Warnings from world leaders all within 72 hours

page: 4
79
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 03:37 AM
link   
I think you're all reading way too much into Biden's comments. Obviously he mentioned Jan 21 & 22 because those are Obama's first 2 days as president, and he was just speaking hypothetically... stating that something COULD happen on those days and Obama will have to deal with it.




posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 03:38 AM
link   
the only reason i can think of that biden would be worried is if israel is attacked and we don't defend it and hollywood gets ahold of it, obama's popularity will plummet like a stone.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
launch of something extremely important that no one has yet mentioned... AZERBAIJAN.


What are you suggesting? That Israel or the US is going to attack Azerbaijan in January?


Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
It is the world's largest repository of natural gas & oil; the "Land of Fire" which inspired Zoroaster's visions & Hitler's "Operation Barbarossa"- a 14 TRILLION dollar oil field upon the Caspian Sea.


Could you give a source confirming this figure?



Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
Russia has cut off the Georgian pipeline to the Black Sea there is one option left: Iran's pipeline to the Persian Gulf. Can you spell W-o-r-l-d W-a-r III ??!


What are you talking about the Azerbaijan-Georgia-Turkey pipelines are up and running and have never been cut off by Russia...


Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
For all of you that become enraged at Ahmedinijad's Holocaust denials, I have this to say: Moslems tend to deny the Holocaust ever happened because so few of the Nazis were ever punished.
At the war trials in Nuremberg, only 19 of them were tried & sentenced. Every one of them had this to say when asked how did they plead: "Nichst suldistch!" (Not guilty).


Nicht Schuldig, you mean? You are suggesting thousands of soldiers should be punished for simply executing orders? Those responsible either committed suicide or were put on trial and punished.. so please cut the crap.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Mdv2
 


That's not totally true according to operation paperclips. I think we just caught the ones we didn't need. I also think that some big names where put on the list to hide or cover up operation paperclips.

Well what i am trying to say is that there is a lot of information that sort of tell two stories about the after math of ww2.

But that's history. The future is really in the middle east. And i think we are going to see a lot of Iran and Israel in the news after the elections. The Iran issue is still kept very warm in the Senate as we speak. And we are been educated and prepped about this situation that might happened very soon.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 05:14 AM
link   
Please make a note of this post because I am supremely confident I am correct.

An action is planned for January 21 / 22nd, most likely the launch of an attack, maybe the long promised bombing of Iran, (high probability, I know everyone predicts this constantly, I have not until now).

Here are the variables which led me to this conclusion:

1. Bush signs executive order transferring presidential office immediately at soonest possible date.
2. Various world leaders are briefed in meetings via US State Dept, Vice President and as a side item during the global finance talks.
3. Very secret meetings in obscure locations of high level US and "allied" military commanders.
4. Statements being made per the subject of this thread.

This is big, whatever it ends up being. I won't theorize on the possible reasons as to why they plan to wait until after the new president takes office. Perhaps the planned action will "go over" better in the perception of various parties if someone other than Bush and Cheney are in command.

War is coming, history proves this when economies collapse. Perhaps the long postulated attack on Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon (choose one or all) can now take place with a UN, NATO or "Coalition" force.

Perhaps the crash of various economies made an unpopular action possible. Quite a few countries would be looking for a war at this point based on historic precedence.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong. I can't say if the attack on Iran is something we actually need to do or not. I would prefer peace, of course but history shows us that is not always possible and often war occurs in order to continue a well worn but very successful cycle under the direction of the elite.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 05:15 AM
link   
If they know what will happen...
It means they are the in ones planning it...



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 05:20 AM
link   
I'm not sure its going to mean war with other countries or war between other countries outside of America. Could this event be related to a new currency, or America dropping the dollar etc.
I mean the problems that will arise from that initially will be terrible for some and mostly those with money and investments, and they need the population to get behind them so they can bring in the currency or somehting similar and in the end it will all work out.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by nfotech
Please make a note of this post because I am supremely confident I am correct.

An action is planned for January 21 / 22nd, most likely the launch of an attack, maybe the long promised bombing of Iran, (high probability, I know everyone predicts this constantly, I have not until now).

Here are the variables which led me to this conclusion:

1. Bush signs executive order transferring presidential office immediately at soonest possible date.
2. Various world leaders are briefed in meetings via US State Dept, Vice President and as a side item during the global finance talks.
3. Very secret meetings in obscure locations of high level US and "allied" military commanders.
4. Statements being made per the subject of this thread.

This is big, whatever it ends up being. I won't theorize on the possible reasons as to why they plan to wait until after the new president takes office. Perhaps the planned action will "go over" better in the perception of various parties if someone other than Bush and Cheney are in command.

War is coming, history proves this when economies collapse. Perhaps the long postulated attack on Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon (choose one or all) can now take place with a UN, NATO or "Coalition" force.

Perhaps the crash of various economies made an unpopular action possible. Quite a few countries would be looking for a war at this point based on historic precedence.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong. I can't say if the attack on Iran is something we actually need to do or not. I would prefer peace, of course but history shows us that is not always possible and often war occurs in order to continue a well worn but very successful cycle under the direction of the elite.



news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ballast
 


"“The problems will always be there and there’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.” Powell.

He also made a remark about the challenged US educational system. 20-21 jnuary, ever heard about the inauguration ? I am not even american and I know this.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 06:33 AM
link   
If people think that these comments are just fear mongering then they have their head in the sand. This has been in the making since last year since the nuclear bombs were flown illegally over the United States and then the crew all died with 6 weeks.

Check out the OPERATION NOBLE RESOLVE. This will certaily put some credability into what is being spoken about by the high ranking muppets!!

Someone somewhere knows something but the question is will the sheeple find out before its too late!!!



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by nomorelies
I think you're all reading way too much into Biden's comments. Obviously he mentioned Jan 21 & 22 because those are Obama's first 2 days as president, and he was just speaking hypothetically... stating that something COULD happen on those days and Obama will have to deal with it.


Why would he say that it would not be apparent at first that what they were doing was the right thing?

How could he possible have any idea what we the people might think of what they will do unless they already know what they will do because they already know what they will be responding to. It just seems like a rather ominous thing to say.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 06:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Irish Matador
If people think that these comments are just fear mongering then they have their head in the sand. This has been in the making since last year since the nuclear bombs were flown illegally over the United States and then the crew all died with 6 weeks.



That is not the first time I have seen that statement. Can anyone provide a source to confirm this that the entire crew died and how?



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12.21.12
You guys arer thinking nukes and I just don't think this pertains to such a drastic measure.

Let's think about this. Say there is an event at the UN and martial law is declared.

The elections continue.

January first Obama is elected President, however under
www.whitehouse.gov...
www.whitehouse.gov...

the presidential seat is taken away from Obama, which triggers outrage among Americans and the begining of WWIII, followed by the boxcars for civilians and an all out attack against the US.


Come the 21st of January, neither Bush, nor Obama, nor McCain, will be President. Whoever is elected on Election Day will attend the UN Summit, and be assassinated right alongside Bush. It's a coup.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by JustMy2Cents
 


by who? and for what end goal?

and how do you know this?



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:07 AM
link   
reply to post by TH3ON3
 


its just the day after the inauguration that powell refers to.

Bigger problem is the self-fulfilling prophecy nature of prominent

figures making prophecies.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by JustMy2Cents
 


by who? and for what end goal?

and how do you know this?


he doesn't know....but can you imagine the chaos if all G20 leaders were killed in one day....?

the destablisation would enable anyone wanting to attack a pretty big head-start,



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Hint to destruction/Nukes/Evil=Fear/Pain

Hint to UFO's/Christ coming to save us=Pleasure/Happiness


The controllers play with everyone's emotions.


Why are we so easily controlled?



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Sheridan
 


One missing nuke. Mysterious death of personnel in ND. Officers who discovered from Barksdale NOT missing. NOT dead.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:51 AM
link   
I need to extend a thank you to the OP. I have been expecting that a huge crysis will occur shotly after Obama's inaguration (sp?), simply so that his enamies within the republicans / elietis can blame him. As a result, I doubt any sooner than a week or two after the inaguration (if that) is too soon for them to let things fall apart.
Also, thanks for giving us some influential people agreeing with us.



posted on Oct, 23 2008 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by MorningStar8741

Originally posted by Irish Matador
If people think that these comments are just fear mongering then they have their head in the sand. This has been in the making since last year since the nuclear bombs were flown illegally over the United States and then the crew all died with 6 weeks.



That is not the first time I have seen that statement. Can anyone provide a source to confirm this that the entire crew died and how?


I did a search and couldn't find anything about the death of the crew.

Irish Matador, can you give us your source?





new topics
top topics
 
79
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join