Are we being attacked from abroad?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   


I haven't really seen this issue raised in connection with Sandy Hook and Aurora. Most people seem to be focusing exclusively on the possible 'false flag' issues...

But I have been wondering for sometime now whether the truth is that we are being attacked by terrorism from abroad? From a political impact perspective, wouldn't it be better for the government to assert a domestic 'rogue' perpetrator than to admit coordinated attacks from individuals or groups with foreign origins?

Try this mental exercise... Assume Sandy Hook and Aurora were actually committed by foreign terrorists. Would the politics of that fact help or hurt the administration? I think I know the answer, and for a number of reasons would chose to blame one of our own before admitting we are helpless to repeated foreign attack.


If you were emperor for a day, which excuse would you prefer?


While I don't have a whole lot of time right now, look to the DHS and FBI bulletins warning of schools, movie theaters, malls and apartment buildings as known targets of interest to foreign terrorist groups.

Isn't it interesting that the few examples of such events actually taking place have ALL been blamed on individuals of domestic origin under highly disputed circumstances and facts?

If you apply Occam's razor to this issue, I think it makes far more sense that the government is hiding our defenselessness from these types of attacks cooked by those from abroad. And to avoid political condemnation for it, the government has decided it better to blame the crazies...or guns...or whatever else.


Thoughts?
edit on 21-1-2013 by loam because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Nope. We are being attacked from within. A political coup, from progressives in the public and progressive Marxists and Moaists in the government.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 



But I have been wondering for sometime now whether the truth is that we are being attacked by terrorism from abroad? From a political impact perspective, wouldn't it be better for the government to assert a domestic 'rogue' perpetrator than to admit coordinated attacks from individuals or groups with foreign origins?


That is an interesting conspiracy theory. If we take everything at face value it appears they want us to think we’re being attacked from within; domestic terrorists. They have identified who we should fear (conservatives, Tea Partier’s, gun owners, veterans, etc).



Isn't it interesting that the few examples of such events actually taking place have ALL been blamed on individuals of domestic origin under highly disputed circumstances and facts?


So you think it may be outside attacks being blamed on domestic lone wolf shooters to save face?

I was thinking more along the lines of MKUltra or other manipulation because of the way these so-called "lone-wolf shooters" look and act….very disturbed looking individuals.





I do believe the story we've been told is complete BullSpit but I think TPTB are creating these events, not terrorists from other countries.

S&F



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 



Originally posted by Libertygal
Nope. We are being attacked from within. A political coup, from progressives in the public and progressive Marxists and Moaists in the government.


Sorry. I'm not convinced.



These guys look more like fictional characters, rather than orchestrators of a political coup.


Easy pickings, I would say, by a government with the means to destroy anyone's life if they deemed it necessary to advance some greater cause.
edit on 21-1-2013 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   
according to various 'insider sources' there is the possibility that more that one foreign government has planted nukes throughout america, and is blackmailing the us government attemting to force it to conceeed to their demands.

these 'false flag' attacks could be a warning by those powers to try to keep the U.S. in line.

hopefully the truth will soon come out!



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
The only thing that gets me; if the shooting happened inside, then why were bullets found outside? There wasn't a shootout with the officers. And no one heard the shooting outside? The shooting happened first outside then continued on inside. And no one heard anything? What? Was he using a silencer? None of the school windows had bullet holes. Has anybody even asked that question yet or even looked into it?
edit on 21-1-2013 by Manhater because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



Originally posted by seabag
I think TPTB are creating these events, not terrorists from other countries.


While a concede such a thing is possible, I just don't think it likely in the face of the more obvious threat to us from abroad. The issue of terrorism from abroad has steered political careers in this country for more than a decade now.

I'm starting to think this is purely about the politics of embarrassment. Blame one of our own, and you don't have to address all of the sticky issues facing us concerning such attacks derived from abroad.


I can almost see the words of such a government policy manual now.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Any terrorist group who could pull off such attacks would be quick to claim responsibility for them.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam
reply to post by seabag
 



Originally posted by seabag
I think TPTB are creating these events, not terrorists from other countries.


While a concede such a thing is possible, I just don't think it likely in the face of the more obvious threat to us from abroad. The issue of terrorism from abroad has steered political careers in this country for more than a decade now.

I'm starting to think this is purely about the politics of embarrassment. Blame one of our own, and you don't have to address all of the sticky issues facing us concerning such attacks derived from abroad.


I can almost see the words of such a government policy manual now.


If you look at the MO for terrorist attacks world wide, 99% of the time it involves blowing things up.

We haven't seen that.

Why would they change their MO for us - especially if you believe they attacked us on 9/11 (with explosions)?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
according to various 'insider sources' there is the possibility that more that one foreign government has planted nukes throughout america, and is blackmailing the us government attemting to force it to conceeed to their demands.

these 'false flag' attacks could be a warning by those powers to try to keep the U.S. in line.

hopefully the truth will soon come out!


Do you have any references to said "inside sources"? I'd definitely want to know more about that if there's any truth to it.

As to the OP - it is a very interesting theory. I think Occam still points us towards mental illness - if events like these continue to happen, then I'd start tending towards theories like yours. I still don't subscribe to the whole "gov't orchestrated to force gun control" theory - that's far too irrational for me. But the thought that outside forces that genuinely hate america could be behind it does tend to make a bit more sense.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam
If you apply Occam's razor to this issue, I think it makes far more sense that the government is hiding our defenselessness from these types of attacks cooked by those from abroad. And to avoid political condemnation for it, the government has decided it better to blame the crazies...or guns...or whatever else.


Thoughts?

With no evidence to confirm the input of foreign interests attacking the US via lone gunmen, I would consider it more likely that recent events are what they appear, the work of people with mental health issues who have access to guns.
I keep an open mind of course but if I had a gun to my head demanding an opinion I would personally run with the crazy lone shooter idea over any unsubstantiated foreign government/terrorist speculation.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Atzil321
 



Originally posted by Atzil321
Any terrorist group who could pull off such attacks would be quick to claim responsibility for them.


Perhaps they do.

With a MSM media as easy to manipulate as the one we apparently have, why do you think we would hear of such claims over the mountain of reporting prompted by government sources?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Tempting though it is to look for 'rational' explanations to irrational events, could it not be just the fact that crazy men have easy access to guns and do crazy things? Admittedly this is a UK perspective, but surely people just snap sometimes.

When the evidence boils down to things like people shooting up x, y or z and looking 'crazy' or 'out of it', that does rather sound like evidence of some form of critical mental break.

How should they look? How should they act?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



Originally posted by seabag
If you look at the MO for terrorist attacks world wide, 99% of the time it involves blowing things up.

We haven't seen that.

Why would they change their MO for us - especially if you believe they attacked us on 9/11 (with explosions)?


While I'm not confident of your statistic (I'd like to see some research on this...and perhaps attacks with explosives are just sexier to report on than shooting events, which probably also regularly take place), I'd imagine the truth is that once here in this country, guns are just the easiest means to carry out such attacks as the ones in CO and CT.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 
It would be impossible to hide any such claims. All of these loosely affiliated islamic groups operate with impunity on the internet.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by KingIcarus
 



Originally posted by KingIcarus
Tempting though it is to look for 'rational' explanations to irrational events, could it not be just the fact that crazy men have easy access to guns and do crazy things? Admittedly this is a UK perspective, but surely people just snap sometimes.

When the evidence boils down to things like people shooting up x, y or z and looking 'crazy' or 'out of it', that does rather sound like evidence of some form of critical mental break.

How should they look? How should they act?


I think I've explained myself poorly.

I'm not disputing the possibility of crazy people doing crazy things. In fact, the truth of that facilitates the ability to blame such individuals in these events- even if not true.


My premise really focuses on the fact that in both events, there is credible evidence that suggests more than a single perpetrator in each case. Such details are beyond the scope of this thread, but the point I'm making is that it seems unreasonable that so many of the facts in these incidents are under dispute. Why?

So returning to my initial question, what is more favorable to the government...admitting terrorism perpetrated by those from abroad or domestic terrorism perpetrated by our own?

Seems clear to me.
edit on 21-1-2013 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Atzil321
 



Originally posted by Atzil321
It would be impossible to hide any such claims. All of these loosely affiliated islamic groups operate with impunity on the internet.


Hide? No.

Drown out...easy.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


Actually I have been trying to find the libor scandal angle to sandy hook and other shootings. The fathers of both the Colorado shooting and sandy hook are in the business of finding illegal banking practices and both are experts in their fields. The odds of this happening have to be astronomical but the evidence to link both the two shootings is weak at best. Then you add the CNBC Exec’s Children Murdered, 1 Day After CNBC Reports $43 Trillion Bankster Lawsuit "apparently the nanny slit her own throat after killing the kids" odds of a women slitting her own throat in a suicide again are astronomical and the mo again of killing children. both sandy hook and Colorado had reports of multiple shooters or accomplices
edit on 21-1-2013 by digital01anarchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


You raise interesting questions there, I have to say.

However, I also think that sad events like those you describe cannot (if we believe the 'official' interpretation) be described as domestic terrorism. If we consider these two recent events, there is no apparant evidence that either 'man' intended any political statement through their actions. Of course, this could have been suppressed somehow, but their actions cannot be compared - imo - to a political lunatic like Breivik who committed an attrocity to make a point about politics in his country.

A foreign terrorist incident is - again imo - beneficial to some extent. Firstly it makes the issue non-domestic, and avoids some of the uncomfortable discourse that these two events have created. Secondly it can be used to justify certain political agendas, should they exist.

For me, the apparant inconsistencies in these two cases fall more to the MSM's rush to report rather than any nefarious intent. Let us not forget that tragedies such as these are good copy for MSM journalists who are happy to run off the cuff comments from officials during confused situations as verified facts.

A good example of this would be the suggestion that there was a second shooter in the Sandy Hook event. It seems now that Adam Lander was carrying his older brother's ID at the time of the shootings - presumably to create confusion. If we accept this information, we can perhaps understand why cops finding a dead shooter carrying an ID not matching his appearance might suspect another man's involvement. They'd certainly be remiss not to investigate that fact, and you can certainly see how loose Cop lips in the melee lead to wrong info being disseminated - the same info being discussed here today. The MSM is not really in the business of correcting 'breaking story' information later on. Those reports are considered void by subsequent write ups.

I'm not saying there isn't anything unusual, inconsistent or questionable about these events as they're presented - but I think discussions like this sometimes link the dots via very long route methods. It's worth keeping an open mind, of course, but I also think fragments of 'facts' taken from developing news content is unhelpful.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 03:05 PM
link   
I'm multitasking today, so not a whole lot of time... But here is an example of the kind of policy thinking I am suggesting would certainly come to play in this country.




Group claims responsibility for border attack

In a statement posted on jihadi websites late Saturday, a group calling itself Ansar Jerusalem ("Supporters of Jerusalem") said the Friday attack, in which three militants and an Israeli soldier were killed, was a response to the anti-Islam film "Innocence of Muslims."

The statement claimed that the militants were Egyptians and that the operation was a "disciplinary attack against those who insulted the beloved Prophet" Mohammed.

General Ahmed Bakr, head of North Sinai security, said, 'There is no evidence of highly organized groups in Sinai regardless of such statements released on the net.'

There are dozens of "groups of armed militants who have been weakened by our military operation in Sinai, and sooner or later will be demolished completely," he said.



See how that is positioned?

It seems obvious, doesn't it? In fact, one might argue that denying organized attacks of a foreign nature is a requirement of good policy against encouraging future attacks.

What makes anyone think the US would not do the same? Any country, for that matter?

Food for thought.
edit on 21-1-2013 by loam because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join