Originally posted by SIRR1
Is this more BS from AQ?
THE SAUDIS AND NUKES
No sooner had Iran agreed to halt their uranium enrichment activities than it became apparent that the Neocon war machine was starting to cast around for another justification to widen the wars in the oil regions of the Mideast. Building on the dubious claims made in the opening moments of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9-11", this week we saw Michael Scheuer, a CIA operative currently making the rounds of the media, accuse Osama of planning to use a nuclear weapon on the US, and moreover, that Osama had the permission of a Saudi Sheik to do so.
Well, we're just going to have to go in and smash them-there Saudis for that, aren't we?
Fool me once........
Let's take a look at Osama himself. You may want to hold your nose because the real Osama, the CIA asset the US trained and equipped to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, died in December 2001 and his funeral was reported in the foreign press. Of course, the American media never covered the story of the funerals, because they needed a live Osama, even if he was a fake, to scare you all into going to war.
Now, let's take a look at the idea of Saudi Arabia as a perpetrator of a terrorist attack on the US. Why would they do it? What would they gain? Immediately after the 9-11 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attack would mean for US-Israeli relations. His quick reply was: "It's very good……. Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)". The months since 9-11 have borne that out. US support for Israel's agenda grew stronger as Israel committed more atrocities against the Palestinians. More money flowed from the US to Israel. World opinion, which had been growing against Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, temporarily abated. World hostility towards Arabs in general grew. Forgotten was the fact that Israel was actually in defiance of more UN Resolutions than Saddam had ever been. And, it was assumed at the start of the war that direct access to Iraq's oil would reduce American demand for Saudi oil, and likely force prices down as Iraq's oil came to market. So, where was the motive? Do you really think Saudi Arabia would commit an act that would strengthen US-Israeli ties? Do you really think Saudi Arabia would commit an act that would undercut their own oil revenues? Do you really think Saudi Arabia would commit an act that would anger the world against Arabs? Me neither.
According to Carl Cameron's FOX News story on the Israeli spy ring, the US Government classified evidence that linked arrested Israeli spies to 9-11. There was no classification of evidence linking Saudi spies to 9-11.
The 9-11 scene was littered with passports using Saudi names, passports which the FBI admits were high-quality fakes. Why would Saudi Arabia commit 9-11 and use phony passports pointing back to themselves? If Saudi Arabia had done 9-11, it is safe to assume the phony passports would have likely pointed to Israel.
The warnings of the attack sent to Odigo in New York and Israel before the 9-11 planes had even left the ground confirms beyond question that Israeli-linked companies did receive advance warning. Why would Saudi Arabia warn Israeli companies if they were behind 9-11?
See any Saudis dancing on vans while the towers fell?
If the Saudis were connected to a terror attack in the US, the government would move to seize their funds inside the US, just as they did Iraqi funds and the funds of various Arab charities. And this is a considerable sum of money. Would the Saudis just throw that all away? Hardly.
Israel, on the other hand, is jealous of the influence the Saudis have in the US because of their money. Billions pour into the US from Saudi Arabia. Billions flow OUT to Israel. Israel's agenda has always been to find a way to sabotage the political influence the cash flow brings to Saudi Arabia while leaving the cash in place. Israel's dependence on American money means that Israel itself could no0t survive the crash that would result of Saudi Arabia were to withdraw their funds from the American investment market.
Which brings us to a simple point. If the Saudis really did want to harm America, all they have to do is take their money and go home. It's legal for them to do so. It is, after all, their money. They can put it where they want to. And given the recent performance of the US economy, who would fault them? The hard fact is that the Saudis, if they wanted to attack the US, could do more damage on a national scale by yanking their investment than by setting off a single nuclear bomb. They would not need Osama. They would not need a nuclear weapon. They would not need to smuggle terrorists into the US.All they would have to do is pick up a phone to their brokerage.
Then there is that big valve on the pipes leading to those US oil tankers. If Saudi Arabia wanted to harm the US, and with the US unable to extract much oil from war-torn Iraq, all Saudi arabia has to do is find another customer for their oil, or switch their currency of choice from dollars to Euros.
If Saudi Arabia really wanted to harm the United States, it has several ways to do so, all of them perfectly legal and moral. They do not need Osama and a nuclear weapon. And if they did, would they write such an agreement down?
The US, on the other hand, does need an Osama armed with a nuclear weapon to expand the war of conquest over the middle east. Israel, eager to sabotage diplomatic relations between the US and all Arab countries, needs an Osama armed with a nuclear weapon, and as we saw in the recent AIPAC spy scandal, their agents are in the very Pentagon offices that have been feeding us the now exposed lies that took us all to war in Iraq.
We were lied into Afghanistan, then we were lied into Iraq. Emboldened by their successes, of course the liars will continue to create more wars, using more lies.
You are being lied to again.
Fool me once...
www.whatreallyhappened.com...
Originally posted by leiphasw
Link: Al Qaeda Bluffing
Quote:
He said the suitcase nukes have a lifespan of only one to three years because some of the materials, such as the battery and the conventional explosives that produce the charge that sets off the nuclear reaction, deteriorate over time and must be replaced. Otherwise, he said, they become radioactive scrap metal.
Originally posted by IwunderThat's funny. Have you ever seen a recoilless rifle? The M-29 155mm is 8 feet long and weighs 371 pounds. The M-28 120mm is over 5 feet long and weighs 116 pounds. That's minus the XM388 279mm nuclear tipped projectile, which weighed 76 pounds. The M-29 was transported on an M113 or a large truck, but fired from the ground. The M-28 was generally carried and fired on a jeep, but could be carried for short distances by a three man team.
Smal nuke link
If you think it can fit into a Recoiless Rifle and not a suitcase then your not wasting your time but everyone elses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
