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.

 

FBI: 100 Percent Chance of WMD Attack

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by Ronin22
 


Don't bet on it Brother.
The trojan horse was the most basic, simple of plans.
Although i cannot prove historically that this happened, as the city was razed and modern scholars cannot pinpoint where Troy actually was, it seems it worked.
Sometimes the best solution is actually the simplest.
Let em search high, we'll move low.


Lets be honest with each other here for a second g146541,

1). The "Trojan Horse" only worked for the Greeks due to the fact that technology and "intelligence gathering" was not as advanced or sophisticated as it is currently. I seriously doubt that America could pull off a "Trojan Horse" or any other nation (especially against America) without someone finding out whats going on before it all went down. Our Internet capabilities allows for ANYONE without a phone to shoot video and upload it to the World within minutes.

2). I would be more concerned with an official government agency using an unmarked or hell, even marked vehicle to put into place a portable nuke. We hear all the time of dirty suit-case nukes, as well as portable nuke's. Why go through the trouble of sending a nuke to a port to have it found, blasted all across the news (no pun intended) and possibly the trail leading back to those involved?

I just don't buy it man.




posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   
So............................how many countries have ever been hit by a WMD? Well, at least the pre-Patriot Act WMD, because nowadays, they call any Grenade a WMD.

100% chance? I would say that the only possible way to know anything for 100% certain is to be involved with it directly. I think if we get hit by a WMD, then this guy should be arrested as an accomplice. His own words should be used against him.

There is not a 100% chance that I will finish typing this sentence. Phew, got lucky that time, but a few letters before that period anything could have happened!

It sickens me to think that someone with that much authority and influence would not temper their statements a little bit. Nobody knows anything for 100% certain.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


This thread was in no means meant to scare you. It is something I wanted post. Many people think american soil will never be attacked. That mindset alone is scary. Anyhow just passing on ATS apporved information...take it as you please



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
From the article
"Such an attack could be launched by foreign terrorists, lone wolves who are terrorists, or even by criminal elements."

What about "non-foreign terrorists", the Army, and all the 3letter organizations that produce, own, deal and use WMD's ?

Bleeping 200% chance ??



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by svetlana84
 


yes 200% chance seems logical...He never said who where or how, so yes he could be talking corporations laboratories, anything



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by svetlana84

From the article
"Such an attack could be launched by foreign terrorists, lone wolves who are terrorists, or even by criminal elements."

What about "non-foreign terrorists", the Army, and all the 3letter organizations that produce, own, deal and use WMD's ?

Bleeping 200% chance ??


So, let me get this correct..... The Army will launch a nuke attack on America? You my friend, Have been playing too much Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2.

The American Army has a large percentage of bodies, majority of which are VERY Pro-American and VERY Patriotic. I seriously doubt the U.S. Army will think of doing such acts, Now I can agree with you on "non-foreign terrorists" but you saying the Army is capable of such is (for lack of a better word) Stupid.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by prexparte
 


WOW 100%?

This, in my opinion, is setting us up for a false flag for purpose of depopulation. I believe whole heartedly that our government is setting this up, as we speak!



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ronin22

Originally posted by svetlana84

From the article
"Such an attack could be launched by foreign terrorists, lone wolves who are terrorists, or even by criminal elements."

What about "non-foreign terrorists", the Army, and all the 3letter organizations that produce, own, deal and use WMD's ?

Bleeping 200% chance ??


So, let me get this correct..... The Army will launch a nuke attack on America? You my friend, Have been playing too much Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2.

The American Army has a large percentage of bodies, majority of which are VERY Pro-American and VERY Patriotic. I seriously doubt the U.S. Army will think of doing such acts, Now I can agree with you on "non-foreign terrorists" but you saying the Army is capable of such is (for lack of a better word) Stupid.


No one is talking abeout nukes, especially not this poster, what was said was, "wmd" you are the one singlizing on a nuke. This articles clearly talks about many forms of attack...



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Angelicdefender2012
 


I do believe our dasturdly government is up to no good, but what are they skeeming. And if soemthing does happen, who will they blame...its a mystery hopefully we can unfold it...



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by prexparte

Originally posted by Ronin22

Originally posted by svetlana84

From the article
"Such an attack could be launched by foreign terrorists, lone wolves who are terrorists, or even by criminal elements."

What about "non-foreign terrorists", the Army, and all the 3letter organizations that produce, own, deal and use WMD's ?

Bleeping 200% chance ??


So, let me get this correct..... The Army will launch a nuke attack on America? You my friend, Have been playing too much Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2.

The American Army has a large percentage of bodies, majority of which are VERY Pro-American and VERY Patriotic. I seriously doubt the U.S. Army will think of doing such acts, Now I can agree with you on "non-foreign terrorists" but you saying the Army is capable of such is (for lack of a better word) Stupid.


No one is talking abeout nukes, especially not this poster, what was said was, "wmd" you are the one singlizing on a nuke. This articles clearly talks about many forms of attack...


Forgive me if I mistaken the main weapon of mass destruction to be a Nuke, in which the San Diego news story was bought up by YOU prexparte. Whenever American News agencies have spoken of Weapon's of Mass Destruction they rarely speak of weapons other than Nukes. I know the definition of WMD and I know a WMD can come in many shapes and forms, from anything such as Biological Attacks down to Computer Viruses/Worms crippling communications and information structures.

So let's not play the word game or the "interpretation" game because we all know exactly what WMD was used in place of here in this thread.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 


Truth is powerful! star on ya!

reply to post by Ronin22
 


Very true, but any angle no matter how obtuse is still an angle.
And media, they only allow us to know what they want us to know.
Luckily for me i don't live in a city big enough to be considered a target for such an attack and if it did happen to my little place,.... thats kind of like a tree just spontaneously falling on you. It was gonna happen no matter what.
Vigilance is key, if anything happens. then i start to scream at the masses.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Ronin22
 


I did mention san diegos story, however, I never said nukes...right??:



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ronin22

Originally posted by prexparte

Originally posted by Ronin22

Originally posted by svetlana84

From the article
"Such an attack could be launched by foreign terrorists, lone wolves who are terrorists, or even by criminal elements."

What about "non-foreign terrorists", the Army, and all the 3letter organizations that produce, own, deal and use WMD's ?

Bleeping 200% chance ??


So, let me get this correct..... The Army will launch a nuke attack on America? You my friend, Have been playing too much Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2.

The American Army has a large percentage of bodies, majority of which are VERY Pro-American and VERY Patriotic. I seriously doubt the U.S. Army will think of doing such acts, Now I can agree with you on "non-foreign terrorists" but you saying the Army is capable of such is (for lack of a better word) Stupid.


No one is talking abeout nukes, especially not this poster, what was said was, "wmd" you are the one singlizing on a nuke. This articles clearly talks about many forms of attack...


Forgive me if I mistaken the main weapon of mass destruction to be a Nuke, in which the San Diego news story was bought up by YOU prexparte. Whenever American News agencies have spoken of Weapon's of Mass Destruction they rarely speak of weapons other than Nukes. I know the definition of WMD and I know a WMD can come in many shapes and forms, from anything such as Biological Attacks down to Computer Viruses/Worms crippling communications and information structures.

So let's not play the word game or the "interpretation" game because we all know exactly what WMD was used in place of here in this thread.


Dude I never exchanged a word of this articl it is your reasoning that changed it exclusively for you...settle down here, we do not need anger for a mere thread



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


I also live in a small town far away from big cities....I feel relively safe.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
The FBI and news media are doing a far better job at terrorizing us then the terrorists ever have. They overuse the word "terrorist" so much that I have forgotten who I'm actually supposed to be terrorized by. This terrifies me, because now I don't know who or what to fear so I might as well fear anyone who visits the U.S., or anyone who looks like they are native to another country.

But wait! People within the U.S. who are citizens of the U.S. can be terrorists too! So I guess I'll fear my neighbor, who keeps bothering me to cut my grass. OR the mailman! Yeah he goes everywhere and acts like its no big deal. He's hiding something.

I don't want to leave my house anymore. There's too many terrorists out there. I'm boarding up my windows so they can't get in. I'm putting up cameras so I can see them coming. Now it looks like I'm hiding something. I must be a terrorist.

I'm sick of the bull# slippery slope strawman McCarthy-ism scare tactics that have engulfed our lives. I'm no expert, I've performed no investigations, but I'm pretty sure I can say that there's a 100% chance that someone somewhere will do something that someone somewhere else thinks is bad.

This just proves to me that the Government is far more scared of it's citizens that it exists to serve, than it's citizens are of anything else. Especially now that we know that all it takes to enact change is to gather a few million peaceful protestors on the streets for a little over two weeks (thank you Egypt). But how dare we even consider doing such. We'd be corralled and beaten, attacked with tear gas and rubber bullets, illegally detained and possibly killed,

and be labeled terrorists.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Let's face the facts:-

1. Eversince mustard could be found to use as WMD since WW1, chemical weapons had been with mankind, and had been used for decades. Often is undiscovered until its effect shows. The Iran - Iraq war is one, Vietnam is 2 and flouride in our drinking water is 3. How many more WMD had not or yet be discovered.?

We are already in the midst of being terrorised, only we don't know who the REAL enemy or enemies are.


2. FBI is the last honest anti crime intelligence agency US can depend on. Would you rather trust the NSA, CIA, DHS? At least their experts are only repeating what we already long knew - WMD in our midst.

Next is simply, or more 'complexly', find the evidences of terrorism against humanity by the authorities, and finger every one of them to be strung up on yardams to be spat upon for all eternity by generations.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Ronin22
 


Let me precise; first i do not play any Computer games, no shooting games at all.

2nd; why I mentionend the Army;

- they own and use WMD's
- Sometimes they miss WMD's (Nukes for example Barksdale incident, where 6 Nukes went "lost", Or Nerve Agents as in the recent incident where they had to close down that Dugway Base.)
I really hope that "The Army" would not use them at all, and not use them on their own people
(actually thinking of it, they did test some of the stuff on their own soldiers, remember the soldiers looking at Nuke tests, "protected" by goggles, back in the good ole "duck and dive" days.)

Besides; the us-army is (to my knowledge) the only army that ever nuked another country - twice.

So i see a possibility that some element within the army could launch such a terrible attack on homesoil. Or they could launch something by accident.

I still really really hope i will not happen, and of course i'd assume other groups (terrorism/3letter orgs/ organized crime...) to be the more likely to use WMD's

You see, i am not 100% sure, like the guy in the article.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


You are correct, i would rather trust the FBI over any of the other alphabet agencies as they are more low profile, local law enforcement types. but, history suggests that they can and will stand down an investigation when someone screams of national security.
This by default keeps them in the same boat for me.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


you ask:
So............................how many countries have ever been hit by a WMD? Well, at least the pre-Patriot Act WMD, because nowadays, they call any Grenade a WMD.

Lets see, without investigating, what pops in my mind:


- Iran (Nerve gas)
- Iraq (Nerve Gas)
- Iraq (depleted Uranium)
- Japan (Nukes)
- Japan (Nerve gas by some cult in the subways
- US (Anthrax after 9/11)
- Vietnam (Agent Orange)
- Chile (nerve gas)

This i just a little list, as said just my knowledge of history, i guess with a little research the list would grow huge.
Basically we should ban WMD's once and for all everywhere.



posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by svetlana84
 


Right, thanks. That is about the list I had running through my head as well, although I disagree with the subway attacks, it was a make shift nerve gas, and not really a WMD. Kind of a wannabe WMD.

The point was though, maybe 12 to 20 attacks in the last 100 years over at least 200 or so countries. That is a pretty low percentage of WMD attacks, including 2 world wars and countless revolutions.

In my opinion, for what it is worth, WMD's are the very least of the things are government should be worrying about as far as risks to the country! There is no data to support a 100%, or 50%, or even 1% chance of this country being effectively struck with a WMD, but there is a very good chance of economic implosion, fraud, deceit, corruption, and human rights issues going on at this very moment. A large portion of our intelligence budget and our national security budget is going toward this WMD prevention, but what about foreign stockholders owning majority stock in key corporations? What about undo influence of campaign contributions? What about technology innovations? What about improvised weapons that are not WMDs? What about "real" terrorism such as the DC Sniper?

If the FBI is naive enough to focus their attention on WMDs, and then make a bone-headed statement about a 100% chance of it happening, then the FBI is not doing the work we pay them for!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join