"Humanity is at a dangerous crossroads. War preparations to attack Iran are in "an advanced state of readiness". Hi tech weapons systems including nuclear warheads are fully deployed."
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
The scare-Mongering re: Iran is ridiculous and I can only assume this Is an Israel/USA thing.
I am not an expert on plutonium enrichment but... To enrich raw Plutonium to a level needed In X Rays Is around 8.... To enrich It for cancer treatment, it must be enriched to around 12....... To enrich PU capable of a nucleur war-head, It must be enriched to around 96. Iran simply does not have this capability and Is no-where near that kind of level. Even If they manage It, they are at least 12 years away with the technology available to them.
I am not an expert on plutonium enrichment but... To enrich raw Plutonium to a level needed In X Rays Is around 8.... To enrich It for cancer treatment, it must be enriched to around 12....... To enrich PU capable of a nucleur war-head, It must be enriched to around 96. Iran simply does not have this capability and Is no-where near that kind of level. Even If they manage It, they are at least 12 years away with the technology available to them.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Don't worry there is a voice of common sense and reason
YouTube - Bolton: Military action only way to prevent Iran from getting nukes
YouTube - Bolton: Military action only way to prevent Iran from getting nukes
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
gmc;1328960 wrote: Don't worry there is a voice of common sense and reason
YouTube - Bolton: Military action only way to prevent Iran from getting nukes
It just seems to me that the West and sorry folks but In particular the US, always fears any backward Nation advancing.
The Stranglers had It right In 1979
YouTube - Stranglers - Shah Shah a go go
YouTube - Bolton: Military action only way to prevent Iran from getting nukes
It just seems to me that the West and sorry folks but In particular the US, always fears any backward Nation advancing.
The Stranglers had It right In 1979
YouTube - Stranglers - Shah Shah a go go
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
oscar;1329004 wrote: It just seems to me that the West and sorry folks but In particular the US, always fears any backward Nation advancing.
The Stranglers had It right In 1979
YouTube - Stranglers - Shah Shah a go go
It's a very short sighted view of a few what is in the best interests that is the problem. John Bolton is on record that the only issue is what is in america's ineterest in matters, it seems to be a generally held view that justifies overthrowing democratically elected giovernments and backing any kind of regime so long as business goes on as usual and no one seems able to say this is morally wrong and very short sighted. I take it you are familiar with albion's role in all of this as well. It's almost as if realpolitik has become a habit they can't get off. Then you have all the nutters that think the end of days is nigh and would welcome a war. On 22/12/2012 they will be feeling very silly I think. Any attack on iran would very quickly become all out war, hopefully commonsense will prevail.
The Stranglers had It right In 1979
YouTube - Stranglers - Shah Shah a go go
It's a very short sighted view of a few what is in the best interests that is the problem. John Bolton is on record that the only issue is what is in america's ineterest in matters, it seems to be a generally held view that justifies overthrowing democratically elected giovernments and backing any kind of regime so long as business goes on as usual and no one seems able to say this is morally wrong and very short sighted. I take it you are familiar with albion's role in all of this as well. It's almost as if realpolitik has become a habit they can't get off. Then you have all the nutters that think the end of days is nigh and would welcome a war. On 22/12/2012 they will be feeling very silly I think. Any attack on iran would very quickly become all out war, hopefully commonsense will prevail.
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
quote by gmc
Any attack on iran would very quickly become all out war, hopefully commonsense will prevail.
That of course is what most sensible people believe but how do you allay obvious fears about the intransigence of Iran (the west's gung-ho attitude notwithstanding) Just suppose they are very close to producing a nuclear weapon. Is it not reasonable to expect they might use it. Toward Israel, if not the rest of Europe or the US. Is not a bit of sabre rattling expected ? Or should the West just shrug our shoulders and say "oh just do what ever you want. It doesnt concern us "
I'm sure, beyond what we are fed in the media, there are real fears
Any attack on iran would very quickly become all out war, hopefully commonsense will prevail.
That of course is what most sensible people believe but how do you allay obvious fears about the intransigence of Iran (the west's gung-ho attitude notwithstanding) Just suppose they are very close to producing a nuclear weapon. Is it not reasonable to expect they might use it. Toward Israel, if not the rest of Europe or the US. Is not a bit of sabre rattling expected ? Or should the West just shrug our shoulders and say "oh just do what ever you want. It doesnt concern us "
I'm sure, beyond what we are fed in the media, there are real fears
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Snowfire;1329020 wrote: quote by gmc
That of course is what most sensible people believe but how do you allay obvious fears about the intransigence of Iran (the west's gung-ho attitude notwithstanding) Just suppose they are very close to producing a nuclear weapon. Is it not reasonable to expect they might use it. Toward Israel, if not the rest of Europe or the US. Is not a bit of sabre rattling expected ? Or should the West just shrug our shoulders and say "oh just do what ever you want. It doesnt concern us "
I'm sure, beyond what we are fed in the media, there are real fears
How?
What you have is a site that's neither designed for nor capable of producing weapons level material using fuel supplied by Russia and returning the spent fuel to Russia who check it. On top of that you have on-site inspectors looking for any evidence of efforts to enrich, or even to develop the capability to enrich the material at hand.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
In what way can this power station be a war threat? It is easy to see how it is an economic threat but that is not just cause to destroy a country.
That of course is what most sensible people believe but how do you allay obvious fears about the intransigence of Iran (the west's gung-ho attitude notwithstanding) Just suppose they are very close to producing a nuclear weapon. Is it not reasonable to expect they might use it. Toward Israel, if not the rest of Europe or the US. Is not a bit of sabre rattling expected ? Or should the West just shrug our shoulders and say "oh just do what ever you want. It doesnt concern us "
I'm sure, beyond what we are fed in the media, there are real fears
How?
What you have is a site that's neither designed for nor capable of producing weapons level material using fuel supplied by Russia and returning the spent fuel to Russia who check it. On top of that you have on-site inspectors looking for any evidence of efforts to enrich, or even to develop the capability to enrich the material at hand.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
In what way can this power station be a war threat? It is easy to see how it is an economic threat but that is not just cause to destroy a country.
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Bryn Mawr;1329028 wrote: How?
What you have is a site that's neither designed for nor capable of producing weapons level material using fuel supplied by Russia and returning the spent fuel to Russia who check it. On top of that you have on-site inspectors looking for any evidence of efforts to enrich, or even to develop the capability to enrich the material at hand.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
In what way can this power station be a war threat? It is easy to see how it is an economic threat but that is not just cause to destroy a country. That is very much how It was explained to me... by Arthur Kemp for the record.
What you have is a site that's neither designed for nor capable of producing weapons level material using fuel supplied by Russia and returning the spent fuel to Russia who check it. On top of that you have on-site inspectors looking for any evidence of efforts to enrich, or even to develop the capability to enrich the material at hand.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
In what way can this power station be a war threat? It is easy to see how it is an economic threat but that is not just cause to destroy a country. That is very much how It was explained to me... by Arthur Kemp for the record.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Bryn Mawr;1329028 wrote: How?
What you have is a site that's neither designed for nor capable of producing weapons level material using fuel supplied by Russia and returning the spent fuel to Russia who check it. On top of that you have on-site inspectors looking for any evidence of efforts to enrich, or even to develop the capability to enrich the material at hand.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
In what way can this power station be a war threat? It is easy to see how it is an economic threat but that is not just cause to destroy a country.
I'm not refering to the nuclear reactors per say but any proposed acceleration in enrichment of weapons grade plutonium in the future and the dangers that are inherant in that. I'm refering to the fear of the future and just how close that maybe in terms of a threat to neighbouring nations.......or not as the case maybe. I'm just asking !
Is there a risk of future enrichment for weapons grade or is it just scaremongering ?
What you have is a site that's neither designed for nor capable of producing weapons level material using fuel supplied by Russia and returning the spent fuel to Russia who check it. On top of that you have on-site inspectors looking for any evidence of efforts to enrich, or even to develop the capability to enrich the material at hand.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
In what way can this power station be a war threat? It is easy to see how it is an economic threat but that is not just cause to destroy a country.
I'm not refering to the nuclear reactors per say but any proposed acceleration in enrichment of weapons grade plutonium in the future and the dangers that are inherant in that. I'm refering to the fear of the future and just how close that maybe in terms of a threat to neighbouring nations.......or not as the case maybe. I'm just asking !
Is there a risk of future enrichment for weapons grade or is it just scaremongering ?
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Snowfire;1329045 wrote: I'm not refering to the nuclear reactors per say but any proposed acceleration in enrichment of weapons grade plutonium in the future and the dangers that are inherant in that. I'm refering to the fear of the future and just how close that maybe in terms of a threat to neighbouring nations.......or not as the case maybe. I'm just asking !
Is there a risk of future enrichment for weapons grade or is it just scaremongering ?
Given the checks already in place it is just scaremongering in order to justify the warmongering.
Is there a risk of future enrichment for weapons grade or is it just scaremongering ?
Given the checks already in place it is just scaremongering in order to justify the warmongering.
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Snowfire;1329020 wrote: quote by gmc
That of course is what most sensible people believe but how do you allay obvious fears about the intransigence of Iran (the west's gung-ho attitude notwithstanding) Just suppose they are very close to producing a nuclear weapon. Is it not reasonable to expect they might use it. Toward Israel, if not the rest of Europe or the US. Is not a bit of sabre rattling expected ? Or should the West just shrug our shoulders and say "oh just do what ever you want. It doesnt concern us "
I'm sure, beyond what we are fed in the media, there are real fears
They want one because israel has one. If they had had them in the 1980's they might have used one against Iraq. On the other hand is they had had one maybe saddam would have thought twice about attacking in the first place. If they have one they are less likely to be attacked by israel or america and at the moment the US in particular could attack them with impunity and keeps threatening to do so. If someone keeps threatening you sooner or later the threat gets taken seriously and you get ready for war. You can understand why they might think having one might be handy. Realistically they know if they use one they would be wiped off the face of the planet. The whole thing has a kind of demented logic, if they have one they know they are less likely to be attacked but if they try and get one they are likely to be attacked but if they manage it they might be less likely to be attacked. I posted that link to John Bolton, he's not a lone crazy Bush wanted him for UN ambassador, presumably he wanted to be taken seriously.
It''s not iran having nuclear weapons that causes me concern it's india and Pakistan having them, especially pakistan, it's not exactly a stable country
If they wanted nuclear weapons it's probably easier to buy one from pakistan or maybe one of the russian states.
That of course is what most sensible people believe but how do you allay obvious fears about the intransigence of Iran (the west's gung-ho attitude notwithstanding) Just suppose they are very close to producing a nuclear weapon. Is it not reasonable to expect they might use it. Toward Israel, if not the rest of Europe or the US. Is not a bit of sabre rattling expected ? Or should the West just shrug our shoulders and say "oh just do what ever you want. It doesnt concern us "
I'm sure, beyond what we are fed in the media, there are real fears
They want one because israel has one. If they had had them in the 1980's they might have used one against Iraq. On the other hand is they had had one maybe saddam would have thought twice about attacking in the first place. If they have one they are less likely to be attacked by israel or america and at the moment the US in particular could attack them with impunity and keeps threatening to do so. If someone keeps threatening you sooner or later the threat gets taken seriously and you get ready for war. You can understand why they might think having one might be handy. Realistically they know if they use one they would be wiped off the face of the planet. The whole thing has a kind of demented logic, if they have one they know they are less likely to be attacked but if they try and get one they are likely to be attacked but if they manage it they might be less likely to be attacked. I posted that link to John Bolton, he's not a lone crazy Bush wanted him for UN ambassador, presumably he wanted to be taken seriously.
It''s not iran having nuclear weapons that causes me concern it's india and Pakistan having them, especially pakistan, it's not exactly a stable country
If they wanted nuclear weapons it's probably easier to buy one from pakistan or maybe one of the russian states.
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
gmc;1329125 wrote:
It''s not iran having nuclear weapons that causes me concern it's india and Pakistan having them, especially pakistan, it's not exactly a stable country
If they wanted nuclear weapons it's probably easier to buy one from pakistan or maybe one of the russian states.
If the truth were known more than one nuclear device has found it's way to countries that are not friendly places to anyone. The fact that one hasn't been used is what baffles me.
It''s not iran having nuclear weapons that causes me concern it's india and Pakistan having them, especially pakistan, it's not exactly a stable country
If they wanted nuclear weapons it's probably easier to buy one from pakistan or maybe one of the russian states.
If the truth were known more than one nuclear device has found it's way to countries that are not friendly places to anyone. The fact that one hasn't been used is what baffles me.
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Tightwad;1329210 wrote: If the truth were known more than one nuclear device has found it's way to countries that are not friendly places to anyone. The fact that one hasn't been used is what baffles me.
There's no need for them, if they really want to launch terror attacks on america and cause havoc all they need to do is place a few car bombs in American cities or blow up petrol tankers and the like. There's enough radioactive material lying around in hospitals etc to make them nastier still if they want to. What baffles me is there haven't been more attacks like that.
There's no need for them, if they really want to launch terror attacks on america and cause havoc all they need to do is place a few car bombs in American cities or blow up petrol tankers and the like. There's enough radioactive material lying around in hospitals etc to make them nastier still if they want to. What baffles me is there haven't been more attacks like that.
-
kathaksung
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:48 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Iran war preparation started years ago, after Iraq invasion. Here is an article I wrote one year ago.
582. Robert Gates' career prolonged for Iran war (1/15/09)
Petro dollar benefits US economy a lot. When Iran abandons dollar as oil trading currency, it shakes dollar foundation significantly. To stabilize the dollar position, the war on Iran is inevitable. The latest attempt to war on Iran was failed in August 2008. Next month, in September, a financial crisis is created to save the dollar. The financial crisis push people to change the investment into cash - the dollar, and drives the dollar into a balloon - US bond. The Inside Group will keep that balloon for months, no longer than a year. They will keep that balloon until the Iran war break out.
The reason I said so is out of a decision made by the President elect - Obama. He decides to let Bush's Defense Secretary - Robert Gates to stay in chair for one more year. It means the Inside group still wants to finish Iran war within a year. They maintain that dollar balloon from popping until the war comes.
Robert Gates is a well selected neo-con follower. He is no other than Rumsfeld, Bush and Ashcroft. He has been chosen to command the soured Iran war of 2008 August. No one is more familiar with that war project then him. No one will work better than him with that military official group inside Pentagon which developed the Iran war project. It was an urgent war. If Bush can't stay in President seat, Gates will be the right person to stay for the war.
Barak Obama won the president election by his slogan "change". One important reason he won the campaign is because he said he opposes Iraq war. But when it touches the interest of the Inside Group, he has to obey. In an area where needs an utter "change", he reacts with "un change". He says he opposes Iraq war, because the bird is held in hand already. It doesn't cost anything but a lip service. But when his master gave an order, he will hug another war.
Politicians are picked up from the followers of the Inside Group. High ranking politicians have been all screened tier upon tier. They are all the same even though they pretend to be different by sticking a different sign of donkey or elephant. When people are tired of a white wolf, they gave you a black one. But on the core it's the same. Wolf won't change its habit to eat lamb.
There is a Chinese fable: Three for breakfast and four for super. It says a monkey keeper gave his monkey four nuts in breakfast and three for supper. Monkey felt hungry and protested. The keeper thought for a while than pretended compromise. He said, "OK, you win, I will give you three nuts in morning and four in the evening." Monkey thought it won because the keeper changed three into four for supper. So when Obama gives you four nuts for supper but three in the morning, do you think there is a change?
582. Robert Gates' career prolonged for Iran war (1/15/09)
Petro dollar benefits US economy a lot. When Iran abandons dollar as oil trading currency, it shakes dollar foundation significantly. To stabilize the dollar position, the war on Iran is inevitable. The latest attempt to war on Iran was failed in August 2008. Next month, in September, a financial crisis is created to save the dollar. The financial crisis push people to change the investment into cash - the dollar, and drives the dollar into a balloon - US bond. The Inside Group will keep that balloon for months, no longer than a year. They will keep that balloon until the Iran war break out.
The reason I said so is out of a decision made by the President elect - Obama. He decides to let Bush's Defense Secretary - Robert Gates to stay in chair for one more year. It means the Inside group still wants to finish Iran war within a year. They maintain that dollar balloon from popping until the war comes.
Robert Gates is a well selected neo-con follower. He is no other than Rumsfeld, Bush and Ashcroft. He has been chosen to command the soured Iran war of 2008 August. No one is more familiar with that war project then him. No one will work better than him with that military official group inside Pentagon which developed the Iran war project. It was an urgent war. If Bush can't stay in President seat, Gates will be the right person to stay for the war.
Barak Obama won the president election by his slogan "change". One important reason he won the campaign is because he said he opposes Iraq war. But when it touches the interest of the Inside Group, he has to obey. In an area where needs an utter "change", he reacts with "un change". He says he opposes Iraq war, because the bird is held in hand already. It doesn't cost anything but a lip service. But when his master gave an order, he will hug another war.
Politicians are picked up from the followers of the Inside Group. High ranking politicians have been all screened tier upon tier. They are all the same even though they pretend to be different by sticking a different sign of donkey or elephant. When people are tired of a white wolf, they gave you a black one. But on the core it's the same. Wolf won't change its habit to eat lamb.
There is a Chinese fable: Three for breakfast and four for super. It says a monkey keeper gave his monkey four nuts in breakfast and three for supper. Monkey felt hungry and protested. The keeper thought for a while than pretended compromise. He said, "OK, you win, I will give you three nuts in morning and four in the evening." Monkey thought it won because the keeper changed three into four for supper. So when Obama gives you four nuts for supper but three in the morning, do you think there is a change?
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
What you have is a site that's neither designed for nor capable of producing weapons level material using fuel supplied by Russia and returning the spent fuel to Russia who check it. On top of that you have on-site inspectors looking for any evidence of efforts to enrich, or even to develop the capability to enrich the material at hand.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
Bryn is largely correct in this statement. Russia has no interest in Iran getting nuclear weapons or in starting an arms race in the ME, she can be trusted to cut Iran off if something isn't correct and I believe do what needs to be done if Iran has a nuke.
The Inspectors have already publicly stated that they have found no evidence of any weapons program and that it could not happen at the power station.
Bryn is largely correct in this statement. Russia has no interest in Iran getting nuclear weapons or in starting an arms race in the ME, she can be trusted to cut Iran off if something isn't correct and I believe do what needs to be done if Iran has a nuke.
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Scrat;1333991 wrote: Bryn is largely correct in this statement. Russia has no interest in Iran getting nuclear weapons or in starting an arms race in the ME, she can be trusted to cut Iran off if something isn't correct and I believe do what needs to be done if Iran has a nuke.
Hi Scrat, welcome back :-6
Hi Scrat, welcome back :-6
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
Thanx Bryn
-
kathaksung
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:48 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
585. A super 911 to justify Iran war (1/30/09)
To justify the Iraq war, the Inside Group activated a false flag terror attack in US: that's 911. To justify the coming Iran war, another false flag terror attack is inevitable. That terror attack, likely will be a nuclear bombing. The shock and awe would shake Americans' brain and push them to support another war just like what 911 had done to Americans. From 2007 to 2008, there were at least three attempts to start the Iran war.
I predicted the attempt of false terror attack in advance on all three. Now you people realize why the Feds close AOL homepage service, shut down MSN community groups and blocked me to post for months.
1. The most evident one: On 8/30/2007, a B-52 carried 6 missiles loaded with nuclear heads flied over US continent. I predict the date two days ago.
499. July plot (2) (7/28/07)
With my own observation, I have concluded that in July, Feds would frame a drug case, made a false flag "terror attack" to distract, and with which US would activate Iran war.
505. Assassination, murder and terror attack (8/28/07)
The rest of the August plot started from 8/20 to September. The action date is between 8/31 to 9/3 when Feds closed the Bay Bridge. (see #503) At that time there will be massive terror attack in US and in Europe. I think that's why Karl Rove resigned in advance. His last date in office will be 8/30. So he will leave before the "Super 911". To get rid of any responsibility of involvement in false flag terror attack.
2. Three months later, there was another attempt to attack secret nuclear facility by the impact of hijacked plane(s). The action date: around 11/25/07 the Thanks giving day. I predict it one week ago.
Re: 521. An air express lane for Iran war (11/18/07)
"the Pentagon will open unused military airspace from Florida to Maine to create "a Thanksgiving express lane" for commercial airliners"
My interpretation: "(in 911 case) All four planes left their original airway. Now if there is another 911 alike hijack, what will the crew of the planes do? They will do whatever they can do because they know otherwise it will be death. That may change the result of the original plot planned by the perpetrator. How to comfort the crew member when the plane is led to a different route? The best way is to convince them they are directed to a "Thanksgiving (or Christmas) express way." So there will be little time for crew member to re-act when the last moment comes. (At that time the plane is taken over by the auto-pilot system.)
3. 8/8/2008. Marked with (1) Olympic opening ceremony. (2) Russian invaded Georgia. (3) A massive armada headed to Iran. I speculated the date one month ago.
Re: "556. Petro-dollar, the cause of Iran war (7/4/08)
Another time factor for Iran war is the Olympic Game in August. China has interest in Iran. He is an oil customer of Iran. Olympic Game could be an extortion chip for China's support in Iran war."
Now I say the next attempt to war on Iran is planed to activate within a year. It based on the fact that Obama let Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, to stay in chair for one more year. That the Inside group to prolong the financial tsunami by "orderly bankruptcy".
To justify the Iraq war, the Inside Group activated a false flag terror attack in US: that's 911. To justify the coming Iran war, another false flag terror attack is inevitable. That terror attack, likely will be a nuclear bombing. The shock and awe would shake Americans' brain and push them to support another war just like what 911 had done to Americans. From 2007 to 2008, there were at least three attempts to start the Iran war.
I predicted the attempt of false terror attack in advance on all three. Now you people realize why the Feds close AOL homepage service, shut down MSN community groups and blocked me to post for months.
1. The most evident one: On 8/30/2007, a B-52 carried 6 missiles loaded with nuclear heads flied over US continent. I predict the date two days ago.
499. July plot (2) (7/28/07)
With my own observation, I have concluded that in July, Feds would frame a drug case, made a false flag "terror attack" to distract, and with which US would activate Iran war.
505. Assassination, murder and terror attack (8/28/07)
The rest of the August plot started from 8/20 to September. The action date is between 8/31 to 9/3 when Feds closed the Bay Bridge. (see #503) At that time there will be massive terror attack in US and in Europe. I think that's why Karl Rove resigned in advance. His last date in office will be 8/30. So he will leave before the "Super 911". To get rid of any responsibility of involvement in false flag terror attack.
2. Three months later, there was another attempt to attack secret nuclear facility by the impact of hijacked plane(s). The action date: around 11/25/07 the Thanks giving day. I predict it one week ago.
Re: 521. An air express lane for Iran war (11/18/07)
"the Pentagon will open unused military airspace from Florida to Maine to create "a Thanksgiving express lane" for commercial airliners"
My interpretation: "(in 911 case) All four planes left their original airway. Now if there is another 911 alike hijack, what will the crew of the planes do? They will do whatever they can do because they know otherwise it will be death. That may change the result of the original plot planned by the perpetrator. How to comfort the crew member when the plane is led to a different route? The best way is to convince them they are directed to a "Thanksgiving (or Christmas) express way." So there will be little time for crew member to re-act when the last moment comes. (At that time the plane is taken over by the auto-pilot system.)
3. 8/8/2008. Marked with (1) Olympic opening ceremony. (2) Russian invaded Georgia. (3) A massive armada headed to Iran. I speculated the date one month ago.
Re: "556. Petro-dollar, the cause of Iran war (7/4/08)
Another time factor for Iran war is the Olympic Game in August. China has interest in Iran. He is an oil customer of Iran. Olympic Game could be an extortion chip for China's support in Iran war."
Now I say the next attempt to war on Iran is planed to activate within a year. It based on the fact that Obama let Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, to stay in chair for one more year. That the Inside group to prolong the financial tsunami by "orderly bankruptcy".
-
kathaksung
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:48 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
587. A nuclear bombing to justify Iran war (2/10/09)
For the false flag nuclear terror attack planed on 8/30/2007, there was a big pre-psychological propaganda. Here are some. It indicates that the heads of this country determined to nuke US citizens to justify an Iran war as early as May 2007.
Quote, "Pres. Prepares for Possible D.C. Nuke
14-May-2007
On May 10, President Bush issued a national security directive ordering all agencies to prepare for a surprise attack on the Federal government.
Whitley Strieber's Unknown Country
FBI's Mueller: Bin Laden Wants to Strike U.S. Cities With Nuclear Weapons
Ronald Kessler
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group desperately want to obtain nuclear devices and explode them in American cities, especially New York and Washington, D.C., FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III tells NewsMax.
http://www.newsmax.com/popunders/mainpop_internal.htm
Al-Qaida Plans Nuclear
Attacks on 7 U.S. Cities
NewsMax Wires
Williams maintains that al-Qaida is not content on blowing up one nuclear device or even simply a "dirty" nuke - but wants to explode real nuclear devices in seven U.S. cities simultaneously
http://w3.newsmax.com/a/dayofislam/?PROMO_CODE=34BE-1"
From the news, we learned that:
1. The coming false flag attack would be a nuclear attack which would cause a big loss of lives. The shock and awe would big enough to justify another war when Bush became so notorious for the Iraq war.
2. The false flag would still be Bin Laden and Al Qaida.
3. The inside group targeted at 7 US cities. New York and Washington D.C. were among them.
The 8/30/2007 incident that a B-52 flew US continental with six missiles armed with nuclear head was a soured action. Six nuclear missiles not seven as original planed is because each wing of the B-52 can only install six missiles. The missiles in other wing, un armed, were gone through a security inspection to justify it passed routine safety check.
Washington D.C. was chosen to justify it was a "real terror attack". See, now the dead are not only ordinary people. So many high ranking politicians died too. (That's sad story for those obedient followers. They are sacrifice when the Inside group think it's a necessity. ) Of course, the core member of the plot would have happened been in somewhere else. Just like Bush was in a Florida school and Cheney was in a military base on 911. The following vacuum of disappeared law makers could justify a martial law carried out by the Feds.
New York was chosen because a lot of residents in that city, especially policemen and firemen, with their own experience, knew 911 was a false flag attack. It is a good chance to wipe out a large quantity of witnesses.
8/30/2007 B-52 incident was a big case. It alarms a lot of people. The same tactic obviously can't be used again. But to activate another war, a big justification is needed. Nothing is better than a WMD. Then where can the Feds find the source of the nuclear weapon? Pakistan.
For the false flag nuclear terror attack planed on 8/30/2007, there was a big pre-psychological propaganda. Here are some. It indicates that the heads of this country determined to nuke US citizens to justify an Iran war as early as May 2007.
Quote, "Pres. Prepares for Possible D.C. Nuke
14-May-2007
On May 10, President Bush issued a national security directive ordering all agencies to prepare for a surprise attack on the Federal government.
Whitley Strieber's Unknown Country
FBI's Mueller: Bin Laden Wants to Strike U.S. Cities With Nuclear Weapons
Ronald Kessler
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group desperately want to obtain nuclear devices and explode them in American cities, especially New York and Washington, D.C., FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III tells NewsMax.
http://www.newsmax.com/popunders/mainpop_internal.htm
Al-Qaida Plans Nuclear
Attacks on 7 U.S. Cities
NewsMax Wires
Williams maintains that al-Qaida is not content on blowing up one nuclear device or even simply a "dirty" nuke - but wants to explode real nuclear devices in seven U.S. cities simultaneously
http://w3.newsmax.com/a/dayofislam/?PROMO_CODE=34BE-1"
From the news, we learned that:
1. The coming false flag attack would be a nuclear attack which would cause a big loss of lives. The shock and awe would big enough to justify another war when Bush became so notorious for the Iraq war.
2. The false flag would still be Bin Laden and Al Qaida.
3. The inside group targeted at 7 US cities. New York and Washington D.C. were among them.
The 8/30/2007 incident that a B-52 flew US continental with six missiles armed with nuclear head was a soured action. Six nuclear missiles not seven as original planed is because each wing of the B-52 can only install six missiles. The missiles in other wing, un armed, were gone through a security inspection to justify it passed routine safety check.
Washington D.C. was chosen to justify it was a "real terror attack". See, now the dead are not only ordinary people. So many high ranking politicians died too. (That's sad story for those obedient followers. They are sacrifice when the Inside group think it's a necessity. ) Of course, the core member of the plot would have happened been in somewhere else. Just like Bush was in a Florida school and Cheney was in a military base on 911. The following vacuum of disappeared law makers could justify a martial law carried out by the Feds.
New York was chosen because a lot of residents in that city, especially policemen and firemen, with their own experience, knew 911 was a false flag attack. It is a good chance to wipe out a large quantity of witnesses.
8/30/2007 B-52 incident was a big case. It alarms a lot of people. The same tactic obviously can't be used again. But to activate another war, a big justification is needed. Nothing is better than a WMD. Then where can the Feds find the source of the nuclear weapon? Pakistan.
-
TruthBringer
- Posts: 3567
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 5:39 pm
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
gmc;1329015 wrote: It's a very short sighted view of a few what is in the best interests that is the problem. John Bolton is on record that the only issue is what is in america's ineterest in matters, it seems to be a generally held view that justifies overthrowing democratically elected giovernments and backing any kind of regime so long as business goes on as usual and no one seems able to say this is morally wrong and very short sighted. I take it you are familiar with albion's role in all of this as well. It's almost as if realpolitik has become a habit they can't get off. Then you have all the nutters that think the end of days is nigh and would welcome a war. On 22/12/2012 they will be feeling very silly I think. Any attack on iran would very quickly become all out war, hopefully commonsense will prevail.
I love it. The American people are at their boiling point with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, we simply don't want to be in them anymore. And here comes the President and his war cabinet getting ready to launch another war, that could be the trigger point for World War 3. What balls these people have. Of course, they need a false flag first as an excuse, but then I can easily see them telling the American people to sit down, shut up, and get used to it because this is the way it's gonna be. Right now we are all prostitutes, and these are our pimps.
By the way, 12, 21, 2012 has nothing to do with religious fundamentalism. No religious book uses that as a date for anything significant. It is not part of religion it has something to do with something outside that scope of reality - http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/warfa ... 012-a.html
I love it. The American people are at their boiling point with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, we simply don't want to be in them anymore. And here comes the President and his war cabinet getting ready to launch another war, that could be the trigger point for World War 3. What balls these people have. Of course, they need a false flag first as an excuse, but then I can easily see them telling the American people to sit down, shut up, and get used to it because this is the way it's gonna be. Right now we are all prostitutes, and these are our pimps.
By the way, 12, 21, 2012 has nothing to do with religious fundamentalism. No religious book uses that as a date for anything significant. It is not part of religion it has something to do with something outside that scope of reality - http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/warfa ... 012-a.html
Link removed by moderator
-
kathaksung
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:48 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
589. Regime change to control nuclear bomb of Pakistan (2/22/09)
Pakistan was Bush's ally in his eight years "war on terror". The military dictator, Musharraf, collaborated with US when he was the president of the Pakistan. Its intelligence, ISI, even helped the inside group in 911.
The head of Pakistan抯 ISI, General Mahmud Ahmed, had ordered to wire $100,000 to the leader of 911 attack, Mohammed Atta through the hand of Omar Sheikh. This has been confirmed by the director of the FBI抯 financial crimes unit, Dennis Lormel.
Quote, " Musharraf names 9/11 suspect as possible British asset
Fails to mention links to 9/11, ISI, CIA
By Devlin Buckley
?Copyright 2006,
http://fromthewilderness.com/members/10 ... _names.php
Co-operation is convenient. It's easy to deny. To take the responsibility for a nuclear attack is quite different. It will be carved deep in history. Will Japanese forget Hiroshima? Musharraf's group was not that stupid. Obviously they wouldn't play that role.
When a follower became disobedient, what US would do? Replaces him with a puppet of its own. Then we saw on September 10, 2007, a deported opposition politician, Nawaz Sharif landed in Islamabad. But he was sent back to Saudi Arabia immediately. The resistance of Pakistan regime was fierce. Anyhow, the plot went on. Next month, another US asset - Benazir Bhutto - was sent to Pakistan. She was warned by a bombing to her car convoy on Oct.18 and finally was assassinated two months later when she likely would have won the president election of Pakistan. Here is a news:
Quote, "Bhutto's death a blow to US
By BobinWright and Glenn Kessler 12/28/07
Washington Post
Washington - For Benazir Bhutto, the decision to return to Pakistan was sealed during a telephone call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice just a week before Bhutto flew home in October."
How efficient it was. A big decision made just by a phone call. Be noticed the date of their return: Sharif flew back on 9/10. (Buhtto returned one month later.) It was only ten days from 8/30/07 - the day when a B-52 flew US continent with six nuclear missiles. And that nuclear terror attack plot went soured.
The effort of a regime change was going on covertly. Mosharraf stepped down one year later.
Quote, "US backed Musharraf resigns in Pakistan
By Jane Pertez 8/19/08
New York Times
Islamabad, Pakistan - Facing imminent impeachment charges, President Pervez Musharraf announced his resignation on Monday, after months of belated recognition by US officials that he had become a waning asset in the campaign against terrorism."
You may also have noticed the resignation date. It was too just ten days after 8/8/08 - a day marked with Olympic opening ceremony in China, Russia invaded Georgia and a massive armada of US, Britain and France headed for Iran. The day I said plotted for Iran war but went soured.
The timing accordance is not a coincidence. It indicates that the attempt for Iran war is urgent. When the main project went soured, a spare one immediately activated. That a false flag nuclear attack will be used to justify the war. The nuclear bomb this time will come from Pakistan.
Pakistan was Bush's ally in his eight years "war on terror". The military dictator, Musharraf, collaborated with US when he was the president of the Pakistan. Its intelligence, ISI, even helped the inside group in 911.
The head of Pakistan抯 ISI, General Mahmud Ahmed, had ordered to wire $100,000 to the leader of 911 attack, Mohammed Atta through the hand of Omar Sheikh. This has been confirmed by the director of the FBI抯 financial crimes unit, Dennis Lormel.
Quote, " Musharraf names 9/11 suspect as possible British asset
Fails to mention links to 9/11, ISI, CIA
By Devlin Buckley
?Copyright 2006,
http://fromthewilderness.com/members/10 ... _names.php
Co-operation is convenient. It's easy to deny. To take the responsibility for a nuclear attack is quite different. It will be carved deep in history. Will Japanese forget Hiroshima? Musharraf's group was not that stupid. Obviously they wouldn't play that role.
When a follower became disobedient, what US would do? Replaces him with a puppet of its own. Then we saw on September 10, 2007, a deported opposition politician, Nawaz Sharif landed in Islamabad. But he was sent back to Saudi Arabia immediately. The resistance of Pakistan regime was fierce. Anyhow, the plot went on. Next month, another US asset - Benazir Bhutto - was sent to Pakistan. She was warned by a bombing to her car convoy on Oct.18 and finally was assassinated two months later when she likely would have won the president election of Pakistan. Here is a news:
Quote, "Bhutto's death a blow to US
By BobinWright and Glenn Kessler 12/28/07
Washington Post
Washington - For Benazir Bhutto, the decision to return to Pakistan was sealed during a telephone call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice just a week before Bhutto flew home in October."
How efficient it was. A big decision made just by a phone call. Be noticed the date of their return: Sharif flew back on 9/10. (Buhtto returned one month later.) It was only ten days from 8/30/07 - the day when a B-52 flew US continent with six nuclear missiles. And that nuclear terror attack plot went soured.
The effort of a regime change was going on covertly. Mosharraf stepped down one year later.
Quote, "US backed Musharraf resigns in Pakistan
By Jane Pertez 8/19/08
New York Times
Islamabad, Pakistan - Facing imminent impeachment charges, President Pervez Musharraf announced his resignation on Monday, after months of belated recognition by US officials that he had become a waning asset in the campaign against terrorism."
You may also have noticed the resignation date. It was too just ten days after 8/8/08 - a day marked with Olympic opening ceremony in China, Russia invaded Georgia and a massive armada of US, Britain and France headed for Iran. The day I said plotted for Iran war but went soured.
The timing accordance is not a coincidence. It indicates that the attempt for Iran war is urgent. When the main project went soured, a spare one immediately activated. That a false flag nuclear attack will be used to justify the war. The nuclear bomb this time will come from Pakistan.
-
littleCJelkton
- Posts: 1215
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:57 pm
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
oscar;1329004 wrote: It just seems to me that the West and sorry folks but In particular the US, always fears any backward Nation advancing.
The Stranglers had It right In 1979
YouTube - Stranglers - Shah Shah a go go
I think the stranglers had it right with this
The Stranglers had It right In 1979
YouTube - Stranglers - Shah Shah a go go
I think the stranglers had it right with this
-
kathaksung
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:48 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
591. Driving Iran into a nuclear weapon trap (3/5/09)
Pakistan now goes the direction the US wants it to go. On 2/6, there was the news:
Disgraced Pakistan nuke scientist freed by court http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090206/ap_ ... _scientist
A secret pact granted freedom to Pakistan nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, who lived under house arrest for allegedly leaking atomic weapons secrets to Iran, North Korea and Libya. It is obviously releasing a bait for Iran. Now the freed nuclear scientist is able to go on with his proliferation mission if there is a buyer. Iran is a potential customer.
Does Iran want to own nuclear weapon? Yes, it does. Does Iran know the danger it faces if it develops atomic bomb? Yes, it does, too. Iran knows it may risk a possible military invasion from US. Then how did Iran solve this problem? To develop the program in Syria, I think. It was a smart strategy. But US won't let it go. So we see the story that Israel bombed a site in Syria in a raid on 9/6/2007. Both countries gave little information about the incident. Syria even denies it, leaves it a mystery. Seven months later, there was a later report:
Quote, "U.S. displays images used to justify Israeli attack on Syria
See as evidence of N.Korea collaboration on reactor
By David E. Sanger New York Times
Washington - The Bush administration released detailed photographic images Thursday to support its assertion that the building in Syria that Israel destroyed in an air-strike last year was a nuclear reactor built with years of help from North Korea."
I believe the nuclear reactor was built for developing nuclear weapon. Iran joined the project because it did not want to take the responsibility of developing nuclear weapon in its land. I had read a news said that after the bombing Iran had sent inspectors to check the ruin site. What surprised me was that North Korea was part of the Trojan Horse plot to frame Iran.
Pakistan now goes the direction the US wants it to go. On 2/6, there was the news:
Disgraced Pakistan nuke scientist freed by court http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090206/ap_ ... _scientist
A secret pact granted freedom to Pakistan nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, who lived under house arrest for allegedly leaking atomic weapons secrets to Iran, North Korea and Libya. It is obviously releasing a bait for Iran. Now the freed nuclear scientist is able to go on with his proliferation mission if there is a buyer. Iran is a potential customer.
Does Iran want to own nuclear weapon? Yes, it does. Does Iran know the danger it faces if it develops atomic bomb? Yes, it does, too. Iran knows it may risk a possible military invasion from US. Then how did Iran solve this problem? To develop the program in Syria, I think. It was a smart strategy. But US won't let it go. So we see the story that Israel bombed a site in Syria in a raid on 9/6/2007. Both countries gave little information about the incident. Syria even denies it, leaves it a mystery. Seven months later, there was a later report:
Quote, "U.S. displays images used to justify Israeli attack on Syria
See as evidence of N.Korea collaboration on reactor
By David E. Sanger New York Times
Washington - The Bush administration released detailed photographic images Thursday to support its assertion that the building in Syria that Israel destroyed in an air-strike last year was a nuclear reactor built with years of help from North Korea."
I believe the nuclear reactor was built for developing nuclear weapon. Iran joined the project because it did not want to take the responsibility of developing nuclear weapon in its land. I had read a news said that after the bombing Iran had sent inspectors to check the ruin site. What surprised me was that North Korea was part of the Trojan Horse plot to frame Iran.
-
kathaksung
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 10:48 am
Preparing for World War III, Targeting Iran
593. Payment to North Korea (3/15/09)
Similar to the bombing of a Syrian nuclear site on Sept. 6, 2007, Israel also destroyed a nuclear reactor of Iraq in 1981. One thing is very clear: the raids all achieved by "one shot did all." It couldn't be done by regular bomb. It must be done by an accurate guided missile.
I remember the news in 1981 said when Israel attacked the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq, nobody was inside the site except a French technician. (The Osirak nuclear reactor was built by a French company) I think that technician was the one who activated a signal generator without aware of that a missile was running toward him by tracking the signal. Such kind of practice is common in the intelligence world. A typical one was 7/7/05 London bombing. When four sacrifice (government informants) went boarding the underground train with smile, they did what their master told them to do. They never knew their mission was to be a "suicide bomber".
Bombing nuclear site of Syria in 2007 needed accurate inside information too. How do I know North Korea played a role of Trojan Horse? From a news that the President of South Korea made a sudden visit to North Korea and had a summit there. The visit started from 10/2/07, 25 days from the incident "bombing Syria". Obviously it was a payment trip.
Of course the media used to mislead public with big lumps of story such like "Surprising steps at Koreas summit", "North Korea's leader shows little emotion at summit"..... The real meaning was vague in news: Quote, "Worries that South Korea's President Roh Moo Hyun would give away too much had been high..... For the North's leadership, the declaration would yield the economic growth it is seeking without demanding the political change it fears." (By Norimistsu Onishi, New York Times) They promised to open regular cargo railway service crossing their heavily armed border and create a joint fishing zone on their disputed sea frontier. It benefited both sides so it was not a payment.
The real payment was in a sentence: "The countries reiterated a commitment to deliver aid under the February disarmament deal granting the North the equivalent of 1 million tons of fuel oil." So I knew the secret deal was done in February. Seven months later (May, /2008), in another short news, I learned that USAID would supply North Korea 500,000 tons of food based on that February deal.
North Korea was labelled as an evil country by Bush. From time to time it challenges US with missile test, nuclear weapon and war. Yet, it always get generous aid from US that other countries rarely got. With my revelation, you now are able to realize all these are a soap opera to cheat the public, or the targeted enemy such like Syria and Iran.
595. Push Iran to swallow a bait (3/25/09)
On 3/15, I talked about the payment to N. Korea for its role in Syria bombing. (see "593. Payment to North Korea (3/15/09)) Three days later, there was a news.
Re: " N. Korea rejects U.S. food aid
By Foster Klug Associated Press
Washington - North Korea has rejected U.S. food shipments and asked aid groups to leave the country.....
Last May, the U.S. said it would provide 500,000 tons of food to N.Korea.... As part of that agreement, the U.S. delivered 169,000 tons to N. Korea, with the most recent shipment of 5,000 tons of vegetable oil and corn soy blend arriving in January."
(San Jose Mercury, 3/18/09)
It's another swift response to my revelation. When I pointed out the petro dollar was the cause of Iran war, the high oil price went downwards since. When I revealed the fuel aid and food aid were the payment of a secret deal, N. Korea immediately refuses to accept the food aid. Will that change your opinion?
The current events indicate that another plot is going on. N. Korea has played a Trojan Horse in Syria's case. It will play that role again, the target now is Iran.
Early this month, US and South Korea had a joint military maneuvers. N. Korea reacts with alarm and warns it may trigger war. N. Korea warns that it won't guarantee the safety of passenger plane flying near its airspace which forced air liners changed their flight paths. N. Korea also warns a war if US dare to intercept their rocket which will launch a satellite into orbit.
All these are just soap opera. It's an effort to push for a deal. I think N. Korea is trying to sell weapon grade nuclear fuel to Iran. That will finally justify US to invade Iran. US and N. Korea work hard to show Iran: "see, we are hostile each other. So that nuclear deal is not a Trojan Horse. Pull it into your city."
On 3/17, two US journalists were seized by N. Korea border guards. It's only another soap opera to add a coat of sugar on that poisonous capsule. US is eager to finish the Iran war in 2009. (see "582. Robert Gates' career prolonged for Iran war (1/15/09)")
Similar to the bombing of a Syrian nuclear site on Sept. 6, 2007, Israel also destroyed a nuclear reactor of Iraq in 1981. One thing is very clear: the raids all achieved by "one shot did all." It couldn't be done by regular bomb. It must be done by an accurate guided missile.
I remember the news in 1981 said when Israel attacked the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq, nobody was inside the site except a French technician. (The Osirak nuclear reactor was built by a French company) I think that technician was the one who activated a signal generator without aware of that a missile was running toward him by tracking the signal. Such kind of practice is common in the intelligence world. A typical one was 7/7/05 London bombing. When four sacrifice (government informants) went boarding the underground train with smile, they did what their master told them to do. They never knew their mission was to be a "suicide bomber".
Bombing nuclear site of Syria in 2007 needed accurate inside information too. How do I know North Korea played a role of Trojan Horse? From a news that the President of South Korea made a sudden visit to North Korea and had a summit there. The visit started from 10/2/07, 25 days from the incident "bombing Syria". Obviously it was a payment trip.
Of course the media used to mislead public with big lumps of story such like "Surprising steps at Koreas summit", "North Korea's leader shows little emotion at summit"..... The real meaning was vague in news: Quote, "Worries that South Korea's President Roh Moo Hyun would give away too much had been high..... For the North's leadership, the declaration would yield the economic growth it is seeking without demanding the political change it fears." (By Norimistsu Onishi, New York Times) They promised to open regular cargo railway service crossing their heavily armed border and create a joint fishing zone on their disputed sea frontier. It benefited both sides so it was not a payment.
The real payment was in a sentence: "The countries reiterated a commitment to deliver aid under the February disarmament deal granting the North the equivalent of 1 million tons of fuel oil." So I knew the secret deal was done in February. Seven months later (May, /2008), in another short news, I learned that USAID would supply North Korea 500,000 tons of food based on that February deal.
North Korea was labelled as an evil country by Bush. From time to time it challenges US with missile test, nuclear weapon and war. Yet, it always get generous aid from US that other countries rarely got. With my revelation, you now are able to realize all these are a soap opera to cheat the public, or the targeted enemy such like Syria and Iran.
595. Push Iran to swallow a bait (3/25/09)
On 3/15, I talked about the payment to N. Korea for its role in Syria bombing. (see "593. Payment to North Korea (3/15/09)) Three days later, there was a news.
Re: " N. Korea rejects U.S. food aid
By Foster Klug Associated Press
Washington - North Korea has rejected U.S. food shipments and asked aid groups to leave the country.....
Last May, the U.S. said it would provide 500,000 tons of food to N.Korea.... As part of that agreement, the U.S. delivered 169,000 tons to N. Korea, with the most recent shipment of 5,000 tons of vegetable oil and corn soy blend arriving in January."
(San Jose Mercury, 3/18/09)
It's another swift response to my revelation. When I pointed out the petro dollar was the cause of Iran war, the high oil price went downwards since. When I revealed the fuel aid and food aid were the payment of a secret deal, N. Korea immediately refuses to accept the food aid. Will that change your opinion?
The current events indicate that another plot is going on. N. Korea has played a Trojan Horse in Syria's case. It will play that role again, the target now is Iran.
Early this month, US and South Korea had a joint military maneuvers. N. Korea reacts with alarm and warns it may trigger war. N. Korea warns that it won't guarantee the safety of passenger plane flying near its airspace which forced air liners changed their flight paths. N. Korea also warns a war if US dare to intercept their rocket which will launch a satellite into orbit.
All these are just soap opera. It's an effort to push for a deal. I think N. Korea is trying to sell weapon grade nuclear fuel to Iran. That will finally justify US to invade Iran. US and N. Korea work hard to show Iran: "see, we are hostile each other. So that nuclear deal is not a Trojan Horse. Pull it into your city."
On 3/17, two US journalists were seized by N. Korea border guards. It's only another soap opera to add a coat of sugar on that poisonous capsule. US is eager to finish the Iran war in 2009. (see "582. Robert Gates' career prolonged for Iran war (1/15/09)")