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.

 

Israeli Defense Chief: The problem doesn't necessarily stop on December 21, 2012

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
I found a rather interesting quote from the current Israeli defense chief of staff Benny Gantz


Gantz tempered that assessment by saying that the further Iran progresses with its nuclear program, the "worse the situation is. This is a critical year, but not necessarily 'go, no-go,'" Gantz said. "The problem doesn't necessarily stop on December 21, 2012. Business Insider Article HERE


The statements he makes about Iran are interesting enough, but I really wonder if this isn't something entirely else. Does he know something? Was he making a joke, and if so it is a very peculiar joke considering the context of the subject? I mean he holds an extremely high level and important position, and in one of the most powerful armed forces on the planet..knowing military men they are not ones to make light of such situations.

I haven't been on the 2012 bandwagon, the world has enough pending catastrophes as it is without 12/21/2012, just interested in hearing some other thoughts on this statement. If this has already been posted mods please delete.




posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   
It seems he is using it as a reference in order to make a point about the subject.

His reference to Dec21 2012 "The problem doesn't necessarily stop" on that date. What I think he means is that Iran isn't going to go away and that this issue will persist until something is done about it.

I find this all silly because if Israel wanted the "Iran problem" to actually disappear, they would reach out the olive branch in peace and try to form cooperative projects to work together on. They claim to be using diplomacy but they are not actually trying very hard.

They are too concerned about protecting their own interests to consider for one minute that they may have to make compromises in order to resolve their disputes.

They aren't true diplomats.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Count Chocula
 


Can you really believe anything that comes from their mouths?
I mean they have been claiming that Iran is going to blow them up any second, which would be a big threat yet they are happy to wait for US help to attack them.. Even tho they say they are capable of defeating Iran.

Which one is it?
Either Iran is not a threat or Israel can’t take them on.
Probably both actually.

Anyway, I am yet to see any single piece of evidence that actually proves Iran is a threat and/or has nukes.

We all know Israel is the true threat to peace and stability.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Well this is odd, now all references to the December 21, 2012 date are gone. The Business Insider article has completely changed, and the original source has edited the date to 12/31/2012. Very strange.

None of what I posted was inaccurate. I copied and pasted the quoted material and links.

How is that possible?



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Count Chocula
Well this is odd, now all references to the December 21, 2012 date are gone. The Business Insider article has completely changed, and the original source has edited the date to 12/31/2012. Very strange.

None of what I posted was inaccurate. I copied and pasted the quoted material and links.

How is that possible?

Maybe they changed his quote because it was getting too much attention.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Whoa thats crazy man............that they changed it after you caught that...and that he referenced it,,after the brick they found last year referencing the 12-21-2012- date and the brick said it was the return of the 9 gods,,,Im kinda thinking something is gonna happen,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,aliens will return and everyone is going to know it except the mindwarped people who watch the news,,,the media will not say a word about it..



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Even hours after reading this my mind won't stop racing around it. I too was always very skeptical of the whole 2012 thing. But why would he say that? Does this signify the date that Israel is going to drop a huge bomb on somebody or commit a mass genocide?

By the way, I found an article that contains the unedited quote: warsclerotic.wordpress.com...



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
It is interesting the date changed in the BI article, it seems to have changed again since the OP'ster update.

The fact that this specific date was used is indeed odd. I could mean that Israel has some "drop dead" date and this is it - bad use of a good date. The real reason for the Iran issue is their placement of the entire countries assets with the IMF, the are one of the last holdouts. I think the contract with the Fed ends on that date, it could be he knows the real reason, as for the global currency one world government to be successful it must be in place before the Fed contract ends. It seems all countries must comply with the one world government currency situation prior to that date; prior to the death of all other forms of currency perhaps?

Or, it could be a thin connection made to the consciousness transition that hits at that point, leaving the possibility that mass death and destruction will no longer be available to them.



posted on Apr, 28 2012 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


Or it was a typo and the quote was 31 all along and the guy typing hit a 2 instead of a 3.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Count Chocula
 


You can be sure there will be a large Iranian Revolution before anything else happens in Iran......whispers from a friend.......



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 04:38 AM
link   
I don't know where I'm going to be during the holiday season this year, but it sure as hell isn't going to be Israel!



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Xaphan
 


Or it was a typo and the quote was 31 all along and the guy typing hit a 2 instead of a 3.


Right, and they pay editors for what? To "catch" mistakes after publication or before publication? Maybe the guy needs glasses .



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


Yeah I can say that too with 100% confidence.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Count Chocula
 


WND has the same article without edit.

Gantz tempered that assessment by saying that the further Iran progresses with its nuclear program, the “worse the situation is. This is a critical year, but not necessarily ‘go, no-go,’” Gantz said. “The problem doesn’t necessarily stop on December 21, 2012.
source



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xaphan
Even hours after reading this my mind won't stop racing around it. I too was always very skeptical of the whole 2012 thing.


I was and still am mate- no offence but a change of date on an online news article still hasn't sufficiently confirmed stories of doom, aliens and flying through space holding hands with fairies.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


Thank you for the link, you are alife saver.
I was looking for the original.



posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Count Chocula
 


This is very interresting. They changed the article... To remove the december 2012 quote.
I still try to figure the thing out...
S&F.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Pirateofpsychonautics
 


I wasn't implying that it automatically makes the 2012 theory true. I was just saying that even though I'm skeptical, I did find that very unusual.



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   
This is very weird...

He talked about December 21 so naturally, as if he knew about something...



posted on Apr, 30 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Well, the article doesnt even mention December 31 now. It makes a reference to July of 2012 as a possible attack period. But the OP is correct with the other article mentioning the orginal qoute of December 21, 2012. My question is this paragraph has not connection to the topic at hand. Why did he mention that specific date??? it has no connection to the article and subject. I do find it strange that the orginal article changed and then removed this part of the quote and I find it even stranger that Gaantz makes the reference to this date???



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join