Monday, 25 February 2008

False Flag Prospects, 2008 -- Top Three US Target Cities

By Capt. Eric H. May

The 9/11, 2001 attacks in the United States and the 7/7, 2005 attacks in the United Kingdom both have smoking guns proving that the mass murderers were not foreign terrorists but domestic tyrants. Each country's government was conducting military exercises that simulated the exact events that were to occur.

The US 9/11 Commission stumbled across strong evidence of treason by Dick Cheney when it interviewed Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, who was present in Cheney's famous command bunker as Flight 77 sped toward Washington, DC. Cheney was at the center of national military exercises simulating terrorist hijackings of US aircraft -- at the very time that those hijackings were occurring in real life.
... an objective investigation would have more than enough evidence to warrant impeachment of Bush and Cheney on a charge of high treason, and to summon a grand jury that would indict many others on charges of high treason against Larry Silverstein and other apparent 9/11 collaborators. I believe that the American people, if presented with a single news story containing the five YouTube links above, would demand that the case of high treason be carried to its logical conclusion.

Congress, though, won't impeach the president. The mainstream media, for which I used to write, will not investigate and report the story. The military that was used as a tool to mass murder American citizens will not take action against traitors in uniform who knew exactly what they were doing on 9/11, or the many more uniformed dupes who thought they were conducting military exercises until the events of 9/11 occurred. To this day there have been no adverse actions -- which would require investigation and evaluation -- against any military person involved in what even official apologists call the greatest defense failure in American history. All of this shows that the fix is in, and that we are in a fix.

One of the scenarios touted is the use of a nuclear device (possibly a "suitcase" nuke). In this event the cover for the operation in any targeted city could be very limited. The officials planting the device need only have enough cover so that they & the nuke would be given a "free pass" out of custody in the event of capture. One or two well placed people in positions of authority is all that would be required.

The difference between this action and the previous false flags is that the detonation of a nuclear device would destroy most evidence that might cause one to question the attack. There would be no suspicious signs such as the freefall collapse times of the Twin Towers, or something like the collapse of World Trade Centre 7. There would be no need to do extensive (and detectable) pre-planning as per the 911 demolitions in New York City.

The only questionable aspect of the story might be a post attack "Al Qaeda claim" or the arrest of "middle eastern conspirators" after the fact. There'd be no discernible -smoking gun -physical evidence.

Therefore pushing the truth about 911 is vital in preventing, or at least undermining the success, of a new false flag attack.

No comments: