WWIII - USS Enterprise, a dying Legend to be the FALSE FLAG !! ??

page: 4
65
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   
I don't know about false flag, it's plausible and probably should be expected in one form or another, but it's interesting to note what the Enterprise is doing right now. jacksonville.com...

The carrier is currently deployed, as of Jan 11th, in the Atlantic Ocean, seemingly preparing for combat:



USS Enterprise (CVN 65) departed its homeport of Norfolk, Va., Jan. 11 to participate in a Composite Unit Training Exercise (COMPTUEX) and Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFEX).
 The early morning departure was the next to last departure from Naval Station Norfolk for the 50-year-old carrier. Enterprise is scheduled to enter deactivation after completing its 22nd and final deployment later this year.

 COMPTUEX is the intermediate phase of the Enterprise Carrier Strike Group’s (CSG) Inter-Deployment Training Cycle (IDTC), designed to hone warfare skills throughout the strike group while maintaining unit proficiency. “It’s the final exercise to ensure Enterprise is combat ready,” said USS Enterprise Commanding Officer Capt. William Hamilton Jr.


2 questions arise here:

Why does the ship scheduled for decommission next year need to be "combat ready"? The troops, yes but he specifically names the Enterprise, which suggests knowledge that it will feature in some sort of conflict. and...

What is USS Enterprises final deployment, given this is it's penultimate? I've taken a look at the official 'Big-E' site (www.navy.mil...) and, while there's plenty of mention of preparation for "Enterprises 22nd and final deployment", I can't find what or where that is.

edit on 26-1-2012 by Pr0t0 because: Forgot link




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by korathin
 


Don't be so sure about America's 'will'. It isn't the peoples will you need to be concerned with. Politicians only know a handful of ways out of a recession; War is usually 3-5 years into the 'recovery'. Check your calendar.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Glargod
 


This entire thread:


One thing happened, and therefore we are assuming a million things.

Even the video. "past history". One case. Not history.



This is ridiculous.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by spoor

and what triggered the Vietnam war was

January 1959, North Vietnam's Central Committee issued a secret resolution authorizing an "armed struggle," allowing the southern communists to begin large-scale operations against the South Vietnamese military. North Vietnam supplied troops and supplies in earnest, and the infiltration of men and weapons from the North began along the Ho Chi Minh Trail.


Why do some people ignore the real reason for the Vietnam war?


If it were accurate to say the Vietnam War happened because of a single reason, that reason would be greed.
edit on 26-1-2012 by theshepherd2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   
The USS Enterprise as a false flag is a viable theory for many reasons, but since I look for different markers, and since those markers are present, I will share them with ATS just so that you dont feel left out.

The USS Enterprise has a Naval Ship number that reads CVN 65. 6=5=11 which is the signature of Bush Sr. although it was John Connolly who was involved in the 8th commissioning upgrade to 8 nuclear reactors on-board, and the fact that the ships number adds to 11 is a key starting point.

The USS Enterprise is currently the 8th Enterprise in history and this matters in ritual matters because in the near future 9 is a ritual numbered event they are currently working on.

Only when the NWO succeeds does the number 9 become active or start being used, for it denotes the NWO 1st number of use in the new future when their success is achieved.

If the ship is sunk, then her replacement would be the 9th ship and so, with these small ritual clues, even I can conclude that as a false flag is probable and as a sacrifice of American victims to blame Iran for a war that the USA and Israel Zionist are eager to start.

While such a false flag would probably necessitate placing the Enterprise somewhere at sea where she could be easily attacked or sunk far from shore, with only the official insider reports used to consider what happened if it happens.

It is indeed a thought to have that the Enterprise is of more useful as a false flag than the millions of dollars needed to decommission her. To have the false flag that many suspect would then require a review of dates,because if the Enterprise is to be sunk, then the location, GPS and the Date are part of the ritual coding and will show the numbers that denote that the Enterprise is part of a ritual, as well as a false flag needed to start a war with Iran.

Knowing exactly when the USS Enterprise could be potentially sunk in accordance to occult ritual numerology relative to the ongoing NWO ritual is even more important data to consider in the scheme of things.

While the USS Enterprise is indeed old, the men and women on board should not be used as sacrificial victims to those NWO insiders that would sacrifice innocent human lives to start a war for the greed of Zionist in both American and Israel governments.

Thanks for the thread.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Just thought of something.
So you are basically saying the people on that ship will let this happen?
Will their radars be jammed? suicide mission or remote control mission?

it better be a fast unexpected attack.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:04 AM
link   
First of all, the claims of the USS Enterprise being old and limping around the sea are a Joke and a bunch of Mid East propaganda. Over half the fleet runs on Nuclear power these days. Nothing out of the ordinary there.
I served on the USS Ranger CV-61 which was commissioned in the 50’s now That was considered old back when I served on board. Any how I have seen the snippets around the net on this claim that this great ship would somehow be used in a false flag. That is a buncha crap. For one thing Aircraft carriers don’t tool around the ocean alone “Ever” they have a battle group of escort ships assigned to them at all times. This film is also a bunch of old clips thrown together and made by some anti American sorts.
IMHO.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Glargod
 


This film looks kickass!!!



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:27 AM
link   
USS Enterprise current status is "Active". Even though it was due to be decommissioned in 2009. As part of a larger strike force it is at or enroute to the Strait of Hormuz. If I was still active, I would have to be dragged kicking and screaming onto the deck of this historic boat. IMHO is should be a tourist attraction at Norfolk, VA _javascript:icon('
')

Stringman



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   
With Obama's union address fresh in our minds. With the words "No options off the table" statement. I guess anythings possible.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Smart people know Iran isn't going to attack American assets or personnel. If they do it's a BS false flag. Period.

edit on 26-1-2012 by L00kingGlass because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by havok
What is remarkable here is the fact that they moved old ships to Pearl Harbor.
Then, just in time it seems, the harbor was attacked, while the new ships were away.

Now we have another old ship, and a place for it to be sunk, possibly used again.


Definitely keeping my eyes on this.



Thanks.





You know absolutely nothing about the military or Pearl Harbor, our battleships on "Battleship Row" was NOT old ships at the time, they were the cream of the crop! What was away at the time was our aircraft carriers and most of the battleships were repaired and put back in service.
Where are you getting your history from? If you are any indication of what our children are learning in school about history. we are in big trouble!



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Glargod
 


After the Gulf of Tonkin incident, I have no doubts they would try anything to get another war going.
2nd



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   
The Enterprise was the 11th CVN 68 class carrier. CVN 68 was commissioned in 1974 and it has been 38 years. The cost of keeping nuclear powered ships stored in reserve would be astronomical, we are told the refueling process alone takes 33 months. Perhaps they tow these huge carcasses to India by submarine for recycling after removing the classified stuff?

We really should be talking about this in a "Philadelphia experiment" thread. Ships being disappeared from the GOM and instantly teleported to the ME. Whats happening to ATS these days?

After listening to Obama's "Chicken in every pot" State of the Union speech I'm wondering if instead of a Pearl Harbor we get a Citizen's Conservation Corps style infrastructure rebuild?
edit on 26-1-2012 by Cauliflower because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by tommyjo
Seriously guys, get out more! Do you honestly think that such a plan has been foiled by a YT video?



I don't know, but I wonder if we had such a video before 9/11 happened, if it would have happened...



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Screwed
Yup, looks pretty plausible to me.
Only problem is,
Now there is this well produced video out there calling out EXACTLY what they plan to do
which has generated God knows how much discussion.

The plan has effectively been fioled.


I can not imagine they would be foolish enough to go thru with it now.

I mean, it is one thing to have a T.V. pilot which loosely describes the events of 911 BEFORE it ever happened.

It is quite another for someone to go out of their way to produce a video of PRECISELY what our government plans on doing and HOW they plan on going about it.

Bottom line,

I see this happening,
which is why I don't see this happening.


Yep. Either that or it was never going to happen in the first place. I suspect that this is just this guys fabricated imagination hard at work. The elites ARE evil, no doubt, but also smart. They are not going to risk the loss of a whole empire over the disposal of one ship......a 50 year old one at that. They will probably just barrel the toxic waste and then put it in our drinking water or toothpaste and then force the Dental Association to tell us that it is good for us like that have done for so many years with Flouride.
edit on 26-1-2012 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Sometimes I think ATS is populated by nothing but highschool kids!

No one on this board uses the term "False Flag" correctly.
A false flag is not an attack by a country on itself. A false flag is one country using the flag of another to attack it.
The term comes from the Age of Sail. As an example a British frigate would be sailing in the Atlantic and come across a French convoy. In order to get close to teh convoy and attack it the British would run a French naval flag up the mast. When they got to within firing range they were required by the "laws of the sea" to pull that false French flag down and run up their own Naval colors. The laws of the sea were traditions and not really a "law" they were more or less agreed upon and set down in treaties.
The term has come to mean all mannor of stupid ideas but thats not its correct usage.

You kids love to pump up Iran and make them out to be superbadazz. Those threads draw out the resident anti Israel crowd and arab chest bumpers. Then you love to trash the US military for picking on poor defensless Iran. Then you love to trash the US military as weak bullies who just need to get beat so it will show them a thing or two. Then you claim the US military is so all powerfull that no one would actually attack them so if something happens IT MUST BE a false flag!!! Consistantly inconsistant hysterical ravings of pot smoking highschoolers!



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dragoon01
Sometimes I think ATS is populated by nothing but highschool kids!

No one on this board uses the term "False Flag" correctly.
A false flag is not an attack by a country on itself. A false flag is one country using the flag of another to attack it.
The term comes from the Age of Sail. As an example a British frigate would be sailing in the Atlantic and come across a French convoy. In order to get close to teh convoy and attack it the British would run a French naval flag up the mast. When they got to within firing range they were required by the "laws of the sea" to pull that false French flag down and run up their own Naval colors. The laws of the sea were traditions and not really a "law" they were more or less agreed upon and set down in treaties.
The term has come to mean all mannor of stupid ideas but thats not its correct usage.

You kids love to pump up Iran and make them out to be superbadazz. Those threads draw out the resident anti Israel crowd and arab chest bumpers. Then you love to trash the US military for picking on poor defensless Iran. Then you love to trash the US military as weak bullies who just need to get beat so it will show them a thing or two. Then you claim the US military is so all powerfull that no one would actually attack them so if something happens IT MUST BE a false flag!!! Consistantly inconsistant hysterical ravings of pot smoking highschoolers!


That may well be the correct historical definition. However, if Israel were to attack the USS Enterprise and then blame it on Iran, I think that would fit well into the modern definition of the term. After all, flags on a sub tend to get all wet and clumpy.

We can agree to disagree on this, but as long as everyone understands the possible scenario evolving here, I'm fine with using the terms folks here understand.

And we're not all kids. I watched the fake moon landing live on TV.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   


No one on this board uses the term "False Flag" correctly. A false flag is not an attack by a country on itself. A false flag is one country using the flag of another to attack it.
reply to post by Dragoon01
 


It was used correctly here, and secondly terms tend to change slightly over time.

In this case, an entity attacking a US asset or ally in order to make it appear as though Iran had done it.






edit on 26-1-2012 by L00kingGlass because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   
If anything were to happen as suggested here and it was foreshadowed in any movie or book, I think a good place to start looking might be within Star Trek. I don't have any specific episodes or even a good background in Star Trek. We need a Trekkie to comment. I just noticed there seems to be some interesting connections between the fictional Starship Enterprise and the real ship.

en.memory-alpha.org...(CVN-65)
(Click on the link about USS Enterprise CVN-65)

articles.dailypress.com...

I know the odds of there being any connection are remote. In fact, the event discussed in the second link sounds like it was fun and a nice thing to do for the crew. However, the name of the event, "The Big E Con" kind of creeped me out after reading this post.




new topics
top topics
 
65
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join