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.

 

CIA Agent: Nuke Attack Surely Coming

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson
Why on earth would they want to move such a weapon to Baltimore?

Its a huge port town with thousands of containers comming in every day?

edsinger
the way these 'theories' are going means that the bomb is NOT here yet.

Remember, they did stop some terrorists in one of the central 'stans with nuclear bomb material. Not 'dirty nuke' material or 'non-weaponized precursors' but the actual stuff that works inside a nuclear bomb. How many weren't caught?

zintac
All the duck tape and plastic anit gonna do crap.

It'll stop VX and Sarin and mustard gas from easily wafting down your block and into your house or apartment.


thinker
At forty-five degrees the sky will burn,
Fire to approach the great new city:
In an instant a great scattered flame will leap up,
When one will want to demand proof of the Normans.

I believe it will happen, nostrumdum said something like that.

Isn't that the quote thats actually made up of peices of a few different quatrains? Weren't hose quatrains written in a mix of a few different languages and codes?

If this happenes Muslim's will be the most despised race on earth after this.

its not about race, racist.


robin1976
must first Try to convert Americans to Islamic religion before he can attack America.

Apparently their holy book requires that an enemy be given the chance to convert or something like that. As far as someone 'high up' in islam, it doesn't have a structural heriarchy like Catholicism. In fact, I think it might be a little less organized than Orthodox Christianity. I'm saying this because there is a need to distinguish between receiving orders from the leaders of islam (which I am saying don't exist) and going to popular preachers to 'legitimize' ones actions.


shadow
So they would also be killing perhaps hundreds of thousands of Muslims how could they think Allah would like that?

How could they think that their god would like for them to kill thousands of civilians in the first place? Technically they are forbiden from it. Just like christians are forbiden from killing anyone. Both sides do it anyway.

they believe the Muslims they killed would be Resurrected

I was surprised to see that, the early christian movement had a similar beleif in pyhsical resurrection


He is referring to individual states and how they voted

Then why was NYC attacked in teh first place? He isn't refering to US states, he'sprobably refering to world states, ie nations.


cgb
M.A.D [attack meca, etc]

I find that rather difficult to accept, and I also have to wonder wether or not it will work. Destruction is so passe too. Why elimiate the Kabba, the iron metorite worshipped long before the arabs were monotheists, when one can, say, submerge it in pigs blood? Or smelt the iron to make butcher knives and use them to slaughter pigs? Actually, outside of wrathful revenge, I think that it might work out to kidnap the kabba and enshrine it in the US. That way, american muslims will be unhappy, but not completely enraged. Think of it like this, if you were under attack, by italian catholics, and hot lots of peaceful italian catholics living in your coutnry, would you bomb the vatican or execute the pope? Probably not.

thomascrowne
How'd I do? Did I answer it well?

For a genocidal maniac you'd've answered pretty well.

konartis
nukes were here for a long time and i never saw a nuke attack yet

Exactly, because the other people with the nukes, mainly the soviets, could have thier own destruction ensured in a retaliatory strike. It was a balance of terror. Also, the soviet command probably figured that, as nice as it would be to destroy the decadent capitalist US, it was probably better to site by the fire place, drink a little vodka, and have some swedish chick dance for you. Bin Laden and his 'ilk' can't be attacked in the same way as the soviets, and have little to loose in global thermo-nuclear war, so why shouldn't they use it?

esdad
We have CENTCOM

You live in qatar?

flyersfan
YES, there
are definately things we can do. We can support the war on
terror and not try to turn it into a 'nuisance' - treat it like the
war it is

Agreed. THey were able to capture that group in central asia from delivering/using their nuke indicates that these people can be stopped or at the least their capabiliteis can be reduced.

And most of all .... people of faith need to PRAY

Thats not going to accomplish anything.

drhoracid
But a simultaneous strike at maybe 7 major cities would kill america in an instant

No it wouldn't. It'd cripple the economy, but it wouldn't destroy the nation.

rami-arna
Not Easy at all to get such weapon.

The russians even admit that they'd lost track of one of their suitecase nukes. No one knows what the North Koreans have sold, pakistan has nukes, and iran is becomming capable of building them. Its not easy to get them but its also not easy to blow up an embassy, strike a US warship and organize a global terrorist network and use it to sneak into a superpower, train in it, and turn its own vehicles against it, but they did all of that.Getting a nuke at this point is a matter of purchasing it. They don't need to build it. They don't need to steal it. THey just need to buy it.




posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

they believe the Muslims they killed would be Resurrected

I was surprised to see that, the early christian movement had a similar beleif in pyhsical resurrection

And most of all .... people of faith need to PRAY

Thats not going to accomplish anything.


Actually, it's not just the 'early Christian movement'. Physical
resurrection at judgement is STILL a doctrine of the Catholic
Church. I think it's also belief among most of the different
protestant groups.

I respectfully disagree with your thought that prayer won't
accomplish anything. Many of us pray about the situation
the world is in. I guess when we are dead, we will all see
what good the prayers did or didn't do. Prayers certainly
couldn't hurt anything, could they??



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan


zintac
All the duck tape and plastic anit gonna do crap.

It'll stop VX and Sarin and mustard gas from easily wafting down your block and into your house or apartment.



Very true, but the topic is about nukes. Yes duck Tape and plastic will help you from Bio and Chem. attacks. But it's not gonna do $hit in the case of a nuke.

Zintac


[edit on 15-11-2004 by Zintac]



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by rami_Arna
Satalites can easly detect radioactive substanses moving around.


No they can't. If they could, this discussion would not be happening, and the cold war would have been less scary.

Again, I repeat, satellites can not track a nuke.



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   


I respectfully disagree with your thought that prayer won't
accomplish anything. Many of us pray about the situation
the world is in. I guess when we are dead, we will all see
what good the prayers did or didn't do. Prayers certainly
couldn't hurt anything, could they??



Prayer is what simple people do when they have no logical way out of a situation, and prayer DOES cause harm, because it diverts people away from trying to solve a problem in a practical matter and essentially causes them to hand it over to some yet-to-be-confirmed diety, which is a pretty stupid thing to do.

Plus, I find it far more noble in a person to just accept the fact that there is no God in the classic sense due to all the information present in this day and age, than to blindly believe in something in the hopes that they will be rewarded with eternal happiness after they die. Religion is incredibly perverted.


[edit on 15-11-2004 by keke]



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Look, I put the odds of a nuke at 50/50, but the odds were 75/25. So things are getting better.

the reaction of the US to such a strike would be very unfriendly, and North Western Pakistan would be a likely target of a tactical nuke.


I wonder if Iran is talking to the US in back channels?



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I guess when we are dead, we will all see
what good the prayers did or didn't do.

So then you agree that it can't be said to do anything right? And you'd agree also that there's not been any scientific studies that show prayer or meditation influence world events then right?

zintac
But it's not gonna do $hit in the case of a nuke.

I agree, and I don't think that the gov had ever said it would. I recall them talking about it back then, I think it made sense, no one knew what was going to happen. If pick up trucks had been rumbling down city streets, fumming out mustard gas, the people with duct tape and plastic sheets for their houses might have a higher probability of surviving than the ones wading thru it and watching their skin blister off the bone.


keke
just accept the fact that there is no God in the classic sense due to all the information present in this day and age

What? What information does man have now that he didn't have, even a thousand years, ago, that can disprove the existence of any of the multiple gods worshipped these days? No objective information is going to inform us one way or the other about those kind of things.

ed singer
the reaction of the US to such a strike would be very unfriendly, and North Western Pakistan would be a likely target of a tactical nuke.

Why? It wouldn't get him. It'd just be a waste of nukes. Nukes are good at destroying cities or vapourizing fleets and armies, not shelling scattered populations.



I wonder if Iran is talking to the US in back channels?

Should the US listen even if they were? THe iranians were the ones who sent that double agent chalabi to the US, and he was the one giving lots of info to the US about husseins weapons. THey used him to trick the US into fighting against their greatest enemy in the region. What would be different now? They'll tell the US that the musharaff sold a nuke, and then set off one of their own in iraq so that we'll attack yet another enemy of theirs? The US and the rest of the West has to be on its toes now, the enemy isn't as stoopit as everyone likes to pretend. They completely pulled the wool over everyone's eyes on that one.



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
A single nuke strike would just piss off America. Just asking for retaliation like after 911. But a simultaneous strike at maybe 7 major cities would kill america in an instant. No way to retaliate.


No such thing as no way to retaliate for the US or Russia for that matter.

You could drop a 1000 nukes on America and it can still retaliate. We didnt put most of our nukes in subs patroling the ocean for nothing. You could kill 99 percent of the people in the US and those subs can still wipe whole nations out. We were planning for a Nuclear war with Russia for almost 50 yrs a far cry from a terrorist blowing up a few cities. We had to be able to retaliate even after a Russian nuclear attack.



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by DrHoracid
A single nuke strike would just piss off America. Just asking for retaliation like after 911. But a simultaneous strike at maybe 7 major cities would kill america in an instant. No way to retaliate.


No such thing as no way to retaliate for the US or Russia for that matter.

You could drop a 1000 nukes on America and it can still retaliate. We didnt put most of our nukes in subs patroling the ocean for nothing. You could kill 99 percent of the people in the US and those subs can still wipe whole nations out. We were planning for a Nuclear war with Russia for almost 50 yrs a far cry from a terrorist blowing up a few cities. We had to be able to retaliate even after a Russian nuclear attack.

Yeah, it's not a stretch to say the majority of our nukes aren't in major cities

So destroying 7 major cities wouldn't "kill" America, we'd just be pissed off even more.


I wonder if terrorist really are that stupid and would set off a nuke (or any WMD) in the US. Knowing good and well the retaliation would be 100X worse than what they did to us.
It would only hurt their cause (whatever that is).



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by dh
.....
You appear to accept everything you're told about the state of the world and the need to promulgate the agenda through violent control
.....


Everything that you mentioned can be said that is true about you. You seem to accept everything the liberal media tells you, and if i remember correctly many liberals, if not most, are actually asking for violence...to overthrow governments, not ony the US....humm...how did you put it?.... "an agenda through violent control"....

BTW, if you can't discuss any topic without insulting, perhaps it's better if you don't discuss at all...


dh

posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib


Everything that you mentioned can be said that is true about you. You seem to accept everything the liberal media tells you, and if i remember correctly many liberals, if not most, are actually asking for violence...to overthrow governments, not ony the US....humm...how did you put it?.... "an agenda through violent control"....

BTW, if you can't discuss any topic without insulting, perhaps it's better if you don't discuss at all...


Actually, mate, I am quite sure the liberal media tells me the selfsame lies than the ...what?... the superficially (Bushist) conservative media tells me -
From a far off perspective the US contains two types of Conservatives - those who wish to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and Christian values whatever, and those are seeking to shred the both by whatever means necessary, and are evidently practising satanists while worshipping Owl deities and are members of secret societies while openly pretending to be avowed Christians of the Billy Graham/TV evangilist school of covert satanic faith
Liberals - well I could hate 'em as much as you though innumerable of them are breaking through the scientific proof barrier and the falsely-based rationalist prison, and can see through the more negative side of New Age stuff while accepting some of the more positive and pragmatic workings
This left and right dinger is collapsing as fast as chips

On the subject of overthrowing government, I would only too happily agree
The world governmental system does need dismantling piece by piece from the inside and non-violently

Oh yes, and I was abusive earlier on and have received a warning for it, but it was meant with a little bit of humour, a self-evidently exaggerated blast , . I actually intended only a massive bit of chiding for foremost contributer edslinger, whose posts I always read and appreciate as thought-provoking and provocative.
Hell, I agree with him from time to time



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Terrorist has already nuclear weapon. Remember that Russia has problems with their Military stocks. General corruption in the army, and money buy anything, they have lost the trace at this point of 250 Nuclear bombs.
There is a quote from G W Bush 3 years ago: I am not afraid of the country that have 1000 fissile bombs.... I'm afraid of the country that have only one.

This is true, the country with one bomb surely wants to use it. One Nuclear bomb is hard to track.... How to bring it in the US? Not Baltimore, no US Ports will allow a nuclear bomb to come.... Too much technology to detect that kind of materials are install in the Ports... Bring it by ground by Canada or Mexico... It's the easiest way... Canada and Mexico have limited fundings in the border security buyings.

A nuclear bomb attack in the us? this will be the worst nightmare for the country that attacks. Tourism will be closed for the next 2000 years....


dh

posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 05:07 PM
link   



A nuclear bomb attack in the us? this will be the worst nightmare for the country that attacks


This is true - only one government in the world could have a cui bono interest in such an attack
Sorry if that's a one- liner



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by dh
I actually intended only a massive bit of chiding for foremost contributer edslinger, whose posts I always read and appreciate as thought-provoking and provocative. Hell, I agree with him from time to time


Better watch agreeing with me, puts a bullseye on you m8!

Notice I have a warning also




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join