Breaking! Military Action Against Libya Within Hours: France

Originally posted by Getsmart
We can also assume that some of these operations are being used as a "Field Demonstration" for arms sales,

Can "we"? Thanks for doing my thinking, I was getting tired..

Originally posted by Getsmart
with the French Rafales being refueled in flight directly above a French Air Force Base in Corsica, when they could have simple landed for traditional refueling.

Wow, good planning! You should e-mail Africa Command and let them know. It takes time to land a plane and refuel on the ground, as opposed to keeping assets in the air and refueling there.

Originally posted by Getsmart
The only explanation I can imagine is that this was done to demonstrate to potential French Dassault Aviation Rafale purchasers that the range of this aircraft can be easily extended using in-flight refueling.
We can also expect that the decision to launch the first Air Strikes against Libya with this aircraft is as a lasting advertisement for its effective use in aggressive military actions over enemy territory.

The Rafale has been in service for almost 10 years and has already seen action. This campaign is not a sales advert.

Originally posted by Getsmart
The only alternative explanation would be the fear of retaliation by Corsicans when landing on the French Air Force Base north of Solenzara, Corsica.
This might be prompted by the likelihood that Qaddafi is HALF CORSICAN and that his biological father may very well have been a FRENCH AIR FORCE FIGHTER PILOT. Sometimes reality is stranger than fiction.

That's just a silly idea. All of a sudden, Corsicans are going to rise up in support of a guy who might be a Corsican? Corsica has been French for centuries and they have no love for Gaddafi.

reply to post by stumason


Hi Stumason,


You are critical but are offering us ZERO analysis of what is going on. So far just your sour grapes about another ATSer's opinion. Please kindly provide your own explanation of what is going on, or is your take the standard issue propaganda we're bombarded with by the mainstream news outlets ? We have been provided no intelligence proving that the French Air Strikes were justified, only vague statements of ground movements near Benghazi. Then after the inordinately imprecise statement of "a vehicle strike" we received footage of an undefined Jet Fighter apparently shot down directly over the city of Benghazi, yet later we heard rumors that three armored vehicles or tanks were bombed.


If the Coalition really wanted a cease fire, then they would have Ceased Fire after stopping any alleged ground movements, which they claim to have achieved. The Coalition instead went on immediately and without direct provocation (to our knowledge - this remains to be verified) to make numerous Air Strikes on passive land targets such as Command Centers and Radar Installations, by way of Bombing with French Mirage Jets and British Tornado Jets as well as sea launched US Tomahawk Missiles. This isn't, by any stretch, a measure of Policing or enforcing a NO FLY ZONE, but one of direct Military Air Assault.


Regarding the Rafale, it is still one of the SUPERIOR Air Strike Fighter Jets despite it not being recent. The French were hoping beyond hope that Qaddafi was buying a few as its First Client 4 years ago. It is very overpriced and therefore a very hard item to sell. France has them and was unable to impose them to others in the European Union. Were I seeking air superiority I would consider their purchase. Pray tell us what other fighter jet can out maneuver a Rafale in a dog fight? Proving its capabilities in 2011 combat is useful for marketing purposes and Image Building for the entire French Military Industrial Complex which is maybe larger than you suspect.


The British are themselves positioning their own Tornado aircraft in view as having met a "momentous decision" of David Cameron to undertake missions 3000 miles in distance which is an important event given the current difficulty in renewing the British Defense Budget. If that isn't a product positioning and public opinion oriented analysis of the usage of Military Assets, then strike me stupid. This statement was made on the English version of France's international News Television station France24.


Regarding Corsica you obviously know precious little about that Island or its people. It is a place where many things can happen without much control of the official authorities. French military police (Gendarmes) routinely have their cars and lodgings blown up and the Air Force base personnel are generally 'tolerated' by the local population. If you find it that hard to land a fighter jet on a flat airstrip inside a Military Base then that's your call, your judgment. In flight refueling saved them precious seconds in a 6-hour round trip mission. Makes sense. Or is there possibly a political dimension to that choice, Corsicans maybe not wanting to be associated with a military assault by 'la Metropole" as they call mainland France ?


As we speak Qaddafi after playing the role of a barrier to Islamic Fundamentalism is calling on all beleivers to support his battle against the "Crusaders" and unfortunately for we Westerners the ongoing Globalist attack against this Dictator is making us all out to be just that, Crusaders who for no legitimate reason are invading a Muslim nation. If this propaganda ploy on his behalf works, we can expect mild to severe onslaughts on many fronts and in many locations, close and far from Libya. Our best hope is that the UN Security Council will ROPE IN the Coalition to restrain its actions to "more civilized behavior" unless they are out to make us look like Barbarians attacking a nation which never provoked us or posed any security risks to our interests or populations.


And please.... spare us the recent human rights vocation which recently revealed itself to our world leaders who have never given a sneeze about anyone's life or liberties unless forced to by institutional or legal restraints.


Members of the Arab League were alleged to have been surprised that no member of the Security Council vetoed Resolution 1973 thinking that they were only paying lip service to a proposal that would never go through, and only having done so regarding the establishment of a NO FLY ZONE and not the military onslaught against Libya.


GS

reply to post by Getsmart


If you want my analysis, visit other Libyan threads. I am not going to retype my posts over and over. I was merely pointing out the error of logic in your over-analytic post.

Here, have some links..

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well Stumason, it seems that you won't grant us the courtesy of a direct reply, placing the task of learning your opinions to other ATSers who must hunt down your random critiques of yet other ATS members. It would be nice to actually make a statement of your opinion in a nutshell, as that is much harder to do as this exposes you to critique, something you particularly seem to enjoy providing to others. To save others here the task, I will do that footwork myself, culling your links for any insight found.

Originally posted by stumason

Read the resolution. It isn't just a no fly zone that has been set up but rather it is just part of it. The main thrust of the UNSC resolution is "protecting civilians", which in this context is diplo-speak for supporting the rebels.

If the rebels were spawned, sponsored, logistically financially or militarily supported prior to them starting Civil War in Libya, then of course the diplomats of foreign nations intervening through militias against a nation state would as you say use "diplo-speak for supporting the rebels".

Originally posted by stumason

The Kosovo Campaign in 1999 went pretty well. Air power alone drove the Serbian Army out of Kosovo, so when the Para's and US Marines went in, the only opposition they encountered was the Russians at Pristina.

Since you believe that "the Kosovo Campaign went pretty well" it becomes clear that you and your family were not a part of those who were left in the field of honor. Pray tell us what scenario you would describe as "The Libya Campaign in 2011 went pretty well ?"

Originally posted by stumason

In defence of my Scots, Irish, Welsh and Commonwealth friends, it isn't an English ship. England hasn't had a Navy since 1707.

I personally think, having looked at the video, that it was engine failure. But is serves the rebels well to claim it was "shot down", both for morale and to entice the West to respond.

I sometimes wonder if I am rather sad because I seem to be one of the few that has followed this thing from start to finish and remember's things.

At the beggining of the uprising, Libyan Army, Air force and some Navy defected. The rebels also took several airfields with aircraft in them. There was a report a few weeks back of the rebels and the few pilots they have trying to get these aircraft airworthy. Looks like they have managed that, albeit not very well.

No fishyness or strange stenches. It's rather simple and a bit less exciting.

Rebels captured planes - rebels fixed planes - rebels flew planes - rebels crashed plane.

Originally posted by stumason

Up until the beggining of last week, half the country, including it's air bases, was under rebel control. It really isn't that surprising to find they nabbed a few aircraft. They also have helo's too.

Seriously, it isn't some conspiracy they have a few aircraft!

Well here at least you have shared an analysis of the Plane that crashed over Benghazi, as a defective Libyan fighter jet captured by rebels and unsuccessfully flown into the NO FLY ZONE Airspace under the likely protection of the foreign Coalition and crashed due to mechanical failure or pilot error ?

Originally posted by stumason

Well done, you've cut through the diplo-speak. The "protecting civilians" is how they got it through the UNSC vote. This is and always has been about getting rid of a manical dictator on Europes borders. An opportunity presented itself and, very surprisingly, the French took it with both hands and bent it over. Kudos to them.

It isn't dependant, not by a long shot. An importer, sure, but not dependant. Libya, at best, can do 1 million barrels a day. A drop in the proverbial.

French Military Technicians intervened only a few short months ago for their good buddy Qaddafi helping him with maintenance on his aircraft. While there they noted that of the 400 fighter jets in Libya half of them had serious issues due to rust from sand penetration into the thruster nozzles, making them potentially hazardous for flight. France has had whatever occasions it could have wished for to take out Qaddafi, but this is a US Led Attack using France's complicit 'agent' President to disguise it as a broader international initiative with support from France's masquerading as the defenders of human rights and civilian populations. LOL.

Originally posted by stumason

I would like to see that as every source I can find points to Norway, Saudi and even the UK as major suppliers of Oil to France, but no Libya in the lists. Libyan oil went mostly to Italy, Germany and Spain with France importing only 87,000 barrels off them, making that a rough 8% of Libyan oil going to France.

Thanks for posting this information on Libya's fuel supplies. My earlier assessment was based upon numerous public declaration by French officials in the past who said that Libya was their main supplier, this has apparently changed? So I had been misled and should have researched it, I stand corrected... unless your source is erroneous.


Italy isn't intervening directly but has offered its Air Base near Naples as a Platform for NATO Missions against Libya. Germany kept its nose clean thus far, probably knowing the real intent of the Americans and their obedient puppet president/premier (both alleged by various sources to be infiltrated foreign agents) posted in the Elysees Palace and at 10 Downing Street.

Originally posted by stumason

It's France's show this one, with the UK flying wingman and the US just idling wiaiting for the French phone call. The Command Centre hasn't even been set up yet, so this is happening pretty quickly and I think the assault on Benghazi by Gaddafi has pushed up the timetable a bit.

Hmm. I suspect that Obama just pontificated, to be honest. He has shown himself to be indecisive and a bit wishy-washy. Ready to say alot, but won't back his words up.

No, they won't. It's political and I covered it in depth in another thread, but the short of it is that Saudi simply won't allow Bahrain to be dealt with and doing so will only place a Shia, Iran-Friendly Government in control of the home of the US 5th Fleet and right next to Saudi. Not a good result.

It is slighlty hypocritical of us in the West, but Saudi have us by the short and curlies, plus we don't want Irans influence spreading.

People need to see the big picture when comparing Libya to Bahrain.

As stated above I venture that the underlying 'initiative' for this Operation, which happens to have been Baptized "Odyssey Dawn" by the Pentagon and not named with some French Heroic Imagery, is actually an American call to further a Zionist agenda to control the entire North Africa and Middle East region.

Originally posted by stumason

A stable state to the south of the EU, control of migration, stable oil prices, protecting people from a madman?

Not everything is a conspiracy and might just be as it appears.

Extremely few illegal immigrants arrive in France from Libya. This is not one of their 'preferred destinations'. Only it is a matter of political recuperation of an issue which is at the forefront of current French electoral debates. Stable oil prices is not exactly furthered by creating a threat to the Oil Wells of an Oil Producing Nation - check your local pump prices. Protecting people from a madman was seldom a French preoccupation, they've had their own share in positions of power. They simply LOVED Qaddafi to death during his recent state visit only a few short years ago, on special invitation of Nicolas Sarkozy who hosted him lavishly.


GS

reply to post by Getsmart


It's not that I am trying to avoid answering you, I just don't see the point in rehashing rather extensive posts I have made in other, more active threads. I have spent much of the morning talking in the 40 page thread I listed first. My posts are dconcentrated on pages 1-3 and later in pages 36+, I think. It was a busy thread over night.

Ok, now you've drawn me...

Originally posted by Getsmart

Originally posted by stumason

Read the resolution. It isn't just a no fly zone that has been set up but rather it is just part of it. The main thrust of the UNSC resolution is "protecting civilians", which in this context is diplo-speak for supporting the rebels.

If the rebels were spawned, sponsored, logistically financially or militarily supported prior to them starting Civil War in Libya, then of course the diplomats of foreign nations intervening through militias against a nation state would as you say use "diplo-speak for supporting the rebels".

You are making an asumption that they were "spawned, sponsored, logistically financially or militarily supported prior", despite there being no evidence of such. It appeared, on the face of it, that it was initially a series of protests that stemmed from the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings, which in part were as a result of leaked cables on Wikileaks.

Originally posted by Getsmart

Originally posted by stumason
The Kosovo Campaign in 1999 went pretty well. Air power alone drove the Serbian Army out of Kosovo, so when the Para's and US Marines went in, the only opposition they encountered was the Russians at Pristina.

Since you believe that "the Kosovo Campaign went pretty well" it becomes clear that you and your family were not a part of those who were left in the field of honor. Pray tell us what scenario you would describe as "The Libya Campaign in 2011 went pretty well ?"

I have plenty of family who have served, including in the former Yugoslavia. A good ending for this would be that Gaddfi's advance on Benghazi is halted, the rebels get organised and kick his sorry arse out. I already know that they are getting weapons and "advice" from some western powers after initial contact was made some weeks ago.

Originally posted by Getsmart

Originally posted by stumason

In defence of my Scots, Irish, Welsh and Commonwealth friends, it isn't an English ship. England hasn't had a Navy since 1707.

I personally think, having looked at the video, that it was engine failure. But is serves the rebels well to claim it was "shot down", both for morale and to entice the West to respond.

I sometimes wonder if I am rather sad because I seem to be one of the few that has followed this thing from start to finish and remember's things.

At the beggining of the uprising, Libyan Army, Air force and some Navy defected. The rebels also took several airfields with aircraft in them. There was a report a few weeks back of the rebels and the few pilots they have trying to get these aircraft airworthy. Looks like they have managed that, albeit not very well.

No fishyness or strange stenches. It's rather simple and a bit less exciting.

Rebels captured planes - rebels fixed planes - rebels flew planes - rebels crashed plane.

Well here at least you have shared an analysis of the Plane that crashed over Benghazi, as a defective Libyan fighter jet captured by rebels and unsuccessfully flown into the NO FLY ZONE Airspace under the likely protection of the foreign Coalition and crashed due to mechanical failure or pilot error ?

Not sure why there is a question mark here, I don't see a question, only a statement. Dig further and you will find many more posts like that.

EDIT: I notice you keep going back and editing your post, adding further remarks etc. If you cannot play fair and keep your posts the same then how can a structured debate take place?

After Obama ,now Nobel peace prize should go to Sarkozy

Originally posted by xavi1000
After Obama ,now Nobel peace prize should go to Sarkozy

]

Hi Xavi1000,

I'm with you there - that way the Swedes would once again be coherent with NOBEL's invention of explosives used in the worldwide arms industries.


Update on news. Russian TV Russia Today's correspondent in Libya stated that THE HYPROCRISY OF WESTERN COUNTRIES IS SO THICK THAT IT ALMOST DROOOOLS.


They also stated by them that RUSSIA requests that NO EXCESS FORCE BE USED BY THE COALITION.


We can almost wonder why they didn't VETO this resolution? Maybe they didn't want to appear to support a Dictator alleged to kill his own citizens, as most dictators happen to do routinely, even if usually more discretely. Nobody knows what the genuine LEADERSHIP of the BENGHAZI COUNCIL is in reality. Russia Today's analysts speculate that the insurgency is only a small tribal faction in the EAST of Libya which is not at all representative of the desiderata of the general Libyan population.


Getsmart
PS. Just because the NATO alliance are Bad Guys in this violent illegal Military Attack on Libya, don't imagine that either the Russians or Qaddafi are the Good Guys. This is some very messy business, once again victimizing innocent civilians.

Originally posted by stumason
Ok, now you've drawn me...

You are making an asumption that they were "spawned, sponsored, logistically financially or militarily supported prior", despite there being no evidence of such. It appeared, on the face of it, that it was initially a series of protests that stemmed from the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings, which in part were as a result of leaked cables on Wikileaks.

I have plenty of family who have served, including in the former Yugoslavia. A good ending for this would be that Gaddfi's advance on Benghazi is halted, the rebels get organised and kick his sorry arse out. I already know that they are getting weapons and "advice" from some western powers after initial contact was made some weeks ago.

At least you have the merit of being clear. Many folks in Libya and elsewhere would no doubt approve his getting as you so eloquently state "his sorry arse kicked out" but this isn't exactly what the UN Resolution called for. So in fact you are calling for a foreign supported Coup d'Etat as a normal way of doing business in world diplomacy. Thanks for letting us know.

Originally posted by Getsmart

Well here at least you have shared an analysis of the Plane that crashed over Benghazi, as a defective Libyan fighter jet captured by rebels and unsuccessfully flown into the NO FLY ZONE Airspace under the likely protection of the foreign Coalition and crashed due to mechanical failure or pilot error ?

Originally posted by stumason

Not sure why there is a question mark here, I don't see a question, only a statement. Dig further and you will find many more posts like that.

I wasn't questioning that this was what you were stating, I was only trying to verify that I hadn't misinterpreted your statement. This does indeed make a lot of sense, and we can even wonder if Qaddafi didn't announce that they had shot down a French Aircraft in reference to this Rebel seized aircraft which crashed once images were seen by Libyans, he may have been 'creatively interpreting' it as being a French plane (a Mirage is indeed French-made).


Regarding my initial assumption, Mubarak friend Frank Gardiner Wisner Jr was in Cairo to help depose his own close personal friend Mubarak using CIA handlers piloting local operatives manipulating opposition groups for a US controlled transition government. Similarly the Tunisian 'opposition' was both real and supported with a first transition government including people with either direct ties or ideological sympathies with Western and especially US interests. This is why that Tunisian 'February Government' become a short lived transition government only lasting a few weeks before being deposed as illegitimate and unrepresentative of the citizens. Teams of opponents were "coached" and met with both Condoleezza Rice and later Hillary Clinton during two separate trips to Washington D.C. prior to being touted by our media as being legitimate local grassroots dissidents.

The Egyptian protests became the most critical foreign policy crisis so far for the Obama administration, and Obama came to increasingly rely upon Clinton for advice and connections. Clinton had known Mubarak for some twenty years, and had formed a close relationship with Egyptian First Lady Suzanne Mubarak by supporting the latter's human rights work. Clinton originated the idea of sending Frank G. Wisner as an emissary to Cairo, to tell Mubarak not to seek another term as the country's leader. As Mubarak's response to the protests became violent in early February, Clinton strongly condemned the actions taking place, especially those against journalists covering the events, and urged new Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman to conduct an official investigation to hold those responsible for the violence accountable. When Wisner baldly stated that Mubarak's departure should be delayed to accommodate an orderly transition to another government, Clinton rebuked him, but shared a bit of the same sentiment. Mubarak did finally step down on February 11 as the protests became the 2011 Egyptian revolution. Clinton said that the U.S. realized that Egypt still had much work and some difficult times ahead of it.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State

GS

France's President Sarkozy recently tried to gain support for extending the Coalition's attack on the region to Syria which has historically fought against Israel for control over Lebannon. The accusations against the regime were equally contradictory to France's longstanding warm and hearty friendship with Syria's dictatorial government. We will note that this happens just as the Chicago "Outfit" is coordinated by Mossad operative Rahm Emanuel while the American Crime Syndicate, which is shadowed by the KGB's Russian Mafiya entrenched in Chicago, is directly represented by the #2 Job at the White House with Michael Daley named Chief of Staff.


Russia failed to VETO this onslaught in the UN Security Council and we can wonder if there wasn't a KGB/Mafiya deal struck between them and the Mossad/Pentagon. After all the armed bandits which are heralded by all Western Media as heroes and freedom loving grassroots dissidents range from CIA controlled political opponents to armed bandits used by the KGB to destabilize Iraq.


Whatever the generalized move against Multiple Nation States in what is growing into a TAKEOVER of MENA or Middle East North Africa region might even extend further south given Obama's recent demands to remove the current Ivory Coast president from power. Let us not forget that this African nation is one of the wealthiest in terms of natural resources.


The Syrians are quite clever, lifting Martial law after close to 50 years of existence, cleverly releasing prisoners who were captured near its borders during armed attacks against regular troops. They astutely said that this was a 'mistake' because they were still remembering events from the distant past when Israel along with the USA and the Saudis had hired 'armed bandits' (mercenaries) to mount attacks and destabilize the government (all diplomats will have understood that this is a way of outing what really went on recently).


So at present Sarkozy and the coalition are at a stalemate, not having the Public Relations propaganda excuse for smart bombing Syria and dumping countless tons of depleted uranium bunker busters on their heads. Seems they'll need to choose an alternate target until they can muster up some contrived event on Syrian soil or elsewhere an odious terror attack they will then conveniently blame on the demonized Syrian dictator. Who'll be the wiser ?


Khaled Issa who is touted by France24 national (Coalition) TV news channel is said to be a former professor at the University of Damas. He states that the presence of generalized corruption justifies the Coalition's military removal of Syria's Head of State. If one were truly rigorous and held such a view sincerely, either you think that only the Syrians deserve Freedom, or one would need to extend such conclusions to France where Generalized Corruption has become the normal way of life. France's leading construction company, Bouygues, of which the owner is a personal friend of "freedom loving" Nicolas Sarkozy, is famous for having had special company software designed called "Bribe Management" software. This software was rolled out to all national and international operations of the company until its software designer filed a legal suit in court, because Bouygues was so corrupt that they chose to not pay him for his work.


Of course we aren't calling for using Depleted Uranium bunker busters on France to presumably protect its population from the infamous SARKOZY REGIME's generalized corruption. Yet the USA cannot be exactly shown as an example giver, with its $1800 toilet seats billed to the Pentagon nor the fact that Rumsfeld on the eve of the 9/11 attacks was under investigation for over $3 Trillion in the Pentagon's accounts which had been "Disappeared"... Fortunately for Rumsfeld and most unfortunately for the honest innocent employees of the Pentagon's accounting department, all records were lost due to a Missile striking by coincidence exactly that section of the Pentagon. Let us hope the UN won't call for an all out Air Strike against the USA for his corruption.


FWIW.


Getsmart... and WAKEUP


GS

France's head of state was outed as a Mossad agent several years ago, with this information being dispatched to one hundred leading French politicians. Apparently either they didn't believe it or didn't mind their country being subverted by a foreign intelligence agency.

"According to the author of the email, in 1978 the government of Menahem Begin ordered the infiltration of the Gaullist party to make a kind of partner of it for Israel. The operation was set up by Rafael Eytan, an Israeli spy-master. « Three French citizens predisposed to collaborate » would therefore have been targeted: Patrick Balkany, Patrick Devedjian and Pierre Lellouche. Balkany is introduced as the leader of "network".

In 1983, Patrick Balkany would have recruited the "young and promising" Sarkozy, the « fourth man of the Mossad ». The fifth recruit came to complete the implement in the 1990s: Manuel Aeschlimann, deputy-mayor of Asnières (Hauts-de-Seines)."

President Nicolas Sarkozy - One of Five Mossad Agents in French Politics

This will help better understand why Sarkozy has taken a lead role in the Coalition attack against Muslim nations starting with Libya and probably moving forward soon against Syria, a long time enemy of Israel. The reason for this is that FRANCE HAS NO BEEF against these nations in North Africa or the Middle East: IT IS ISRAEL which has a vested interest in attacking these countries, an action which goes against the French population's interest given that they live alongside millions of Muslim arabs in their country.


I interpret France's recent role in attacking Libya as evidence that Sarkozy is Mossad and is guilty of high treason against the nation of which he usurps the Presidency. Members of the French Secret Service already know this but are possibly shut down by pressures from the CIA or even due to the Mossad's intervention in reorganizing and pillaging their security records as ordered several years ago by Agent Sarkozy. Hopefully the French Military still count a few loyal Frenchmen in their ranks for whom their nation is not a commodity to be sold out and their government is not a trivial institution to be subverted and betrayed.


Let us also remember that Sarkozy is serving not the Israeli people, many of whom may die as a consequence of these war maneuvers, but of a small Zionist faction infiltrating the Mossad and the Knesset as well as the US and French Governments.


GS

Why the hell can't these buggers mind their own bloody business instead of poking their soiled noses into other countries' affairs? Whether gaddaffi kills one or a hundred of his own Libyans, WTF is it to do with the the US of A, France, Britain (America's pet poodle as their known)? Let the rebels fight their own battles. It's their internal affair. The West screwed up Iraq and Afghanistan. And now Libya! Will these people NEVER learn?

Why can't they fight poverty, economic slow down, health care, education etc in their own countries first?

Originally posted by OrionHunterX

Why can't they fight poverty, economic slow down, health care, education etc in their own countries first?

Hi Orion Hunter,


Maybe because THEY have an Agenda ? Yes, first we have to figure out who THEY are because they sure aren't we the people, of any nation. Next we need to figure out what that Agenda is because since whoever THEY are they are really warped and evil to such an extent we cannot so much as imagine what sick moves they are planning.


Welcome to the quest, it's a long tough search for answers but we can know for sure that those in power today don't represent even a small fraction of humanity, more likely they represent something entirely INHUMAN whether Alien or Demonic, take your pick.


GS

Get Smart - You really really need to get over yourself!!!! If you break down the points of your EXTREMELY dramatic and drawn out paragraphs, you could fit the text in half the space. You could get the same points across, without wasting everyone's time with your "look how eloquent I can sound" waste of space.

I truly don't like confrontation, or conflict, but I couldn't help saying something. This was a very informative thread, that was on track, until you proceeded to pick apart peoples posts.

You would really be proving something if you made your posts more concise and straight to the point.

Please don't waste everyone time, with a long drawn out blast towards me. Nobody, and I mean nobody, cares what you or I have to say to each other. I would just like to get the information I crave, without having to read through one mans pissing contest with his own ego, over how intelligent he can sound on paper.

reply to post by ShaunHatfield


Hi Shaun,


Good to hear from you. I guess you expect everyone here to be Joe 6-pack Americans or people with your own educational level and way of speaking. I beg to differ, ATS isn't Mister Hatfield's private world.


Of course you're entitled to find me "dramatic and drawn out" and "wasting everyone's time" but I've noticed that there have occasionally been other ATS members who don't find it so excruciating to read through my posts in the event there might be some insight or a valid piece of information, despite my many shortcomings, and I assure you that this isn't as you imagine "one mans pissing contest with his own ego".


For others here as you justly say aren't in the least interested in our exchange of impressions of one another, here's a very interesting interview on CNN which points to the fact that it is a Zionist initiative using both the USA and France as military platforms, to take over the Middle East in the onset of the political globalization of the world.





Cheers,


Getsmart