posted on May, 1 2009 @ 11:20 PM
The answer to who had the opportunity to attack the Pentagon and possibly the WTC with missiles lies in the Falklands War between the nited Kingdom
and Argentina. Argentina dropped tons of conventional munitions on the British navy, but failed to do any derious damage, suffering heavy casualties
themselves, with the sole exception of the lcuky hit ona trooper carrier in San Carlos Bay caused by extreme neglience of the British commander.
ALmost all serious damage inflicted on the British by the Argentines bwas caused by one and only one weapon systemm... the Exocet. ANd why? At the
time a stunning fact was revealed in the newspapers which has gone unnoticed for 8 years by the Truth Movement. The Exocet sank ship after ship,
because it was... French. Weird? Let me explain as explained in the newspapers at the time. When Nato andNorad systems were developed, it was
envisaged that the next war wold be between NATO and the SOviets. It was concluded that the killing would be so staggeringly fast that as soon as
fighting boke out, naval radar personnel would have but seconds to live in which to take hyper urgent decisions. It was viewe that it was essential
to keep NATO and NorAD radar screens as clear and simple as possible, so they are programmed only to show three types of items -
1. Your own weapons, missiles, planes and ships
2. The weapons, missiles, planes and ships of your enemy and their allies.
3. Civilian aircraft, shops etc.
Hence one grop of weapons, missiles, planes, ships etc was left off the screens in order to unclutter them... those of your own allies. Hence the
Exocet was invisible to British radar. The only was to see it was for the British ROyal nNavy garrison a line of sailors with binoculars along the
outside edge of each ship.
Now try apply in gth same logic to the SA. What missiles, planes etc wold beat the Pentagon and NORAD systems? those of the close allies of the USA
, namely the UK and France. Wold all of America's systems fail to spot incoming missiles? Actually no. Old systems, not locked into NATO wold
actually spot them. The main one still in use being in Langley. It is presumed by the Truth Movement that Langley launched their planes to Whisky
386 in the midle of the Atlantic in a cynical attempt to give New York and Wahsington no cover, but there is another explanation.... that Langley
alone CORRECTLY identified where the missiles/planes were coming from and correctly launched.
So ofthe K and Frnace, which cold easily be compromised. Well, in the USA, all missiles, nuclear or not are loaded and maintained by the US Navy or
at least under their watchful eye....but in the Britain, this is not the case. In the UK, all the Royal Navy's missiles are maintained by a private
contractor who cold have easily repainted them to look like aircraft, switched warheads and switched the circuit boards and reporogrammed them. Who
is this contractor who, effectively could sabotage the UK boomer feet without them even knowing? Answer... Kellogg, Brown and Root, a subsidiary of
Halliburton. ANd who put them in charge? Why Tony BLair, Bush's pal.
Furthermore, some people have noted that the colouration of the explosions is similar to that of a nuke going off and lead them to the false logical
step of assuming that a small nuke was used. Nuclear weapons function by using a three stage detonation. First there is a conventional detonator,
but this does not set off the war head, only the Bomb initiator which actually fires the warhead. The bomb initiator, base don Caesium is a truly
awesome conventional explosive. It would never normally be used as its cost as its cost is so astronomic as to make it useless for anything other
than setting off nuclear warhead. BUT, is one sabotages a British nuke by taking out the radioactive material, the initiator alone wold turn it into
a very powerful missile whose initiator chemicals would cause the same colouration as happened at the WTC.