****TRANSPONDERS****
IN 1982, the United Kingdom went to fight the Argentinians over the Falklands.
A large amount of normal munitions were dropped on ships without any success, largely because they were dropped from a height that was too low.
However, one weapon proved devastating against the Royal Navy - the Exocet missile which sank The Atlantic Conveyer, HMS Sheffield, HMS Antelope
etc.
The reason for its success was not its immense explosive power, but because it was, in effect, invisible to all electronic warfare systems and hence
Sea Wolf and Sea Dart anti-missile systems were useless. To defend against it, the Royal Navy had to line the decks with crew with binoculars in a
chance to obtain at least some few split seconds of warning of an inbound Argentinian Exocet.
So, why was the Exocet so invisible. The answer which ws in the Press at the time is ludicrous but true, because it was French-made.
When NATO planners originally developed a coordinated electronic warfare system, they had set a common standard. In any West- Warsaw pact sea battle,
it was viewed that radar and systems wold have only split seconds to respond before being destroyed. There was not time to deal with cluttered
screens, so the NATO systems, including NORAD only show 4 types of flying missiles/aircraft on screens:-
- Your own country's missiles and aircraft
- Warsaw Pact and possible allies missiles and aircraft.
- Civilian aircraft
- Neutral country's aircraft and missiles.
Hence to unclutter the screens, one particular group of flying objects were coded so that they just do not appear on STANDARD NATO screens... missiles
and aircraft belonging to YOUR CLOSE ALLIES. Hence the Royal Navy could not see Exocet missiles because their transponders do not show up on their
radar.
Likewise, the transponders for missiles and aircraft belonging to the Royal Navy wold not have shown up on NORAD screens. If the US Navy had fired at
the Pentagon, it wold have appeared on numerous radar screens, but if the Royal Navy had, it would be as if the transponders had been turned off.
So, did the Royal Navy have any ships near the eastern seaboard of the USA on 9/11?
The answer is YES, I have already checked. The was a nuclear submarine which left port about a week earlier which was on its way to the Far East. That
would have put it just off the eastern seaboard of the USA on 9/11. Did she have any missiles missing on arrival in the Far East? Actually, yes. 6
Tomahawk missiles were unaccounted for onboard when she docked 3 weeks later.
So would no-one have seen if this submarine had launched the attack on the Pentagon? Actually yes. Langley's radar systems are old and non-standard.
And here is a possibility that The Truth Movement will not consider. That Langle's launch of 3 fighters to Whiskey 386 was no accident nor them
trying to get the aircraft "out of the way". but in actuality Langley correctly identified where the attack on the USA was coming from.
So who COULD have launched the Royal Navy's missiles at the Pentagon? Despite being the party of socialism, dead against contracting out, Tony
Blair's Labour Party, bizarrely contracted out the maintenence of all the Royal Navy's missiles and electonic systems in 1999 I believe it was. The
Contracctor now is free to rewire the missiles and control systems as they see fit. And since the missiles are housed in tiny silos onboard, they can
even paint them to look like aircraft and no-one would even know.
How could they be launched? In the UK, the anit-nuclear lobby is huge, so any radiation leakage by missiles would be serious and the captain would
have to launch and programme them to self-destruct which they would do IF not rewired by the contractor.
So, who is the Contractor that Tony Blair brought in to maintain all Britain's Tomahawk missiles and all the submarine control systems including
radiation alert systems?
KELLOGG BROWN & ROOT - subsidiary of Halliburton, run by DIck Cheney





