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.

 

What was stopping them from planting evidence of 'weapons of mass destruction'?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Hello to you all!

Seeing as a lot of people consider the 9/11 attacks to be a false flag operation so they could invade Iraq/Afghanistan under the pretences of them having weapons of mass destruction and finding key Al-Qaeda members, and turned up with nothing (on the weapons of mass destruction part anyhow).

Why didn't they just plan it I mean considering the scrutiny at the government for possibly planning the whole thing, what was stopping them from planting said weapons.. I mean Sadamn Hussein was a dictator and nobody would believe him if the said they had nothing.

what are your opinions?




posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Good Thread....I've often wondered this myself. Why not just plant some & say "Look, here they are!" Fear of getting caught? Too many people to pay off? They've always told the truth and didn't want to start lying to us now???

Anyways....reminds me of another question I can't get my arms around - Why isn't our gas free? I mean, win you "win" a war, you get the spoils, right?

~I am so paranoid about posting anything in this forum, the warning is always there~



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
ive noticed that all 9/11 posts, no matteer what the contenbt have

due to request this thread under scutiny

why is that. it seems automatically added to any 9/11 thread. and i NEVER see it on other threads.

since this is a cinpsiracy web site, is this some agency requesting these threads be monitored by admin?

is itsomething admins do themselves? im curious.
since even threads where users are openly flaming each other never get this "watching you" notification.

anyone?

back to the OP if they had planted WMD they would have had a better case for what they had said they were doing, but just think.. EVERYONE would have said they planted them..

so either way, no one would believe them. i was CERTAIN they would be planted especially after hans blix, and other weapons inspectors over the years had been so interested in thier stockpiles...



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by okamitengu
 


lol good point...truther or not, you'd have every democrat in the U.S. (and prolly some republicans) accusing Bush of planting them lol.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I just read the title

so ...

what was stopping them from plating evidence ?

well, they said that they didnt find any ... they really dont care what you think, since you wont do anything about it ...

since everybody is in their paygrade



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by okamitengu
ive noticed that all 9/11 posts, no matteer what the contenbt have

due to request this thread under scutiny

why is that. it seems automatically added to any 9/11 thread. and i NEVER see it on other threads.

since this is a cinpsiracy web site, is this some agency requesting these threads be monitored by admin?

is itsomething admins do themselves? im curious.
since even threads where users are openly flaming each other never get this "watching you" notification.

anyone?

back to the OP if they had planted WMD they would have had a better case for what they had said they were doing, but just think.. EVERYONE would have said they planted them..

so either way, no one would believe them. i was CERTAIN they would be planted especially after hans blix, and other weapons inspectors over the years had been so interested in thier stockpiles...



I don't know, Saddam Hussein seemed to be capable of producing (and releasing) said weapons so people completely disbelieving that fact wouldn't be really logical, but coupled with the evidence of 9/11 being a false flag operation I guess it would be more wood added to the fire.

Also that 'under strict scrutiny warning' is regarding the large amount of personal battles going in this forum, people insulting each other and so members have requested moderators/administrators monitor this forum even more so such things can be squashed immediately.



[edit on 11/23/2009 by diamount]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Faiol
I just read the title

so ...

what was stopping them from plating evidence ?

well, they said that they didnt find any ... they really dont care what you think, since you wont do anything about it ...

since everybody is in their paygrade


Well for one why would they even announced the reason (among others) would be because they had destructive weapons?

Keeping it a secret wouldn't be logical as there really is no reason to do so.

Plus they've lied about countless over things, so thinking they're saints in that regard is not smart.



[edit on 11/23/2009 by diamount]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by diamount
 


Actually he did have WMD's that haven't yet being found because they were transported over the border to Iran, possibly with help by the Russian's. I know it sounds like a cliche, but I think it's highly credible, and that's where Iran has has gotten some of it's war. tech from, as Saddam Hussein had a nuclear programme before Israel bombed it. So it's plausible that he also had war. programmes that were incomplete, but survived.

I suppose Iran could get this tech instead from N.Korea, which is orignally from Pakistan.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   
First there is the possibility that the men and women of our military would not take part in any such fraud.

Secondly, nuclear, chemical and biological materials can all be analyzed and traced to sources. A great deal of information about the processes used to enhance or weaponize those items can be determined via such analysis so just planting something was not a viable option.

Had the US government found something there would have been demands for other nations to analyze the material and short of fabricating the entire process to match the geographical area it was claimed to have been made in, (any spores or dust mites not native to Iraq found on or in those chemical weapon artillery shells?) they would have been caught.

Governments engage in deception and conspiracy but they do it in ways which minimize or eliminate detection of the scheme. For me, this helps to determine which conspiracy theories are possible and which are less so.

[edit on 24-11-2009 by ecoparity]



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 11:16 PM
link   
I have no idea why they didn't plant the crap they went after. All I know is, it was there when I was there. I spent a week surrounded by the explosions of these dangerous and deadly poisons. I sucked the crap into my lungs with every breath. Lucky me, I got to leave after a week. Nerve gas, mustard gas, anthrax, it was all blown up around me and my comrads. But, we, the allied forces were only in the south of Iraq. Where else were these munitions? I don't know.

Were they found later? I don't know. You don't know. I don't recall the UN dude who later proclaimed there were no WMD's in Iraq, but up until that time, he proclaimed there could very well be these things. He recounted tales of how he and his comrades were stopped for hours at gates leading to compounds, while trucks left via back gates. Later he changed his tune. That's suspect in itself.

Why weren't any WMD's found? Because me and my buddies destroyed them all.


This whole crapfest is a sham. WMD's? Never existed. Or, were destroyed. Or were moved in the weeks leading up the the latest Iraqi war. Oh, Sadam didn't have any such things, he just made it up, so that everyone would be afraid of him. Pick you fantasy. Aw, it's all for oil, it's all for Israel, it's all about control of stargates and towers of Babylon. lol.
Why not plant WMD"s? Because you DON'T HAVE too. lol. It all happens anyway.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Well if I'm a evil son of a gun, I tell people there are WMD's, and if I find them then the threat is no more. I can't accidentally let one off in a city somewhere and blame the Taliban when I found the WMD's already. Better to have people believe they could be in danger of biological weapons.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 11:18 PM
link   
I believe they attempted to. Yellowcake uranium ring any bells? Thing is a few people got wind of it and got in the way. It's late. Maybe I'm misinterpreting the question.

He had WMD? Not according to any valid sources. Transported across the border to Iran? To Russia? No conclusive proof whatsoever. Those theories hold about as much water as the mole people taking the WMD to Syria via their underground tunnels.



posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by diamount
 


Because they gave him American-made WMD and expected them to still be there. Saddam destroyed them all in compliance with the demands. The disposed remains were found. Reason for being in Iraq shifted to al qaeda and then to rebuilding.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by SteveR
 


They weren't all destroyed. Like the poster above said, my own brother was there and told me there were munition dumps bombed that had chemical weapons in them. He talked about several times the detections systems set off alarms that put him in MOPP gear in the 114 degree heat.

I think they were looking for more WMD's other than what the US gave Saddam back when he was our little buddy. It wouldn't have done much good to claim we found WMD's and then have the analysis come out that they were US in origin. Then we'd have a conspiracy about them being "planted" for sure.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by okamitengu
 


This site is compromised.

Not much more than any other, though.

Money talks. When an entity has "INC" or "LLC" after the name, you know that they listen.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ecoparity
told me there were munition dumps bombed


Make sure the information is interpretted correctly. The munitions they found were in a very poor state and unusable. They were not kept in a condition for use. The majority had been completely disposed of.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   
What stopped them?
The fact that the rest of the world knew that Iraq did not have WMD.

The fact that the Russians would have demanded to be allowed to examine the so called WMD to determine their origin and authenticity. Origin being the key factor.

By the rest of the world, I mean the western intelligence agencies, the Russian intelligence agencies, etc.


They needed something to sell to the American people, to get them on side for the invasion. What the rest of the world thought didn't matter, because those who needed to know, knew already it was bull#.

What mattered was securing Iraq, and what lays beneath.
It wasn't long after the invasion and over throw, that they started publicly talking about a pipeline to Israel, a pipeline here, a pipeline there etc.

Among one of the tasks the coalition had, was using navy clearance divers(particularly Royal Australian Navy divers), to keep the port of Umm Qasr in Basra clear of mines etc to allow for merchant shipping.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ecoparity
Secondly, nuclear, chemical and biological materials can all be analyzed and traced to sources. A great deal of information about the processes used to enhance or weaponize those items can be determined via such analysis so just planting something was not a viable option.


This is the simple answer - pure and simple. Radiation signatures can be traced back even to the mines they were extracted from. Believe it or not, biological weapons use strains which are all patented and registered. It's not that simple to simply 'knock up a fake'. The first testing by any independent authority would confirm it would be the scam of the century. Better to have egg on your face from being wrong than from trying to swindle the world.

Also, not many people realise that Iraq has large quantities of uranium deposits, so the need for them to import yellowcake from Nigeria is nonsense, which should have been obvious to those in charge trying to pedal fake documents to the world. Therefore, the 'faked' WMD's would have to have the same radiation signature as the uranium from Iraq. But to create those fakes, they'd have to mine it for themselves, and enhance and refine it to weapons grade, before being planted... all of which takes time...

Rewey



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   
There WAS weapons of mass destruction in IRAQ.

We (The US) gave Saddam Anthrax.

He used Mustard Gas aginst the Kurds.

The reason we claim there were none is because we let the Russian Ambassador escort them to Syria. Rather than admit this and cause problems with Russia and Syria we would rather lie and state we had bad intelligence.

www.cdi.org...

Can anyone explain why the Russians would be driving to Syria in the middle of a war, when we would have flown them out with an escort?

www.timesonline.co.uk...

You remember Isreal bombing Syria 75 miles from the Iraq border right?

I think Saddams weapons cache was what they bombed.

How can so many poeple accept the fact that:

A. There were no WMDs when we gave him some and we know he used some against the Kurds.

B. We have bad intelligence. Maybe about some things, but not Iraq. Hell we put him in power and helped him agaisnt Iran. We knew what was there.

Wake up please.



posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rewey

This is the simple answer - pure and simple. Radiation signatures can be traced back even to the mines they were extracted from. Believe it or not, biological weapons use strains which are all patented and registered. It's not that simple to simply 'knock up a fake'. The first testing by any independent authority would confirm it would be the scam of the century. Better to have egg on your face from being wrong than from trying to swindle the world.


No, actually, you just contradicted yourself here. After the 9/11 attack the US gave its NATO allies classified intelligence linking Al Qaida to the attack, and after they conpared it with what their own intelligence sources were reporting, NATO found it convincing enough to invoke article 5 of the NATO charter, declaring that an attack on one member is an attack on all members. This is why there are NATO troops in Afghanistan along with ours.

Therefore, if you are going to attempt to claim that foreign nations are independent authorities and would reveal any stunt to plane WMD in Iraq, then you're necessarily admitting the evidence linking Bin Laden to the 9/11 attack is legitimate as well, specifically, becuase it HAS been verified by those very foreign nations, which necessarily means all these "inside job" claims are rubbish to begin with.

Either the European countries are independent authorities who are able to offer credible analysis or they are not. You cannot have it both ways.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join