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.

 

How this Crisis Will Play Out - 2010 and beyond

page: 54
32
<< 51  52  53    55  56  57 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:29 AM
link   
ha ha the united states navy has be doing that # for the past hundred years or so.. so no its not saber rattling its normal..




posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by nlouise
reply to post by Wide Vision 2010
 


Every time I read Daniel 11:21-24, I think of Obama

Daniel 11:21-24 (King James Version)

21And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.
...

Yes! That describes him perfectly, and verse 24 fits too. 22 and 23 might be coming.

Especially all the bowing he does. He gets some favor in return I guess.
edit on 20-11-2010 by oniongrass because: add last sentence.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by oniongrass
 


The losses by the Dems were in part due to the health care bill. Losses were big due to people voting their wallets. In other, "It's the economy stupid." And the reason I put this down as a "duh" issue is that claiming that the economy and health care, which were the 2 big issues, and were highly contested at all times, would be expected to be contested into the future.


No saber rattling? You think our aircraft carriers are just out for a pleasure cruise in the vicinity of Iran?

That's normal. We run navy exercizes in hot spots around the world all of the time. Think about China, Libya, North Korea, and the Persian Gulf. These are all hot spots where our navy regularly shows up and puts on a show of force. Had there been an out of the ordinary show of force in some place in the world, then it would have been a hit.


Don't tell that to the millions of people who used to have land in Pakinstan, that's now a part of the Indus River. Just one example.

That's a failure. Look at the flood history of the area.

en.wikipedia.org...
Pakistan has lots of floods and droughts. That is typical for the area. The link I provided tells us that there were floods in Pakistan in 2003, 2007, 2009, and 2010. Flooding in Pakistan is normal. To use a normal event as evidence of something atypical happening is odd to say the least.


But you're not paying very close attention to a lot of things that are going on.

Anyone trying to claim any of these failures as hits is not paying close attention.

I did grant the one hit which I termed a "duh" hit since just about anyone could have or actually should have gotten that one right.
edit on 20-11-2010 by stereologist because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by nlouise
 


Here is what I asked.

Got any reason to suspect that the bombs were fake? Got any reason to suspect that there is any other purpose to these enhanced screening methods?

I doubt you have anything other than paranoia to back up your statements. If there were a reason I think you'd have stated it up front.


Your response was vacuous at best. You offered no reason to suspect that the bombs were fake. In fact, I'd strongly suggest that all you have to go on here is paranoia.

Your claims that these body scanners were put into place quickly is simply false. These have been on the develop track for years. They have been tested for years.

Here is an article from 2 years ago:
10 airports install body scanners



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


I didn't say they invented the scanners last week.

Lets just suppose for a moment that what they found in the luggage was real and not staged. How does devices found in luggage have anything to do with intrusive body searches? I thought all luggage was 'searched'. I am not luggage.

There are reports of TSA workers putting their hands underneath clothing when doing 'random' body searches. How would someone know that they are being 'chosen' just because they have a nice figure, and some 'gay' worker decides that that's the one he/she decides they want to feel up? No thanks, I'll drive instead.

I'm not paranoid. I'm just old enough to remember how things used to be, and that our rights are being violated daily under false pretences.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by oniongrass
I'd appreciate if the critics restrict their comment to facts. "You predicted X and X didn't happen." That's a fair comment.



[edit on 29-7-2010 by oniongrass]


Well, oniongrass, we critics have restricted our comments to facts...
He has predicted X and X didn't happen, as seen by the detailed listing a few pages back...
They were fair comments, as per your request on 7-29-2010.

Could you at least concede to that?

God Bless~

thegoodearth



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


And one more thing.......paranoia? No! I do not walk around in fear of terrorists, neighbors, people on the street, etc. I refuse to live in fear of what an 'ordinary citizen' could do to me. (not my terminology, but what government has addressed us as in speeches)

The real terrorists are the criminals who hyjacked Washington, pretending to save you from 'terrorism', while they build walls around your God-given freedoms, constitution aside.

REAL paranoia is the 'order of the day', being orchestrated by false media under the direction of their benefactors and owners (top 4 Corporations). The whole intent is to not only make the people submissive to the NWO objective, but to fearmonger the people against their own neighbors using race and religion, while at the same time putting up the surveilance camera's, tracking their every move, and 'conditioning' the them to get used to random searches without a cause. This is 'mental manipulation' at work, and only one component of what is going on.

I stand by what I said before.....it is 'dehumanization' using false pretense. This has been going on for a long time, but is more obvious today. What 'terrorist' is going to plant bombs that don't work on airplanes, and then call the government and tell them which airplanes they are on? Please. -If terrorists are that ignorant, then they can't be all that useful. If someone intends to do harm, are they really going to warn their victims? I laughed my butt off when they said on the news that they knew exactlly which planes the devices were on. Only people who are in on it, know where to find it. The media would have us to believe (2 days before election) that the government saved the passengers in the nick of time, the same government that is 'spending their way out of debt'. Geez. Guess what? I have some rice patties in Greenland for sale. You like rice?



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by nlouise
 



I didn't say they invented the scanners last week.

What you did suggest was that body scanners were put into place quickly on the pretext of this single event. Below is what you wrote.


They sure didn't waste any time puttting in those naked body scanners and doing intrusive body searches did they? It only took 2 weeks, a few days after election time? Government doesn't act that fast on the behalf of anyone but themselves. They just had to create a 'reason'.

My point is that body scanners have been around for years, are not new technology, and getting back into the news - again. They have been tried before and are likely here to stay.

Is the introduction of some new body scanners at this time dependent on a perceive new threat level? Possibly, but body scanners are not new. Just because one type of threat is used should we overlook over potential threats? Wouldn't everyone be calling foul if the government didn't introduce stricter across the board measures and someone pulled off a Christmas day style of attack - again.


I'm not paranoid. I'm just old enough to remember how things used to be, and that our rights are being violated daily under false pretences.

I assume here that you are suggesting a false pretext on something not stated in your post. It sounds to me like paranoia just because you claim that events are not as reported. That rings like paranoia to me.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by nlouise
 



What 'terrorist' is going to plant bombs that don't work on airplanes, and then call the government and tell them which airplanes they are on?

This is not as it was reported. Your claims are based on what?


Only people who are in on it, know where to find it.

That's not true is it? That's just your straw man argument isn't it?


The media would have us to believe (2 days before election) that the government saved the passengers in the nick of time

Once again, this is not what happened. There were no passengers, only crew.

What is the purpose in jumbling the events and creating a fiction of it?

Do you know how they began the search for bombs on planes? What tipped off anti-terrorism squads that there might be bombs in planes?



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by thegoodearth
 


No I don't agree with some of his characterizations, but at least he's reading the predictions now which I will concede is a step in the right direction!



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


Oh please. They used to have a moderately intrusive search. Now one year later they have a lot of scanners that view your private parts and they fondle your sexual organs during patdown. It's not the same.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Can't recall where I left off.

This one is a massive failure.

The fall started in September-October 2008, the crash will be this year. The war will be the right time for it. They will create a war to mask the crash. Financial chaos will bring the collapse, the greatest collapse ever seen. TPTB will bring a war for people to be scared and hungry so that they accept their new "saviour", his system and a new order based on electronic money. They will blame the war for the fall.


This is not dated, but to date this is a massive failure.

The sea will become violent and roar. When the sea starts to become rough, move away from the coast. Get to the mountaintops. I don't know how much inland, but 800 meters above sea level should be barely enough to avoid the problems that are coming.


Not dates but a massive failure to date.

Greek will see revolution, Europe, too.


This is dated and again a massive failure.

The biggest, most notable event soon will be the world crash. Pope will be persecuted. Attempt. War. The conflict that will start the war, will be unmistakeable between the end of June and beginnings of August, 2010.


This is an untestable claim.

The money that is unaccountable at the Federal Reserve has bought and paid for whole systems that the public doesn't know that exist, nor would approve of.


Not dated and no war. To date this is a failure.

A pandemia will happen while war is ravaging town after town, city after city, and country after country. The Swine Flu will be released at the right moment to lower population. There will be no controls in place to abate it. Please take your precautions, and for those you can help.


This is extremely unlikely. There are no known NEOs on a collision course with the Earth. Personally, I think this is a typical Hollywood dumb as tacks claim. With 70% of the Earth's surface area water chances are objects will hit the oceans. Cities are such a small portion of the Earth's surface that the chances of a city being hit are remote. Of course, every dumb as tacks Hollywood movie has the objects from space hitting cities.

Two [comet pieces] of considerable proportions will hit the Earth. One will hit NY and the power structures of the elite will be in shambles. Washington will move in time and will never be the same, ever. Two major rocks will hit the Earth.


I think we can toss a hit on the Gulf plug time.

So far all I see is 2 hits. That's good. I didn't think it was possible to get 100% wrong.

In general, the predictions are just plain wrong.



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by oniongrass
 


Oh please. Body scanners are not new. Just because your limited experience has not encountered one is meaningless. Just because security at airports is tightened is not a restriction of your liberties. They are not pubic places at which you have unbridled freedom. For 37 years the courts have recognized the right of airport authorities to search passengers and goods.

The big change came in 2007 when the courts allowed warrantless searches of individuals if they advanced partially through an airport security gate. The 9th circuit agreed that people could be stopped and searched often they passed by a magnetometer or placed luggage on a conveyor belt for inspection. They can be detained even if they want to leave the airport to avoid further search.

If you have a problem with that issue then you can go to this link to read why that decision was made.
Court Says Travelers Can’t Avoid Airport Searches



posted on Nov, 20 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by stereologist
 


I'm not talking about court opinions, although that's interesting and thanks for providing the research. I'm talking about the actual experience travelers have in airports. It's changed recently.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:19 AM
link   
$11,000 fine, arrest possible for some who refuse airport scans and pat downs


The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is warning that any would-be commercial airline passenger who enters an airport checkpoint and then refuses to undergo the method of inspection designated by TSA will not be allowed to fly and also will not be permitted to simply leave the airport.


www.sun-sentinel.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Heres the Link

The article goes on to say that you have to stay for questioning by TSA and possibly Law enforcement, and if you refuse you will face fines up to $11,000 and possible arrest.

Wait until they start putting them up in all the court houses, grocery stores, and malls and banks. I guess for right now they only want to 'condition' us to think that terrorists only exist in airports.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Breaking: Former Gov. Ventura Will No Longer Fly Due to Abuse He’s Endured at Hands of TSA

www.infowars.com...


Here's another one.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reaper2137
you quote the one guy out of hundreds and hundreds over the years that were wrong.. and you know what I bet every one of them said the same thing you do.. I do talk to god.. and I trust my gut when the end come's it comes..but I don't see it any time soon.. but good luck to you.


It's good to know what the signs are; the signs of the times and the signs that the time is nigh. Thank you.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by oniongrass
 


It changes all of the time. The body scanners are not in all airports. Other airports must other methods to provide similar levels of security. Court rulings are important. They allow airports to do these searches. I remember things were different. I remember being hassled by Hari Krishnas and other people in airports. Yeah, those days are long gone.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by nlouise
 


Thanks for telling us all that Jesse has turned into a whiner. What is the world coming to? I mean when Mr Tough Guy starts being a whiny baby things are just horrible.



posted on Nov, 21 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by nlouise
 


Wait until Red Flag is set in place, Codex Alimentarius, Agenda 21, and all those wonderful laws and those executive orders that people aren't yet aware of.

Here is just one:



FBI email says Bush signed exec order authorizing torture

Apr 17, 2008, 00:17

Email this article
Printer friendly page

President George W. Bush’s comment to ABC News -- that he approved discussions that his top aides held about harsh interrogation techniques -- adds credence to claims from senior FBI agents in Iraq in 2004 that Bush had signed an executive order approving the use of military dogs, sleep deprivation and other tactics to intimidate Iraqi detainees.



link here



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 51  52  53    55  56  57 >>

log in

join