Obama: "I'm Concerned About a Loose Nuke Being Detonated in Manhattan"- prep for a false flag?

opethPA
Lets go another route with this..

If the horrible and evil MSM did this how would people respond?

By that I mean If they reported something out of context, left key words out and then reported it as fact.. If the MSM did that people here would be in an uproar so what is the difference between that and the OP?

You mean like iraq's WMDs? Or that alCIAduh perpetrated 9/11 from a cave? Or maybe all the misleading regarding MH370?
Yup, so far MSM has done nothing of the sort...

So Mr.Obama is being lambasted now for the use of an analogy???

Anything to knock him down!!!
Even the reporter was clearly taking a swipe at him by saying no one listens to him anymore!!!


Let's put it this way!!!

He could easily have said "Russia is less of a concern right now than a small pox outbreak!!!"...
But then people would still be saying "FF chemical war, they're going to poison us"...
Or he could have said "Russia is less of a concern than me slipping & twisting my ankle!!!...
But then people would be saying "he is taunting Russia & claiming they're not dangerous in any sense"...

So what could he have said to play down the current rhetoric of WWIII rubbish that's so prevalent right now that wouldn't have pissed people off or set off the conspiratorial???

I say fair play that he used the extreme!!!
If people want to be scared of a speech in which he plays down current threat levels with an extremely unlikely scenario then that's their problem & they'd likely be fearful of anything, well sod them anyways Politics doesn't cater to the fearful!!!



However...
What I would question is why he mentioned this in the same sentence as "challenges in America"!!!
Who/What are the challenges in America???
Rogue Generals... Rogue Organizations... Rogue Agencies... Civilians???

I think that was a much more important aspect of his answers & something that people are ignoring for an analogy they didn't like!!!


Peace everybody!

Yusomad

opethPA
Lets go another route with this..

If the horrible and evil MSM did this how would people respond?

By that I mean If they reported something out of context, left key words out and then reported it as fact.. If the MSM did that people here would be in an uproar so what is the difference between that and the OP?

You mean like iraq's WMDs? Or that alCIAduh perpetrated 9/11 from a cave? Or maybe all the misleading regarding MH370?
Yup, so far MSM has done nothing of the sort...

That's grea5, how does it answer my question?

Didn't Benjamin Nutnyahoo say something like this a while back? And let me guess.....the nuke will have come from ......DUH DUH DUH RUSSIA???? lol Lunatics every one of them.

Stevemagegod
History Channel has been talking about Rogue Nuclear Bombs in Manhattan for years now. But to hear this from the Presidents #ing mouth scares the # out of me. Something most of recently happened and they are just covering it up for the President to say something like this. 

History Channel. You mean this History Channel? :

History Channel Nuke Expert

Seriously, let's stop acting like this is a terrifying new development. I can remember people talking about WMDs in Manhattan since the first WTC attack in 1993. South Park did an episode about Hillary Clinton and suitcase nukes years ago in response to her statements about that possibility. Bush/Cheney made it a point to show the entire country that they were deploying "nuke sniffing" technology to New York. The POTUS stating that he's concerned about the possibility of a nuclear incident in Manhattan shouldn't bother anyone.

thesaneone
reply to post by Chronogoblin

 

Because when people think of America the usually think of New York.

I'm not sure how you know what people usually think of on this subject, but I can tell you that for me, a non-American, the first image I usually get is the Capitol Building in DC. I can't define a hard and fast reason as to why, but I suspect it's because it's so iconic of your system of government -- and of course, your Constitution. It's far more unique as an image than just some city with lots of skyscrapers.

Don't get me wrong, I think NYC is awesome and it's very high on my bucket list of places to visit in the USA. But the first place I normally think of is that huge dome of the Capitol. Not even the White House.

Getting back to the main subject of this thread, and Obama's statement: " ... Russia's actions are a problem. They don't pose the number-one national security threat to the United States. I continue to be much more concerned when it comes to our security, with the prospect of (err) a nuclear weapon going off in Manhattan. ..."

The above is a verbatim transcript of the relevant part of the video posted in the OP (from 4 min 55 sec to 5 min 12 sec), which anyone may check by reading the above while watching the video. He didn't actually use the specific phrase "loose nuke". The implication is a terrorist act, but it's not stated that plainly, which I find interesting.

But anyway, I recall some years back that a one senior official said (and I'm paraphrasing) the worst scenario for national security (ie in respect of terrorist attacks) was a nuke in the back of a rental truck parked near the Washington Monument. If anyone can recall exactly who said that I'd be glad to be reminded. I only know it was during George W. Bush's administration and I believe it was a high-ranking Govt official. It might have been Rumsfeld but I can't be certain about that. Was definitely a man, not a woman, if that helps to narrow it down.

So I have a question: I'd like to know if the same members who are criticizing or suspicious of Obama's choice of words and location now, were equally critical and suspicious of the official who made that statement about the rental truck in DC with a nuke in the back? Please note I'm not being critical of any of you for voicing your concerns and/or suspicions. I'm just curious.

reply to post by JustMike


As an American, when I think of America I think of D.C. and small towns. NY, IMO, is the poster-child for what's wrong with America(no offense to anyone).

jhn7537
This is me going down some serious conspiracy-type road... (for the sake of the discussion)

While some believe global warming is BS, I am from the camp that believes it is very real. Actually, just took a global climate change course at my college and found some of the statistics to be rather scary, but I digress. Say we begin to see sea levels rise at an alarming rate due to the polar ice caps, greenland, all melting away. Now there's been lots of speculation that Manhattan could/would be threatened by rising sea levels within the next 50-100 years. Maybe the US wouldn't mind a nuke going off on a piece of land that they already know will be inhabitable down the road, so it's lose-lose anyway, so why not make a giant statement with this no-win scenario...

I dunno, I decided to go way off the trail there......hahahahahaha

Just one thing and then I'll drop it.... There is a REAL reason why it's called Greenland. Did you professors mention Eirk and Red and the Medevil warming period?

Even still the fact that he mentioned this is chilling.

Remember when he said he was more concerned about a "lone wolf" going out and killing a bunch of people rather than another grand 9/11 style attack?

Remember what happened after he said that?

EVERYTHING MATTERS. When you're a detective you learn to take nothing as a coincidence. So be a detective, and stay vigilant.

reply to post by Danbones
That is my biggest fear as well. I've worried about that since well before 911. We need to focus military resources into battling terrorism. Russia is a modern, wealthy country... I am not worried about any nuclear warheads from there....
edpalermo.com... longislandcriminallawfirm.com...

This is hardly a new concern.

Since the development of nukes that I can carry, this has been a scenario that keeps people up at night. Stuff of nightmares, indeed.

"False flag?"

Hardly. It's all too plausible, should the wrong folks get a hold of one of those smallish nukes.

For Mr. Obama to articulate that concern is hardly indicative of a darker purpose. It's a legitimate national security issue.

Obama states Kosovo left Serbia only after referendum, but there was NO referendum at all

Barack Obama’s speech on Ukrainian crisis seems to have left the public confused as he claimed that Kosovo broke away from Serbia “after a referendum”. But attentive listeners quickly pointed Obama’s gaps in history – there was no referendum in Kosovo.

President Obama was speaking Wednesday at The Center for Fine Arts in the heart of Brussels, Belgium, and was telling the youth crowd mostly about Russian-Ukrainian conflict over the strategic Crimean Peninsula.

He lashed out at Russia for “violation of international law, its assault on Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

'You can’t just make up facts’
“I honestly don’t know what President Obama is talking about,” Serbian historian Nebojsa Malic told RT. “There was never such a referendum. It never took place. It did not exist. I am completely baffled.”

rt.com...

I mention this just to illustrate that Obama has been known to make slips of the tongue, and from time to time also to use some pretty loopy logic based on those slips.
if he gets thing like this wrong what else might he have misconstrued?

reply to post by Danbones


No, he is just telling us they plan on desecrating the constitution some more under the auspices of keeping us "safe"

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I definitely agree with you there!

reply to post by CharlieSpeirs


Except that a President should be more considerate of his speech regarding things such as nuking New York, which is a very bad joke at best.

His remark was a face saving one, seeing as how when Romney responded that Russia was our greatest threat (during a debate) Mr. Obama made fun of him.

I also pointed out how the OP misquoted Obama... "I am MORE concerned..."

Not that his "analogy" is appropriate (which it most certainly is not).

reply to post by seagull


Up at night in fear are you?

Where you live has a good deal to do with how you will die. In the United States, the top two causes of death are responsible for more than 50 percent of the annual death toll. In the world at large, there's a lot more variety in how you meet your Maker. Here is our list of the 15 most common causes of death in the United States:

Cause

Percent of Total
1. Diseases of the heart 28.5
2. Malignant tumors 22.8
3. Cerebrovascular diseases 6.7
4. Chronic lower respiratory diseases 5.1
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries) 4.4
6. Diabetes mellitus 3.0
7. Influenza and pneumonia 2.7
8. Alzheimer's disease 2.4
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis 1.7
10. Septicemia (blood poisoning) 1.4
11. Suicide 1.3
12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 1.1
13. Primary hypertension and hypertensive renal disease 0.8
14. Parkinson's disease (tied) 0.7
15. Homicide (tied) 0.7

Source: CDC/NHS, National Vital Statistics System

Source:


You are more likely to kill yourself than to have someone kill you and more likely still to be killed by a knife or a gun in a robbery than to be killed by a nuke. Your much more likely still to be killed by your own government with a nuke than any outside foe: Operation Plowshare

I find only a mind capable of the greatest of exaggerations and fantasy's to sit up at night afraid of the 1 thing that has never once happened on American soil...

A logical mind would worry more about the things that actually kill people every single day, like heart disease or cancer - if your prone to worrying about the inevitable that is.

Me- I'm gonna die someday, no way to get out of that. All I do is hope its not too terribly painful. But I don't worry much about it.. to me its a waste of time and I have better things to do.

reply to post by bbracken677

Except that a President should be more considerate of his speech regarding things such as nuking New York, which is a very bad joke at best.

I'm inclined to agree with this, but I'd still be more concerned with the fact the biggest National Security threat facing the US comes from within!!!
I think that part was ignored, & I can't understand why!!!

His remark was a face saving one, seeing as how when Romney responded that Russia was our greatest threat (during a debate) Mr. Obama made fun of him.

Probably was face-saving, although political debate, at least here in UK Parliament, has a lot of mocking though, I can't imagine it being much different elsewhere!!!

I also pointed out how the OP misquoted Obama... "I am MORE concerned..."

Yes I heard that, I did watch the footage, felt it better to see it with my own eyes before I comment, I had a feeling it was taken out of context!!!

Not that his "analogy" is appropriate (which it most certainly is not).

I'd go back to my original thought that any analogy would have been inappropriate...
But he had to say something, not just to save face, but to actually answer the question!!!
He could have said on US soil instead of such a specific Borough, but other than that I can't really fault him!!!

Context has been taken out of this completely IMO, I'm not even a Mr.Obama supporter tbh, but I can see the disdain people have for him no matter what he says, it's a lose-lose situation for him no matter what he says!!!


Peace BB!!!

reply to post by CharlieSpeirs


2 things:

The debate was televised and watched by many people. I am sure that with Russia invading Crimea that the security briefings the president is privy to more than likely are dealing with the Russian situation more so than Terrorist activities right now. So he may be a bit touchy about the subject.

Secondly, a simple statement that he is "more concerned about terrorism than Russia" would have been sufficient without opening the door that his nuke/New York statement did.

I think the nukey thing was highly irresponsible.

What was he supposed to say? "I am scared that Russia could nuke us". No, he was saying the biggest threat to the U.S.A (nuclear or not) comes from within. The U.S.A has one of the best armies defending from the outside, who is defending the inside? Look at the Boston Marathon that was from inside. The plane that hit the twin towers came from within not some far away country.

The biggest threat to the U.S.A is from within, that is what he was trying to convey. Was his wording not the best? of course, but that doesn't change the message

reply to post by Danbones


How would he know who detonated the loose nuke? I see the statement meaning that terrorism remains the top concern and they know who the source of terrorism is.

It may feel very cosy to be in bed with the partner who want to kill you.