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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Multiple aggressive terror attacks on American and European soil that are programmed and inevitable

page: 1
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:40 AM
link   
I do believe this email, among others that came up in the latest wikileaks batch is very important, and Americans should all be informed of this.

In this email, it is stated how the Obama administration/HIllary know that more aggressive terror attacks are coming on American and European soil because they are programmed under the current policies...and how they don't want to wait for the next 20 terror attacks and instead whomever is writing to Podesta suggests a United Nations force against ISIS, but the purpose of this UN force is to put reclaimed Syrian soil under UN supervision instead of having it under Assad's supervision.


ISIS

From:brentbbi@webtv.net
To: john.podesta@gmail.com
Date: 2015-02-28 18:49
Subject: ISIS


John, people can agree or not with my views on ISIS, but here the text of a memo I sent today to someone very high level in the USG suggesting a United Nations force against ISIS modeled after the Uniting for Peace resolution during the Korean War:

With ISIS now committing genocide against Christians alongside mass crimes against humanity I would revive my suggestion to enact a resolution of the U.N. General Assembly, based on the precedent established under the Uniting for Peace Resolution during the Korean War, to
create an international force, against the ISIS terrorist state. The General Assembly would actually be preferable to the Security Council, even if Russia would not veto, because a General Assembly-created force could put reclaimed territory in Syria under international
supervision rather than under Assad.

Personally I am not interested in waiting for the next 20 terror attacks before we devise an effective response. We are now embroiled in arcane discussions with a dysfunctional Congress over inadequate policies. There will be multiple aggressive terror attacks including on American and European soil that are programmed as inevitable under the current policies. If there is one matter the nations of the world should be able to unite against, and act against, it is the crimes of ISIS.
...

emailid/727

Both parts are damning, but the one that shows the DNC/Hillary/Obama know that more terror attacks are coming because they are programmed to happen due to the current polices...

Anyone with any common sense should realize that having an open border policy allowing people from areas that are known heavens of ISIS fighters, and the U.S. State Department under the Obama/Hillary administration want to bring these people in troves into the United States, it's only logical that more such terror attacks will happen... Just like they have happened in Europe. The Obama and Clinton fans have denied this, but we have confirmation from the leaked emails that this is true. The Obama/Hillary administration with the help of the Soros Open Society Foundations are using the immigration issue to import terrorists into the United States, and Europe, knowing full well a percentage of these people they are helping immigrate into Europe and the U.S. will commit terrorist attacks in U.S. and European soil.




posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   
We don't even need leaked emails to know what's coming. Look at what has happened to Europe since the flood of "refugees" rolled in. Obama bringing in Syrians by the thousands and a border so porous that almost half of those crossing illegally are not caught. They want to parade a few ISIS sympathizers that are caught, while not telling us how many they think may have already gotten through.
Over half a million illegals cross the border every year, so how hard can it be for terrorist groups to get through.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Yet another line in an email nit picked and concusion drawn from.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Ever wondered if Lucifer has just given orders to his little mud-monkey goons to release these documents so that he can feast on the doom porn that they create ?

Lucifer really is a little programmed bot and its inevitable that humans will rightfully condemn him to hell for all eternity along with his elitist slaves.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Yet another line in an email nit picked and concusion drawn from.


The line is a conclusion, already drawn from the ones in charge. It is their behind closed doors conclusion that they will not say to the public but only to themselves.

You do not like it because it is inconvenient to your worship of all things Hillary, well too bad.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Oh really, you guys are back at the evil muslims taking over europe and da world, but as usual just made up stuff no proof, vage strory lines and annonymous people telling the truth.

Its nearly november, gotta add to all those excuse as to why trump the savior lost and the evil queen hillary as won.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP




posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: dukeofjive696969

Trump will win.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
(shaking head) And yet Trump is supposed to be considered crazy for wanting to keep the refugees over there? For wanting a secure boarder? For wanting to properly vet the people coming into our country? This is nothing new I think we all see that something is going to happen.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   

There will be multiple aggressive terror attacks including on American and European soil that are programmed as inevitable under the current policies.


"Programmed" here means "taken into account." What he's saying is that the current policies will inevitably lead to terrorist attacks. The comparison is with a theater programme, which sets out what audiences are expecting to see, not with a computer program, meaning some process caused under strict instruction.

What makes this clear is the preceding sentence that goes: "Personally I am not interested in waiting for the next 20 terror attacks before we devise an effective response."

So, what he's saying is that US policies will undoubtedly cause more terrorist attacks, but rather than shrug our shoulders and resign ourselves to suffering those attacks, we should be seeking to thwart them, and ideally at the earliest opportunity.

The real scandal here, such as it is, is that the policy (that is stimulating these attacks in the first place) is apparently regarded as untouchable and perfect!
edit on 17-10-2016 by audubon because: mistakenly thought email's author was HRC



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Also, I find it bizarre that this email was sent by a political columnist, who appears to be making demands about the US government's response to terrorism.

Brent Budowsky is a nobody in political terms, although he used to be a big cheese at the CIA (among others).

So what is actually going on in this email?



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 01:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Encryptor
a reply to: dukeofjive696969

Trump will win.


Wanna bet?



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: dukeofjive696969

I don't have to bet, i'm right and you're not.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Encryptor
I hope you are, because the alternative is scary.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Chance321

The alternative is frightening yeah.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: audubon


...
programmed as inevitable under the current policies.


I don't know why you would think anyone would believe the use of the word programmed in that sentence would mean to anyone anything about a computer program... In his own words the email to Podesta states the attacks are programmed and are inevitable because of current policies.

Brent Budowsky was responsible for commerce and intelligence affairs while serving as Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen. Budowsky is currently a member of the International Advisory Council of the Intelligence Summit. He doesn't work in the government anymore, but he is still in the game, not to mention the fact that he is a Hillary supporter.

www.laprogressive.com...


As to what he could have meant by using the word programmed.


See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a plan of action to accomplish a specified end:
a school lunch program.
2.
a plan or schedule of activities, procedures, etc., to be followed.
3.
a broadcasted television or radio production or similar Internet-based content produced for distribution.
4.
a list of items, pieces, performers, etc., in a musical, theatrical, or other entertainment.
5.
an entertainment with reference to its pieces or numbers:
a program of American and French music.
6.
a planned, coordinated group of activities, procedures, etc., often for a specific purpose, or a facility offering such a series of activities:
a drug rehabilitation program; a graduate program in linguistics.
7.
a prospectus or syllabus:
a program of courses being offered.
8.
Digital Technology. a precise sequence of instructions enabling a computer to perform a task; a piece of software.

www.dictionary.com...

There is only a few definitions for the word programmed in the context of that email.


edit on 17-10-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

If you are insisting on stubbornly clinging to the definition of 'programmed' that implies deliberate planning, and ignoring the others that don't imply that, then you have the following question to answer:

If the writer of the email is openly discussing deliberate and predetermined acts of terrorism in that one sentence, why is he talking about the extreme desirability of thwarting those acts of terrorism just two sentences earlier?

His exact words are:


Personally I am not interested in waiting for the next 20 terror attacks before we devise an effective response.


So even if he were talking about his knowledge of forthcoming terrorist attacks, he must be completely insane because he also
a) Wants to come up with an effective response to those attacks (and is asking a fellow conspirator for help!) and
b) Doesn't know what to do to stop them (despite being part of the conspiracy to cause them in the first place!)

So how much advance warning is supposedly being discussed here? I'd suggest the answer is 'pretty much none', and that's being generous.

Over to you.
edit on 17-10-2016 by audubon because: typo fix



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: audubon

You seem adamant on insisting in covering for the statement made by Budowsky. Also noticed how you insist on ignoring the real reason why he says they should push for UN action?... That purpose being to reclaim Syrian territory and put it under supervision of the UN, and not back at the hands of Assad.

Assad is fighting the rebels, and the rebels includes ISIS, so Budowsky is clearly talking about the current programmed U.S. policies are the ones that would allow more terrorist attacks to occur in the U.S. and in European soil.

Let's try this another way.

Whose policies would allow terrorist attacks to occur in the United States? Last i checked the Obama administration policies include bringing in tens of thousands (already ten thousand have been brought in here, and they plan for more) of people from the very same areas in which ISIS has control of... Last I checked similar policies in Europe have allowed terrorists to enter Europe and make attacks there, and that's not mentioning the sexual assaults, and robberies that occurred in New Year's Eve in European cities by the hands of newly arrived Muslim immigrants.


edit on 17-10-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

You haven't answered the question I put to you. So I'm at a loss to understand why you think I should answer yours.

But because I am a (fairly) reasonable person, I will do so.

You asked:



Whose policies would allow terrorist attacks to occur in the United States?


Your question demonstrates a misunderstanding.

It is not a question of a policy allowing terrorist attacks on US soil. That really would be an, er, explosive revelation.

It is a question of US Foreign Policy inspiring terrorist attacks on US soil (i.e., that the terrorists are effectively being provoked)

So, there: That was simple.

BTW please do not insinuate that I am 'covering' for anyone, as it is untrue.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: audubon

I did answer... You are assuming that he doesn't want to wait for the next 20 attacks because of the goodness of his heart. But apparently according to you, because of the goodness of his heart, he simply wants UN action to get the Syrian territory under international supervision, and not to give it back to Assad, even though Assad is fighting against radicals that the U.S. government is arming and helping. Isn't it possible that he simply does not want to wait, and instead just wants for the ball to start rolling so that Syrian soil they take back can be under supervision of the UN as soon as possible? He is using ISIS as an excuse to take territory from Syria... He is not doing it because of "the goodness of his heart".

US Foreign policy did not start radical Islam... It is obvious you are also completely oblivious that radical Islam has existed for thousands of years. In the 17th century radical Islamist countries in north Africa were already conducting attacks against European and American vessels. in fact two of the United States founding fathers went to London to inquire from Tripoli's ambassador why were the Islamist countries attacking vessels from countries that had never done wrong to them... Here is the answer of Tripoli's envoy.


...
In March 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). When they enquired "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:

"It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once."
...

en.wikipedia.org...

Fast forwarding to the present time, if it has been U.S. foreign policy that has caused attacks by radical Islamists, why is it then that they attacked other countries as well such as France?... France was officially against the Iraqi war, yet they were attacked, among others, by Islamic radicals.

The policies which are allowing more, and more Islamic radicals to infiltrate countries like the U.S., and France, is the open policy to let in tens of thousands of Muslims without being vetted from regions that are known to be controlled by radicals such as ISIS.



edit on 17-10-2016 by ElectricUniverse because: add and correct comment.




top topics



 
16
<<   2 >>

log in

join