Author Topic: Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran  (Read 1140 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bpocatch

  • Lieutenant General
  • ***
  • Posts: 5336
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Offline EyeBelieve

  • General of the Army
  • *****
  • Posts: 8632
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2012, 10:05:37 PM »
http://tinyurl.com/d9uavbt

We're emboldened by success of PNAC theories.  Free Speech means treasonous war-mongering is OK.

Offline bpocatch

  • Lieutenant General
  • ***
  • Posts: 5336
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #2 on: September 27, 2012, 02:19:03 AM »
We're emboldened by success of PNAC theories.  Free Speech means treasonous war-mongering is OK.

Murdering an Iranian submarine crew is doing G.ds work.

Fascinating how he cited the other (Admiralty) actions Gulf of Tonkin, USS Maine, Lusitania... and how "we" had to wait for them (get revenge in the goyim mind).

Jesus walked on the water (Admiralty).

Offline EyeBelieve

  • General of the Army
  • *****
  • Posts: 8632
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2012, 07:58:55 PM »
Murdering an Iranian submarine crew is doing G.ds work.

Fascinating how he cited the other (Admiralty) actions Gulf of Tonkin, USS Maine, Lusitania... and how "we" had to wait for them (get revenge in the goyim mind).

Jesus walked on the water (Admiralty).

Interesting allusion there since Rome (& other Mediterranean empires) heavily depended on sea travel.  Perhaps Jesus walking on the water was a subtle dig against Roman Admiralty Law?  Further I note that current standard propaganda claims British law was a progressive revolt against previous forms but just now I see several web pages noting that British (esp Admiralty) law was heavily based on Roman sources.  Also I hadn't realized that those previous false-flags you mention all involved ships.  That is I knew about the incidents, just never thought about them in re to sea travel/admiralty.  OTOH doing a false-flag is simply much easier on the water with fewer witnesses.

Offline laconas

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 13653
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2012, 08:06:44 PM »
The big secret at this time is drone mini submarines in the Persian Gulf.

Who would have thought? ::)
Nobody censors what they agree with



Offline EyeBelieve

  • General of the Army
  • *****
  • Posts: 8632
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #7 on: September 27, 2012, 09:48:04 PM »
Thanks. I had not seen the LA piece. I just put 2+2 together and had even mentioned sub drones here about a year ago.

I guess the more important point is how to generate false-flags when JMSM trumpets superb skill of MIC.  Hopefully Obama will be encouraged by his election mandate & not have to wait for excuses to attack.

Offline laconas

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 13653
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #8 on: September 27, 2012, 10:18:25 PM »
I guess the more important point is how to generate false-flags when JMSM trumpets superb skill of MIC.  Hopefully Obama will be encouraged by his election mandate & not have to wait for excuses to attack.

We all know the fix is in for the black bastard son of a teenage whore--nothing will happen till after the election results are in.
Nobody censors what they agree with

Offline jacob gold

  • Troll
  • General of the Army
  • *
  • Posts: 9200
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2012, 04:39:51 AM »
Israel is precious - 4.8 million Zhids

Offline wag

  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 10423
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2012, 07:04:26 AM »
When it detects a mine, the undersea craft obliterates itself as well as the mine.[/color][/url]


Can you call it a victory when the value of the prize is overwhelmed by the cost of obtaining it?
Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.

Offline Wulfgar

  • First Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 633
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Not willingly committed.
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2012, 08:45:27 AM »
The front page of the newspapers all had focus on Netenyajew's plea at the UN with the photo of his cartoon bomb chart.  Of course, every article was written by a Jew.

Offline bpocatch

  • Lieutenant General
  • ***
  • Posts: 5336
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #12 on: September 29, 2012, 02:05:37 AM »
Interesting allusion there since Rome (& other Mediterranean empires) heavily depended on sea travel.  Perhaps Jesus walking on the water was a subtle dig against Roman Admiralty Law? 

The Suits in Admiralty Act 3[3] is a law where the United States specifically waives its immunity in three situations:

(1) If the admiralty suit involves a vessel [key word] of the United States. Once we look into the definition of the word

2[2] Benedicts on Admiralty
3[3] Title: 46: U. S. A. Codes, Appendix, Chapter 20 §§ 742-749,

vessel, we will discover that any of the actors working for the United States are vessels, enabling us properly to apply this provision within our case.

In Benedicts on Admiralty, one finds that the description of a vessel is so vague, that anything can be a vessel. We are all vessels; human bags carrying “sea water.” “Our blood has the same specific gravity as sea water.” 4[4] In the Bible, a woman is described as the “weaker vessel.”

(2) Cases that involve cargo belonging to the U.S.. Within the context of our case, when the cargo [the paperwork] of the United States harms us, the United States gives us a blanket waiver of immunity, or three, if the United States could be sued in the admiralty if it were a private party. Since we are going into an international jurisdiction, (a set aside, fenced territory) every time we go into the court, we are entitled to sue the United States in the admiralty if the United States were a private party.

Offline EyeBelieve

  • General of the Army
  • *****
  • Posts: 8632
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
- Israel Lobbyist insinuating We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
« Reply #13 on: September 29, 2012, 03:50:55 PM »
The Suits in Admiralty Act 3[3] is a law where the United States specifically waives its immunity in three situations:

(1) If the admiralty suit involves a vessel [key word] of the United States. Once we look into the definition of the word

2[2] Benedicts on Admiralty
3[3] Title: 46: U. S. A. Codes, Appendix, Chapter 20 §§ 742-749,

vessel, we will discover that any of the actors working for the United States are vessels, enabling us properly to apply this provision within our case.

In Benedicts on Admiralty, one finds that the description of a vessel is so vague, that anything can be a vessel. We are all vessels; human bags carrying “sea water.” “Our blood has the same specific gravity as sea water.” 4[4] In the Bible, a woman is described as the “weaker vessel.”

(2) Cases that involve cargo belonging to the U.S.. Within the context of our case, when the cargo [the paperwork] of the United States harms us, the United States gives us a blanket waiver of immunity, or three, if the United States could be sued in the admiralty if it were a private party. Since we are going into an international jurisdiction, (a set aside, fenced territory) every time we go into the court, we are entitled to sue the United States in the admiralty if the United States were a private party.

Dunno if exactly relevant but I remember post-Katrina about the incident where a ship foundered just off-shore next to England.  (White) Brits looted enthusiastically (much stuff was quite valuable like BMW motos)--MSM portrayed it as a big lark & claimed it was OK under some old nautical rule.  UK cops eventually put a stop to the looting though MSM never admitted the old finders-keepers rule had long been superceded & the looting was a violation of current Brit statute or admiralty law.  Aside from the wildly different treatment MSM accorded black New Orleans looters than that of the white Brit looters, it's interesting how the MSM shied away from mentioning admiralty law.