Threat claim Nuclear Bombs Hidden All over US?

Anyone check Michael Moore's handwriting?

Seriously, the amount of material needed to make 1, ignore the fact they claim 160, would be beyond their usual MO of strapping C4 to someone whos developmentally challenged.

I'm calling BS.
But if 160 mushroom clouds do appear, then I'll admit I was wrong.

reply to post by Rekrul



The Al-Qaeda are certainly not "Fighting for Humanity", but trying to force the whole World to submit to their religion and only theirs. I believe you accidently either must have been reading the wrong article or stumbled upon some Propaganda-Site of theirs.

By the way, it is funny how "The fight for Humanity" always have been pretty much a metaphor for either a "War in the name of Religion or God", or, "a fight for MY way, and ONLY my way", and have repeatedly resulted in massdeaths, violence and persecution of anyone that have refused to participate.

That said, the Republican way you seem to be referring to, is certainly not a fight for Humanity either, it is just another My-way-or-the-highway-mentality.

reply to post by Rekrul



So you're idea is to blow up all the hospitals and schools? Gonna get the patients and kids out first? That is got to be the stupidest, most adolescent, mindless solution that I've seen posted or even heard for that matter. Destroying something is not the fast and easy fix you seem to think. I'm guessing you don't have kids in school or friends and relatives that are in, or work for either system. I DO. BOTH.

reply to post by boondock-saint


Holy crap ... what timing! Great observation.


And like the rest of you, I was wondering how a remote detonation makes this a "suicide mission."

Plus, 160 nukes is pretty ambitious. As I recall ... the "American Hiroshima" plot that was reported back in 2005 involved 8 nukes being smuggled into the United States. Even 8 is a pretty huge undertaking.

Listen to you all, if the government agencies in the U.S. all think like all of you do, then a terrorist attack could be achieved without any problems!! Why not consider all threats as credible until otherwise proven?? 160 bombs huh, well guess what the U.S. is not the only country out there that can make nuclear weapons!!!

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
Listen to you all, if the government agencies in the U.S. all think like all of you do, then a terrorist attack could be achieved without any problems!! Why not consider all threats as credible until otherwise proven?? 160 bombs huh, well guess what the U.S. is not the only country out there that can make nuclear weapons!!!

No the problem is that most of us think the government agencies in the US are behind most of the threats. Problem, reaction, solution. Win win for them I suppose.

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
Listen to you all, if the government agencies in the U.S. all think like all of you do, then a terrorist attack could be achieved without any problems!! Why not consider all threats as credible until otherwise proven?? 160 bombs huh, well guess what the U.S. is not the only country out there that can make nuclear weapons!!!

Because this one is not remotely plausible, for various reasons.

Mmmmhm i smell American politicians and their sponsors pushing an agenda out of their corporate !@#es.
Too many bad angles in the story.
And even if it were true, 160 nukes in the US, that's alot of bad unuseable real estate.
But death would be fairly quick with 160 of them, that's alot of blast radius and full contamination radius no matter which way the wind blows.

reply to post by boondock-saint

And every one of them have to be undetectable from radiation monitors all over the US.

Actually this would be quite easy to hide. There's several methods. Even the inspection people in ports have talked about this.

But yeah, Al-CIAda doesn't have 160 nukes in the US. If they have, they have been supplied by China/Russia/US.

Those are the only three country that can pull it off. False-flag or act of war.

China can put nukes into containers and hide them among the stuff they export. If hidden correctly, no way they can be detected.

The only problem would be to transport and install them in those locations they say they have without being caught. Unlikely.

What Al-Ciada could do is just have ONE nuke, supplied by whoever, and blow it up, then say that if their demands are not met, the 159 others are gonna go off. Then the sky is the limit to what they can ask.

Anyway this is very likely BS.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by dudly

 

Your source is the only remotely credible source I have found. There is no AP or Reuters. There are a couple of marketwatch blogs and survival blogs. Of course GLP is running with it.

I am thinking this isn't a threat whatsoever.

But what if by "nuclear bombs" they actually meant "dirty bombs"?

Someone not to good at English could easily confuse the two.

Just saying ...

I pray nothing will happen before April 8TH in conjunction with the following dates:

source: David wilcox

"Three different massive events all coalesce on this one focal-point — just a week before taxes are due in the US:

SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST THE FED: The Supreme Court has given the Federal Reserve a two-week deadline to reveal where the money went — as of Monday, March 21st. This decision is one of the most significant events in American history. That brings us to April 4th — four days before the 8th.

GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN: The Democrats and Republicans in Congress cannot agree on a budget. The US government will therefore shut down as of April 8th — and there is no indication anyone will stop it. That means no paychecks, no services, et cetera — for an indeterminate time.

NEW BRETTON WOODS: On this very same day, the first meeting to completely overhaul the world’s financial system will take place. Other countries will now have much more of a say. This is the literal fulfillment of everything Fulford and I have been saying for so long.

This will create a massive wave of prosperity and directly pave the way for the release of clean, ‘free’ energy technology."

Originally posted by beezzer

I'm calling BS.
But if 160 mushroom clouds do appear, then I'll admit I was wrong.

Hope you and everyone else is right about this.

However, if al-qaeda had sent out warnings before 9/11, I think you'd all have been saying the same thing about those. No way they could hijack a bunch of airliners and then end up destroying NYC's two tallest buildings, plus severely damage the Pentagon.

Again, just saying ...

reply to post by dudly

COVER-UP

To blame "the terrorists" for radioactive fallout from nuclear reactors.

Damage control, courtesy of the Nuclear Industry.

...'Course now we know. It's gonna be really bad.

I certainly hope this is a hoax.

But to those saying you can't remote detonate and suicide bomb at the same time:

It might take quite some time to place 160 bombs, enough time that a cellphone battery might be unreliable to detonate from anywhere you like. You might need to be within the blast radius to set them off.

As for them using this to cover radiation from Japan:

Wouldn't they have to detonate them to make that believable? I mean, wouldn't people wonder why there were no explosions? Also, isn't the EPA already planning to raise the "acceptable" radiation levels, to cover for the future levels we'll be seeing?

I still think it's too early to start declaring anything.

some interesting info I just came across.

There were 132 nuclear reactors built in the US
between 1954 to 2008.

en.wikipedia.org...

Of these 132 built only 104 of them are still active
yet all 132 have spent fuel rods on location. Now
add in the amount of nuclear fuel storage facilities
like Yucca, etc... and you get approximately 160
sites which have nuclear material on site.

Interesting correlation to the 25 letters which
state 160 Nuclear Bombs.

Is this some anti-Nuclear advocacy group ??

Or maybe, my counting is off. You check
for yourself.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by beezzer

I'm calling BS.
But if 160 mushroom clouds do appear, then I'll admit I was wrong.

Hope you and everyone else is right about this.

However, if al-qaeda had sent out warnings before 9/11, I think you'd all have been saying the same thing about those. No way they could hijack a bunch of airliners and then end up destroying NYC's two tallest buildings, plus severely damage the Pentagon.

Again, just saying ...

You are correct. Consider this my way of whistling past a graveyard.

First, I personally do not feel this is a credible threat.

However, as far as the suicide mission part, and the remote-controlled part, the postmarks are from Chicago according to what I read. I believe the inferred message was that the people detonating them would be in the United States, and since they claim it will destroy our entire country, being here they would in essence be committing suicide -- going down with the ship so to speak.

Just my opinion on that one aspect of the letters.

False flag domestic terrorism kind of thing? More likely that than 16, let alone 160, nukes floating around.

The only way I can reconcile the phrase" suicide mission" & "remotely detonated" is if the nukes were being worn by terrorists with suicide vests, than are activated with a cell phone. Highly unlikely in my opinion.

I believe this has been done in the past with conventional explosives.

I am no expert on this but I did watch every episode of 24.

c'mon...this is a stretch even for the minds of the knuckle-dragging, slopped-headed, low-IQ'ers...the logistics alone would disqualify this from reality. why do i get the feeling that there are aspiring FOX NEWS interns trying to sharpen their fear-mongering claws on the backs of the MSM, as well as in the pages and posts of ATS.

well forst of all, let me say that I am looking at
this letter from an investigative perspective.
Authors of letters leave clues in their writings.
Once you figure out the clues, the whole of the
letter's intent makes better sense. Consider it
a psychological profile of the author.

the letter states 160 nuclear bombs

there are at least 160 sites in the US
which already have existing nuclear fuel
on site.

he states a suicide mission

which means he is an American and/or
either lives in the US so the bombs will
kill him/her too.

letter mentions remote detonation

this doesn't necessarily mean a bomb or
that they can do this on site.
It can mean a remote trigger like knocking out
electricity of the cooling systems by computer
or cell phone. without a cooling system, the
system goes into meltdown. Meaning the fallout
of the reaction could be what he is referring to.

Remember Stuxnet ???
nobody has stopped it yet have they ???