In depth look at the possibility of a nuclear attack to coincide with an invasion of America :

In depth look at the possibility of a nuclear attack to coincide with an invasion of America

IS THERE A PLAN TO INVADE THE UNITED STATES?


Article by Lipper Intel Hub Radio

Intel Hub – A few months go, I was made aware of the fact that there is a plan to invade the United States of America. This plan, it seems has been in place for quite some time, years as a matter of fact. Over the next few weeks I will do my best to show the evidence of this plan.  If you have any information you would like to contribute, please email  writers@theintelhub.com and it will be forwarded to me. My hope is that when we are finished, we will be able to make a definitive decision in regards to this subject. Some of you will agree with me and some of you, at times, will disagree. That being said, I welcome all criticism and support you may have to offer offer…

  • Before we get started we need to clarify that at this moment this subject is theory. Here is the definition of theory, provided by Dictionary Reference
  1. A coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein’s theory of relativity.
  2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
  3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
  4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
  5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
  6. contemplation or speculation.
  7. guess or conjecture.

Origin:
1590–1600; < LL theōria < Gk theōría a viewing, contemplating, equiv. to theōr(eîn) to view + -ia -y3

Can be confused: hypothesis, law, theory (see synonym note at this entry).

-Synonyms
1. Theory, hypothesis are used in non-technical contexts to mean an untested idea or opinion. A theory in technical use is a more or less verified or established explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena: the theory of relativity. A hypothesis is a conjecture put forth as a possible explanation of phenomena or relations, which serves as a basis of argument or experimentation to reach the truth: This idea is only a hypothesis.

On an interesting side note the theory of evolution is just that (a theory). I mention this because many people today believe that the theory of evolution is fact. Perhaps that is a discussion for another time.

My intent is to find all the information I can on this matter, from many different sources. You may not agree with all the sources I reference, but I have found over time that “truth is stranger than fiction.” I am certain we will find some truth in all sources referenced and many theories. We are going to start with the article below which is recent and then we will backtrack to other sources. I will let you decide whether or not we are being prepared for some sort of nuclear attack here in the  homeland. I have listed the source of this article below as well.

Why is FEMA trying to cover up NLE 10?


14 April 2010

Public Intelligence

Public Intelligence has received a request from FEMA to remove a “For Official Use Only” document regarding the National Level Exercise 2010 (NLE 10), which was scheduled for this coming May. The exercise was to be based on National Planning Scenario 1 which simulates a nuclear detonation in a U.S. city. However, recent political pressure has led to the exercise being “scaled back” according to the Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor and a variety of other publications. At the behest of Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), the exercise’s Nevada events have reportedly been canceled and the FEMA website now shows no mention of NLE 10.

On top of this, the Obama [Slick Barry] administration has recently been emphasizing the threat of a domestic nuclear attack. President Obama’s [Slick Barry's] remarks at the Nuclear Security Summit on April 13, 2010 emphasize that the threat of terrorists using nuclear weapons inside of major metropolitan cities is one of the “greatest threats” that the world faces:

Two decades after the end of the Cold War, we face a cruel irony of history — the risk of a nuclear confrontation between nations has gone down, but the risk of nuclear attack has gone up.

Nuclear materials that could be sold or stolen and fashioned into a nuclear weapon exist in dozens of nations. Just the smallest amount of plutonium — about the size of an apple — could kill and injure hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Terrorist networks such as al Qaeda, with intelligence help, have tried to acquire the material for a nuclear weapon, and if they ever succeeded, they would surely use it. Were they to do so, it would be a catastrophe for the world — causing extraordinary loss of life, and striking a major blow to global peace and stability.

In short, it is increasingly clear that the danger of nuclear terrorism is one of the greatest threats to global security — to our collective security.

NLE 10 concerned itself with exactly this scenario: the detonation of a nuclear device inside of a U.S. city. Las Vegas was to be the epicenter of this hypothetical attack and, if the exercise utilized the same circumstances as National Planning Scenario 1, it would have involved “hundreds of thousands” of casualties, more than 300,000 refugees and ultimately more than 1 million displaced persons.

The unpopularity of such a scenario, regardless of its security benefits, is obvious. What is strange is the attempt that is now being made by FEMA to eliminate references to the exercises and remove from circulation a document that has played an important role in drawing attention to the exercise. As the state of NLE 10 is unclear at the moment, it is difficult to say whether the request is truly motivated by security or whether there is a more dubious intention.


I believe that we are going to see some sort of major disaster here in the United States in the very near future. Whether this disaster is natural or fabricated is yet to be seen. This disaster will open the door for the coming invasion I have theorized. The invaders will be led by none other than China and Russia; other players will be introduced as we move forward. I will leave you for now with the following article:

Advertisement


U.S. secrets aboard latest Chinese sub

By Bill Gertz

Washington, December 6, 1999


China is beginning work on a new strategic submarine that will be targeted against U.S. nuclear forces and carry missiles with small warheads similar to American weapons, The Washington Times has learned.

The People’s Liberation Army Navy will start construction in the next several weeks on its first Type 094 missile submarine, according to Pentagon and other administration officials with access to intelligence reports.

Preparations for the construction were detected by U.S. spy agencies and reported to senior Pentagon officials late last month. The submarine will carry a smaller underwater variant of China’s new DF-31 — Continued from Front Page — intercontinental ballistic missile, which was flight-tested in August.

The JL-2 submarine-launched missile to be deployed on the Type 094 and the DF-31 are the first strategic systems that will contain stolen U.S. warhead and missile secrets, the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told The Times.

That view contradicts claims of other administration officials who believe there is no evidence so far that Chinese strategic weapons will be copied from U.S. systems.

According to the intelligence officials, the new Type 094 is being built to provide “a strategic deterrent” to the United States. Both the JL-2 and the first Type 094 are expected to be deployed around 2005 or 2006. The JL-2 also is known as the Julang-2 and will have a range of about 7,400 miles. Julang means Great Wave in Chinese.

“These missiles will be able to hit any place in the United States, not just the Western states,” said one official. “That’s a significant new capability.” The Type 094 will carry 12 or 16 JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missiles that were described in one intelligence report as a smaller version of the DF-31.

U.S. intelligence agencies in mid-November also spotted a Chinese Golf-class missile submarine that is being used as a test bed for the JL-2. The submarine sailed from Zhenjiang to Lushung. The transit was a sign the Chinese are preparing for the first sea-launch test of the JL-2.

The missile also is expected by Pentagon officials to carry China’s newest small warhead that is believed to be copied from the U.S. W-88 warhead deployed on U.S. Trident D-5 submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

China obtained design information on the W-88 warhead in the 1980s and a Chinese official disclosed the loss to the CIA in 1995. An investigation of the warhead compromise is focused on Wen Ho Lee, a computer scientist who was dismissed from his job at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and who is suspected of passing warhead secrets to China. He has denied the charge.

According to a congressional report on Chinese technology theft released earlier this year, the new Type 094 submarine will provide the People’s Republic of China (PRC) with new strategic nuclear capabilities that will increase the threat to the United States.

The report by the special panel headed by Rep. Christopher Cox, California Republican, stated that the JL-2′s 7,400-mile range allows it “to be launched from the PRC’s territorial waters and to strike targets throughout the United States.” “This range will allow a significant change in the operation and tactics of the PRC’s nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines,” the report, based on classified intelligence reports, stated.

“Instead of venturing into the open ocean to attack the United States, the Type 094-class submarines could remain near PRC waters, protected by the PLA Navy and Air Force.”

The Cox committee report also said the submarines are part of a new Chinese nuclear strategy of developing weapons that are more “survivable” against U.S. nuclear missiles. The submarines provide such survivability because they are hard to detect. China has deployed one Xia-class nuclear missile submarine but defense officials said it rarely leaves ports and appears to be in disrepair.

The Type 094 will replace that Xia-class submarine and provide much more advanced capabilities than a second Xia submarine still under construction.

In addition to the new missile submarines, China also is building a new attack submarine known as the Type O93 that will be equipped with underwater-fired cruise missiles.

Defense officials said U.S. intelligence agencies based their assessment of the new submarine on sensitive intelligence gathered from U.S. spy satellites. The Pentagon is closely watching China’s strategic nuclear force buildup, they said.

The trade publication Jane’s Defense Weekly reported in August that China had begun construction of a new nuclear-powered submarine at the Huludao shipyard on the Bohai Gulf northeast of Beijing. The magazine said it is not known if it is the new missile submarine or the first of China’s new class of attack submarines.

The intelligence report last week stated that China already is building the first of its new attack submarines — Type 093 — and is in the process of completing construction of the last Xia-class missile submarine. The new Xia submarine is being modified so it can launch the new longer-range JL-2s. Those submarines currently carry shorter-range missiles than the JL-2.

A senior U.S. intelligence official said in April that stolen U.S. nuclear warhead secrets will be built into new Chinese missiles in a “matter of years.” The official said some W-88 warhead data obtained by the Chinese “could only have been obtained from espionage.”

The senior intelligence official said that the stolen U.S. nuclear data means “future Chinese weapons will look more like ours.” The official spoke to reporters on the outcome of a classified CIA damage assessment of Chinese nuclear spying.

However, retired Air Force Gen. Eugene Habiger, the new security chief at the Energy Department, told reporters Wednesday “the jury is still out” on whether China’s new strategic weapons will contain stolen U.S. nuclear weapons secrets. The retired general was formerly the U.S. Strategic Command leader and has disagreed in the past with CIA estimates.

The Chinese submarine missile development highlights the need for deploying a national missile defense, said a congressional defense specialist. “This is evidence that China is moving rapidly toward the deployment of a modern, survivable long-range missile force at a time when it faces no threat whatsoever,” the aide said.

Pentagon and State Department spokesmen in the past have dismissed China’s strategic nuclear weapons development as non-threatening and a normal process of military modernization.

In addition to stolen U.S. technology, the new missile submarine also is expected to contain technology provided by Russia, including advanced nuclear reactors and special propellers that will make the submarines harder to detect underwater.

To be continued….

Photobucket

Generated image
Join the Intel News Feed:

Like us on Facebook

The Intel Hub News Brief Podcast Series - Listen and Download Now!

Print Friendly
Blubrry player!


Comments are closed.