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.

 

Uranium One plus Clinton equals Russia is planning to build its first nuclear aircraft carrier

page: 3
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Waterglass

I wanna say that I have heard all contemporary navy’s are inherently outdated..

The future is drones with extended ranges and bigger payloads..

That would be like the Italians rushing to make wooden warships






Russia russhuvf tib




posted on May, 10 2019 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Waterglass

Fox News even did a segment debunking uranium one as it concerns Hillary Clinton..


There are 9 dept heads who have to sign off on any uranium deal and none were Hillary Clinton.

She was like one of the 9’s boss..


Plus none of the money end works either.. the donor in question sold the company years before the uranium deal..


Here let conservative Fox News explain it better...

youtu.be...



posted on May, 10 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Bluntone22

Never happened.

Read and learn...

www.factcheck.org...



My question, what is a charity donating to the clinton foundation that could be used for campaigning? I thought to be a charity you had to be helping people in need. Not a campaign. It sounds like the charity is a front, with Uranium one actually donating a lot of the excess money going to the Clintons.




The Clinton Foundation is a fully registered and audited nonprofit organization set up for philanthropic work. According to its website, neither Bill nor Chelsea (both board members) draw any salary from it. When Hillary was a board member, she did not draw a salary, either. The Foundation's funds are carefully accounted for, audited routinely, and are public knowledge; they can't be used for campaigning and there is no evidence that they ever have been.

You're just making stuff up.



posted on May, 10 2019 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Bluntone22

Never happened.

Read and learn...

www.factcheck.org...



My question, what is a charity donating to the clinton foundation that could be used for campaigning? I thought to be a charity you had to be helping people in need. Not a campaign. It sounds like the charity is a front, with Uranium one actually donating a lot of the excess money going to the Clintons.




The Clinton Foundation is a fully registered and audited nonprofit organization set up for philanthropic work. According to its website, neither Bill nor Chelsea (both board members) draw any salary from it. When Hillary was a board member, she did not draw a salary, either. The Foundation's funds are carefully accounted for, audited routinely, and are public knowledge; they can't be used for campaigning and there is no evidence that they ever have been.

You're just making stuff up.


www.judicialwatch.org...



posted on May, 10 2019 @ 09:19 PM
link   
First of all, Russia obtained no nuclear material through Uranium One. How are you suggesting it affected their ability to make a nuclear aircraft carrier? They have nuclear material already.



posted on May, 11 2019 @ 05:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Waterglass

They really don't need one the have set up islands and countries,been building airstrips in the So American islands,Mexico,middle east,they have many long range nukes,and we may see one soon,if DC keeps invading countries



posted on May, 11 2019 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

Thanks. I coined this thread as such to see what factually could be drawn out by others. Actually a lot of stuff. 1st Russia is the worlds 5th largest producer of Uranium. Three former Soviet Union "states" are also among the top ten. The USA is 9th. So why would the USA allow any public or private USA company to sell any of its Uranium mines to any organization outside of its border as its a matter of national security. Right? Now that's the real question. Why?


edit on 11-5-2019 by Waterglass because: added



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 04:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: Waterglass

Totally agree with you
the world really needs a strong Russia. The old balance of power between west and Soviets worked great, sure there was a threat of war but both sides were from western civilisation and had some respect for our ways of life. They should never have given a chance between them for the rise of China which has destroyed most of our manufacturing, there was a time when USSR and USA / Europeans competed in industrial production.................... These were really the good old days and the Christian world ruled between them the seas and made its own stuff, now the asians got on their feet (we fed them and nutured them through our insanity) now all our real jobs went asia and the locals had the jobs stolen by the asians. Russia was strong back then, they are now screwed like the rest of us by asians and their cheap labour sell it for nothing tactics and we must consider that an act of war, indeed the asians commit war crimes in this approach and need to answer for this and the way they caused all the industrial theft of ideology and tech / jobs thus causing unemployment and then the drugs took over. Nuke China and Vietnam too while we're at it then get Vlad on the phone, give him Ukraine and let's get the Cold War v2 on while we all start MAKING THINGS AGAIN


Can't tell if this is satire or not. I hope so, nuking vietnam? Really? I can't wait till old heads die off and common sense and logic can again take hold.



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

I read... Did you?
Doubt it....



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Where in there did Russia get any uranuim?

Oh yeah.... they didnt



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

PS that you dont like factcheck is no surprise to me.



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 10:53 AM
link   
This thread is confusing.

Yet I want to chime in regarding my fascination with Felix Sater and how he ties in to Uranium One indirectly.

Yes, the guy the mainstream media loved to throw out there as a Russian mobster and convicted criminal has a record of being a deep informant for FBI, CIA, DIA from 1998 to either around 2013-14, but he says he still does work for them as a cooperator in a sense.

The guy the Left loves to say would take Trump down “cooperating”; the guy who helped Cohen get a Ukrainian peace plan into the hands of Flynn.

The guy who did Bayrock Trump-licensing deals with Trump at Trump Tower from approximately 2002-2008? and back again at Trump Tower 2010-? Possibly 2015, can’t find concrete fact.

Sater is being sued by BTA BANK for laundering money for oligarch Mukhtar Ablyazov and the Khrapunovs family. Ablyazov was the Chairman of BTA BANK 2005-09.

Ablyazov fled to Russia and later Europe as charges of defrauding BTA BANK of estimated $4 to $6 Billion, the largest money fraud case ever.

BTA BANK also paid money to Cohen to try and get back some of their lost monies.

Sater and Ablyazov according to the Sater v BTA BANK lawsuit, met at the Khrapunov-Ablyazov wedding in Sept 2007 when Ablyazov was still in Kazakhstan, allegedly still defrauding BTA BANK.

What’s this gotta to do with Uranium One?
Ablyazov sold the uranium mine assets to Frank Giustra. Which was UrAsia Energy, which became Uranium One 2007 reverse-merger. Coincidentally or not, when the uranium bubble of ‘07 took place.

The odds of Sater working closely with Trump and a deep informant government asset also being linked up later to the guy who sold the assets to Frank Giustra all while Mueller is FBI Director... crazy to me.

I can’t comment on any Russian sub or if that has bearing on the U1 weirdness, but my strong feeling is Felix Sater, who testified using a proffer agreement with Mueller’s team, is an important person in all this.

My thread on Sater is ongoing/ very interesting dude. ‘The Curious Case of Felix Sater’ if anyone wants to look it up. I’m too lazy to find the link. But it’s a deep dive that’s in progress.



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Who Sold Key Asset to Uranium One? Link

2009-

Uranium One Inc. UUU-T says it doesn't know who previously owned the company's stake in a uranium deposit that is now at the centre of a national scandal in Kazakhstan, raising concerns about the miner's ownership of the lucrative property. Uranium One owns a 30-per-cent stake in the Kyzylkum joint venture, which was purchased for $75-million (U.S.) in 2005 from a privately held company, Jeffcott Group Ltd. But the Vancouver firm says the shareholders behind Jeffcott were never specifically identified, nor does it know how Jeffcott initially obtained rights to the project.


Further down

In addition to the Kyzylkum asset, UrAsia paid $350-million in 2005 for 70-per-cent stakes in the South Inkai and Akdala uranium mines. The seller of those assets has been identified as Mukhtar Ablyazov, a Kazakh oligarch with banking and real estate interests who fled the country after falling out of favour with the Nazarbayev regime.



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: rickymouse

PS that you dont like factcheck is no surprise to me.


Fact check focuses on one particular thing when proving or disproving things. I look at as many things as I can to evaluate things. Fact check often disproves something by disproving the wrong consensus of some people yet the real reason for the effect is ignored. They convince people that the truth is wrong because someone is parroting the wrong reason.

I run into that a lot, Just like measles vaccine causing autism, most likely it doesn't directly cause it. But you cannot ignore the other conditions that occur from constantly injecting people with vaccines or the adverse effect that focusing the immune system to fight something and causing a deficiency in immune response to something else.

I like to look at as much evidence as I can to evaluate things, I have blown away my false beliefs I had most of my life. The conditioning of people has been going on for thousands of years. We are still being conditioned to believe things by people that profit by our believing, Christianity was never was as bad as some of what I am seeing today.

I have found a few things on Fact check where they evaluated things properly, but half of what they spew is crap.



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

I agree. This is a Republican psyop.

edit on 12-5-2019 by Waterglass because: added



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme


I agree. This is a Republican psyop.



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

I agree. This is a Republican psyop.



posted on May, 12 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   
A Russian nuclear carrier is a good thing, worry about the Chinese, because Russia is certainly more concerned about China, and I’d say that is the reason they’re building the carrier in the first place



posted on May, 13 2019 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Trump allegedly talking to the Russians to get elected is bad but the Clinton's accepting bribes in exchange for nuclear material is a good thing.




Out of curiosity.. do you think everyone else on the CIFUS panel was bribed along with Clinton?




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join