though. I can see why Barack said it though. I believe he meant that there is a greater possibility of a Nuke being detonated in America (New York is the place everyone knows, and had terror attacks in the past) than Russia.

I cannot speak on what Barack has done wrong by America as i am on a different continent and only have limited information. But i remember everyone hated Bush and I don't think Obama is that bad. (maybe he is, i have no clue)



new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join