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.

 

Terrorist attack on US again???

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Well, it can be.

As we all know that this jan 20th will be a historic day for every1.
Obama gets sworn in.
What if something happens again?? like another 9/11 ??
George Bush WARNED Obama that terrorist forces are still out there to attack US. is this warning some kind of indication that something may happen in the future?? planned by you-know-who.

As we all know muslim countries support him. and i guess, some "ppl" does not like it. So, another attack maybe carried out so that another war can be started...this time who knows...can be iran ? all blame on iran?? or another muslim country??

i really have a feeling something like this may happen.

ur thoughts??




posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Maybe thats why the television series Jericho was pulled from the air.

That portrayed an attack by an unknown shadow group whick took out all the major cities of the United States with nuclear devices, the US then nuked the hell out of Nth Korea and Iran. Blah blah blah.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by metalmush
 

Could you please elaborate, I have no clue as to what you are getting at. Who is "you know who"? Osama bin Laden. G. Bush. Please explain.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheKingsVillian
Maybe thats why the television series Jericho was pulled from the air.


Re-runs still air.
And if I remember correctly it was pulled because of the screen writers strike.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Oh ya Bush needs to leave a resonance of the false premise before he leaves for good, stirring up the fear factor all over again so that everyone remains on edge..as if everyone isnt already on edge with the fluked economy he left for us.

Bush just needs to can it and leave so the daunting task of rebuilding what he destroyed can begin.


Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Can you think of ANYTHING (barring all-out invasion or nuclear war) that would enable Bush & Co to declare martial law and suspend the constitution?

I really think we are going to see something MAJOR happen around Inauguration Time.

I always thought that it would surface that Obama was legally barred from taking the presidency becuase of the true nation of birth issue. Anyone know how that SCOUS case is going? I haven't heard anything in the news about it lately?



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns
Oh ya Bush needs to leave a resonance of the false premise before he leaves for good, stirring up the fear factor all over again so that everyone remains on edge..as if everyone isnt already on edge with the fluked economy he left for us.

Bush just needs to can it and leave so the daunting task of rebuilding what he destroyed can begin.


Cheers!!!!


...
no worries,...hope the economy catches up

[edit on 14-1-2009 by metalmush]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Hrm, this will probably only feed the fires but have a look for yourselves...

www.fema.gov...


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The President today declared an emergency exists in the District of Columbia and ordered federal aid to supplement the District's response efforts in support of the 56th Presidential Inauguration. The declaration makes available funding and support for the purposes of ensuring the District of Columbia and the federal government are optimally prepared and postured to respond to the 56th Presidential Inauguration, beginning on January 17 through January 21.

The President's action authorizes the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to provide appropriate assistance for certain emergency protective measures, authorized under Title V of the Stafford Act. FEMA will also be authorized and prepared to coordinate any necessary response efforts, should an emergency arise. Specifically, assistance is available to the District for emergency protective measures that are undertaken to save lives and protect public health and safety. Direct Federal assistance, at 100 percent federal funding will be provided during the period of January 17-21, 2009, and reimbursement of emergency protective measures (Category B), under the Public Assistance program, at 100 percent federal funding for work performed on January 20, 2009. FEMA will reimburse for eligible emergency protective measures performed on January 20, 2009, only if the District has expended on the Presidential Inauguration during the period of January 17-21, 2009, the $15 million appropriated to it for "Emergency Planning and Security Costs" by the Continuing Appropriations Resolution 2009, P.L. 110-329.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
One of the biggest threats we face on inaguration day will be from single racist type shooters. Second or more importantly will be threats from Biological events which would affect the millions gathered for the event.

Do you really think that the chance of an unpresidented attack will happen with our top Celebrities, Political figures and Dignitaries, not to mention the huge force of security and Medical Specialists all gathered into one area? Unlikely. You will be more at risk in SanFranciso or Kansas City then in DC on Inaguration day.

The worst case scenario will be from individuals who will try and create chaos in the crowds and that would be just plain stupid. They are ready for that will take any act of violence very very seriously.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajesticJax

I always thought that it would surface that Obama was legally barred from taking the presidency becuase of the true nation of birth issue. Anyone know how that SCOUS case is going? I haven't heard anything in the news about it lately?


Same here
dosen't look like it now though. (to many people dont give a crap about our constitution and dont care if it gets sh#t on)


As you know, this Friday, January 9, 2009 our case, Berg vs. Obama, is being "Conferenced" by the nine [9] Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court [Docket No. 08 – 570]. Then, on January 16, 2009 again, we have a "Conference" before the U.S. Supreme Court in this case.

Also, we have pending two [2] other cases because we are determined, no matter how long it takes, to expose Obama’s “Hoax” on the 305 million people in our country, that Obama is “not qualified” pursuant to our U.S. Constitution to be President.

The new case is Hollister vs. Barry Soetoro a/k/a Obama filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Docket # 08-02254 (JR). Hollister is a retired U.S. Air Force Colonel that can be recalled at any time by the President. His dilemma – is Obama a “qualified” President that he must take orders from or is he “not qualified” and therefore, he is required to legally disobey Obama’s orders? The other case is “under seal” and therefore, I cannot discuss.

www.obamacrimes.com...




[edit on 14-1-2009 by FightLies]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by antar
One of the biggest threats we face on inaguration day will be from single racist type shooters.


Or a patsy set up to look like a single racist shooter. I feel a lone gunman story part II coming to light in a few days.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   
The worst part is most of the world expects to see at least a few white redneck nutters have a few pot shots at the ....... president. You have way too many white racists in the USA, this could just happen anyway with or without your shadow governments help.


Can anyone remember Colin Powell and his remarks about the uknown crisis on the 21st or 22nd of January that Obama will face. He knows what is planned and let it slip.


[edit on 14-1-2009 by TheKingsVillian]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by drift393
Or a patsy set up to look like a single racist shooter. I feel a lone gunman story part II coming to light in a few days.


hope not....
outcome wud be very...i say veryyy..bad.

look at this one below..same one but more with a suspense



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:22 PM
link   
juss see what he says...
"making progress"..what a progress





posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I have been saying that an attack on US soil would undermine all of the changes made thus far by the current admin. I stand by that.

They have restricted many things, they have violated privacy, they have re-written entire areas of the constitution and changed the wording in thousands of policies, laws and civil liberties. 9/11 allowed them to infringe upon the rights of the people on the basis of keeping them "safe".

Tell me why they would undermine all of that? how can they claim that we are so much safer because of the changes made since 9/11 and then allow/miss another "terrorist" attack???

There will be another attack but not on North American soil. The US is trying to avoid an egg on face scenario. They cannot afford to appear weak/unprepared on home turf. It doesn't fit the plan.

Personally I am fearful for the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. The US and NATO forces will be gathered enmass watching the events live. Thousands of uniforms in centralized locations, security will be low as the hype warns of a homeland attack...they have built in terrorists, poor to negligent security, and literally enough munitions (stored and those "contributed" to the "enemies" via sale and trade) to destroy half of the middle east...

Even throughout the whole financial crisis' the US has maintained the highest security levels and continued to rewrite and amend as Bush prepares to hand over. They would be digging their own graves to allow any "terrorist attack" on home soil. The people wouldn't unite the way they did with 9/11.

Ya'll watch the ground at home...I'll be waiting for news out of Afghanistan and Iraq.

[edit on 1/14/2009 by justgeneric]

Thought I'd add a link to demonstrate the NEED and demand for troops - as yet they have no real justification to increase troops exponentially as they want to, Iraq and Afghanistan are central to gaining access to Iran and they will NEED MASSIVE troops to accomplish that...a "terrorist strike" gives justification does it not?

Afghanistan - troops

There are many other news items coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan hinting at and even blatantly stating that there is a great need for more troops...there simply isn't enough "motivation" for NATO forces to agree to increase the numbers.

When the time comes there will need to be in excess of 500K US and NATO forces at the ready to tackle Iran and force a Regime change (this is what they desire - they being the US and NATO and even the UN). Currently the situation does not warrant the massive influx of troops. they need that to change quickly.

[edit on 1/14/2009 by justgeneric]



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by justgeneric
 


Do you think that Iran will invade Iraq?

Or is it just plain ol world war three.

I say world war three.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:48 PM
link   
If they are so worried about Obama being attacked during the inauguration, then hold it indoors.

Or...is this a repeat of the open top, unusual curve turn, moving turkey shoot slow down to 10mph setup? (ie..Kennedy)

Who knows. But if something like that happens, it would not surprise me one bit. History repeating, the cycle continues, and riots will ensue to the likes this country has never seen.

Perfect setup for this NWO, martial law stuff...eh?!!


Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheKingsVillian
reply to post by justgeneric
 


Do you think that Iran will invade Iraq?

Or is it just plain ol world war three.

I say world war three.


why would Iran invade iraq ???



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by TheKingsVillian
 


the King - nope Iran loves to talk and puff up. They are an amazing people but they get themselves into trouble following their extremist and obviously nutty leader.

It is far more likely that US and NATO will invade Iran to force a regime change. They need troops for that and as I said above, there is no current "need", thus a need must be created.



posted on Jan, 14 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Iran invade Iraq, no. They would attack Israel if anything.
Which is why I say world war three.

The stage for a world war is setup. It has been ready since the Georgian/Russian conflict.

Iran will be invaded. Which will start a world war via treaties.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join