Nukes on America/Chirac raises threat of nuclear strikes

Fifth Way

Jedi Council Member
If you read the actual news stories already just skip through my comments.
First I saw this article (including sott comment) below:

Chirac raises threat of nuclear strikes
Aljazeera
20 January 2006
Jacques Chirac, the French president, has provoked concern and criticism from opposition parties at home and in Germany after suggesting the threat of a nuclear strike against any state that launches terrorist attacks on French soil.

It was the first time Chirac has spoken publicly of nuclear action against foreign countries and he said France's doctrine of nuclear deterrence has now been extended to protect the country's strategic supplies, taken to mean oil.

Speaking during a visit to a French nuclear base in Brittany, Chirac said: "Leaders of any state that uses terrorist means against us, as well as any that may be envisaging - in one way or another - using weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would be exposing themselves to a firm and appropriate response on our behalf.

"That response could be conventional, it could also be of another nature," he said in a clear reference to nuclear weapons.

"Our world is marked by the emergence of affirmations of power that rely on the possession of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons"

Jacques Chirac
The president said he was extending the definition of "vital interests" protected by France's nuclear umbrella to include allies and "strategic supplies".

The French press understood "strategic supplies" to include oil.

Le Monde newspaper said that was aimed at "probably also those countries from which France imports part of its energy needs".

Graduated response

"If, theoretically, such interests were threatened by regional powers - Iran, North Korea? - France would react," the paper said.

The French president, however, did not single out any country in his speech.

He did indicate, though, that the previous Cold War stance of threatening massive and widespread destruction against enemies had been changed to a doctrine permitting a graduated and limited nuclear response.

France has configured its nuclear arsenal to be able to respond "flexibly and reactively" to any threat, by reducing the number of nuclear heads on certain missiles on board its submarines, he said.

"Our world is marked by the emergence of affirmations of power that rely on the possession of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons," he said.

In an apparent reference to Iran, Chirac condemned "the temptation by certain countries to obtain nuclear capabilities in contravention of treaties".

Cold War echoes

There was mixed reaction to Chirac's statements.

In France the former prime minister Laurent Fabius, speaking on behalf of the Socialists, said there was nothing shocking about the position put forward.

But Helene Luc, a senator from the Communist Party and member of a defence committee, said: "This extension of the concept of nuclear dissuasion takes us back years to the Cold War and can only deepen tensions with countries that aspire to have such weapons."

The comments also provoked concerned reactions in Germany, from across the political spectrum and the press.

There was no official comment from Angela Merkel's coalition government but opposition MP Winfried Nachtwei said Chirac's comments were "totally adventurous" and "irresponsible".

Andreas Schockenhoff, the deputy president of Merkel's parliamentary party said in an interview on Friday with the regional daily Koelner Stadtanzeiger: "I fear that these comments will not help the international community achieve the highest level of solidarity."

The comments were also widely criticised in German newspapers.

Chirac's comment's are "clearly counterproductive," the economic daily Handelsblatt said.

The Westdeutsche Zeitung in Duesseldorf said: "Chirac's threat is not only unwise, but also counterproductive, because it leads to believe that diplomatic means are very limited in the face of nuclear ambitions."

Comment: Note that "The French president, however, did not single out any country in his speech."

Chirac's exact words were:

"Leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, just like anyone who would envisage using, in one way or another, arms of mass destruction, must understand that they would expose themselves to a firm and fitting response from us," he said. "This response could be conventional. It could also be of another nature." [...]

Notice that Chirac drew a subtle distinction between states using terrorist means and states that envisage using WMDs...

Most curious, yes?

This makes SOtT wonder if Chirac wasn't actually sending a
message to someone in particular while making it seem that it was for Iran? Maybe the the French know something about who is really behind the "terrorist" attacks and know that they are "false flag operations"? Maybe the French know that so-called terrorist attacks can occur in order to compel participation in illegal wars, even the upcoming war with Iran?

Certainly, if Chirac's words were for Iran, then he was suddenly being more hawkish than the Neocons themselves and that is totally non-French!

So, let us consider the idea that his words were aimed at "someone else" who he knew would be listening and take a look at some things that the C's said:

13/Oct/01

Q: (L) And what might the next major act of terrorism be that will... (A) It may be somewhere in Europe to convince the European countries [to join the U.S. war against Iraq]. (L) So, whoever is protesting the most is the one that is
likely to get hit in some way? (A) But, on the other
hand, it may not be easy for America to produce something there [such as 9-11], since it is much easier to produce
"terrorist" events in America where they have complete
control of everything. (L) If they try to do it elsewhere, they are liable to get caught.
A: France may be hit next with nuke.

21/Sept/02

Q: (L) Is this bombing of Iraq that George Bush wants - is there any way to stop this gang from going to war?
A: No.
Q: (L) Are all of my efforts in that respect wasted?
A: No.
Q: (L) Well, if my efforts to stop the bombing are not wasted, and yet the bombing is going to continue, what's the point?
A: Efforts will result in different return.
Q: (L) If we move, [as C's suggested] does that just mean move from this house to another nearby, or out of the country?
A: France.
Q: (L) I thought you said France was going to get hit by a nuke?
A: Still possible but less probable.
Q: (L) Is the United States going to be hit by nukes?
A: No doubt.



6/Aug/05

Q: (Ing) Why are the French putting so much energy into the Int. Thermo-Nuclear Experimental Reactor? Supposedly because we are going to be short of oil...
A: It keeps people busy and it keeps the Bush gang happy. You don't think France "buys" all that nonsense do you? It has to buy time and space to maneuver.
Q: (J) So they are playing dumb in terms of the "end
of the world"?
A: Dumb like a fox!
Q: (Ing) So are there two groups, one in France and one in the US and they are not allies?
A: Not at present. But everyone has to consider that fun gang of stooges for Yahweh. They don't play nice.

In any event, one thing is certain: after the holidays, the pathocrats have stepped up the process leading to Total War in the Middle East.

SOtT thanks Andres Perez-Alonso for analysis.
Now here is my point:

Living in the US naturally this C-comment stuck with me:

Laura/Cs said:
21/Sept/02

Q: (L) Is the United States going to be hit by nukes?
A: No doubt.
And now I find this:

http://www.rense.com/general69/hit.htm
Signposts Lead To
Imminent Nuclear Attack
Intel Army Capt. Eric May Issues 'Red Alert'
For Next 9 Days For Texas City-Houston Area

By Greg Szymanski
1-26-6

Capt. May claims to have broken the Illuminati and Bush Cabal's "embedded code" in an effort to beat the neocons at their own nasty game. Capt. May may have thwarted one attempted nuclear attack last July, but says the Bush Cabal is coming back again for a second try.

The January air is again filled with rumblings about an imminent nuclear attack on American soil, as ominous signs are popping up all over the place indicating the "dropping of the real potato" is right around the corner.

Sources inside the military and close to the action this week warned areas of "nuclear concern" within the next 10 to 90 days include Texas City, Tex., the Houston metro area, Charleston, S.C., Los Angeles, Ca., and Kansas City, Ka.

"I am worried," said Jon Watkins of Texas City. "My family is right in the middle of it. I have asked two police officers to keep an eye out for any suspicious activity during the next 10 days.

"I also am sending a copy to the FBI of the interview I heard today on Greg Szymanski's, Investigative Journal, where his guest, Army Capt. Eric May, presented compelling evidence that a nuclear attack, created by the Bush Cabal, could very well take place on or near Jan. 31, 2006, right here in Texas City."

And From east coast to west, people like Watkins from all walks of life, including military and civilian, are coming forward with stories about "an impending disaster," most of them linking the insidious Bush Cabal pushing the "nuke buttons," not the fictitious and Illuminati-created Al Qaeda terrorists.


For the rest of the story, go to www.arcticbeacon.com
Personally I feel that our ponerolic leaders are presently in such bad shape that only another, bigger 911-type event would turn it around for them.

Any insight anybody?
 
Fifth Way said:
Signposts Lead To
Imminent Nuclear Attack
Intel Army Capt. Eric May Issues 'Red Alert'
For Next 9 Days For Texas City-Houston Area

By Greg Szymanski
1-26-6

Capt. May claims to have broken the Illuminati and Bush Cabal's "embedded code" in an effort to beat the neocons at their own nasty game. Capt. May may have thwarted one attempted nuclear attack last July, but says the Bush Cabal is coming back again for a second try.

The January air is again filled with rumblings about an imminent nuclear attack on American soil, as ominous signs are popping up all over the place indicating the "dropping of the real potato" is right around the corner.

Sources inside the military and close to the action this week warned areas of "nuclear concern" within the next 10 to 90 days include Texas City, Tex., the Houston metro area, Charleston, S.C., Los Angeles, Ca., and Kansas City, Ka.

"I am worried," said Jon Watkins of Texas City. "My family is right in the middle of it. I have asked two police officers to keep an eye out for any suspicious activity during the next 10 days.

"I also am sending a copy to the FBI of the interview I heard today on Greg Szymanski's, Investigative Journal, where his guest, Army Capt. Eric May, presented compelling evidence that a nuclear attack, created by the Bush Cabal, could very well take place on or near Jan. 31, 2006, right here in Texas City."

And From east coast to west, people like Watkins from all walks of life, including military and civilian, are coming forward with stories about "an impending disaster," most of them linking the insidious Bush Cabal pushing the "nuke buttons," not the fictitious and Illuminati-created Al Qaeda terrorists.


For the rest of the story, go to www.arcticbeacon.com
This is all very interesting, heres a link to an audio interview with Capt May:-

http://www.government-propaganda.com/nuke-attack.html
 
Fifth Way said:
Personally I feel that our ponerolic leaders are presently in such bad shape that only another, bigger 911-type event would turn it around for them.

Any insight anybody?
Kind of dosen't bear thinking about. But then many things have come to pass that were inconceiveable just a few short years ago. Question is, if the pathocrats are as desperate as we think they are, will they just detonate a nuke somewhere in the US and then claim it was Iran with no proof? In such a case, how many Americans would believe them?

It seems that it may well come down to a test of the strength of popular belief in that age old idea that "our leaders wouldn't do that". What scenario, if any, would ever cause ordinary citizens to contemplate the reality of the idea that their own elected officials would attack them on their own soil?

Time will tell I suppose. But we should all keep our eyes and ears very much open over the next few months. With past experience under our belts, there may well be the opportunity to see the next false flag coming.

Joe
 
The Northwood documents make me believe they would be willing to do almost anything.

The article says this could happen on the 31st, the day of the State of the Union address and the day of Islamic New Year.

Convenient timing eh?

Capt Mays purpouse in all of this is to make as much of a public fuss as possible to try and avoid it happening, lets hope he is successful.
 
Back
Top Bottom