Posted on 11/10/2010 9:00:55 AM PST by roses of sharon
Just curious if the timing on this coincided with Obama’s meeting that ran long?
Hmmm. Unless, of course, the missile is on a heading away from the viewer as it is in this case. The plume IS a plume and it appears exactly as should be expected.
If the plume is between the sun and the view, it doesn't matter which way the object is moving. The near side will not be lit, which in this case it obviously is.
Sorry but the government and other people have said it was moving westerly, not easterly. It was headed north west, not east. You had better read up on it some more, not only that look at the video, the object is going north west.
Is that you, Louis?
Conn to Maneuvering. Make turns for 1/2 knot. Do not cavitate.
I don't believe the government said it was moving westerly. As for the 'other people', they have been fooled by an optical illusion.
Nonsense. If you have ever seen a fighter jet with afterburner flying away from you toward the Sun, the flame/plume is clearly visible. The plume on the missile appears strongly exactly at the moment the aspect/trajectory changes, as would be expected if a missile were flying away from you.
ANSWER: To show that DC is within reach.
You didn't address anything related to the relationship of the sun, the view and the lit side of the plume.
I saw many posts by people wanting a source for the FAA quote. I was interested as well, so, I went looking for one.
I just linked what seemed to me to be the first clear quote with a credible source, the Sydney Morning Herald. It didn't take too long.
The FAA quote doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't a missile, but it certainly does run counter to the posts that said that the FAA had said there were no other flights in the area.
Also, the flight log for AWE808 says it traveled from halfway between San Clemente island and the coast to northeast of Poway from 5:05 to 5:08.
I don't know how that matches direction-wise or time-wise with the 'flight 808 contrails' vs missiles argument, but it does seem to corroborate the FAA quote that other planes were in the area.
bookmark
You got that right, but it also shows that Omaha is within reach.
If you've ever sat near LAX and checked out the sky, you can see many planes in the sky in either direction - take off or landing. There is never only ONE.
Which is why THIS contrail is so significant. If the conditions were ripe for such a dense jet contrail, there would be remnants of the previous jet flying through that jet route, and the next jet should be emerging in trail.
We obviously live in the same area. I also was not looking at the sunset that night, so I missed seeing this live. But I agree — we see planes all the time, every day, and sometimes there are white horizontal contrails, but we NEVER see anything like this. EVER. There was one once and I believe it was a test of a missile. Of course we did see the trail of the exploding shuttle, which was very sad to see.
Being used to the sight of planes and contrails off shore, it’s hard to believe this was one. VERY hard to believe.
Just coincidence?
It's 3 a.m. somewhere.
Exactly. There are some days over SoCal where the conditions are right when you will see a huge crosshatching in the sky from all the contrails. My little ones would tell me there was “writing” in the sky.
There is no way that ONE airliner would make this missile-like plume when none of the others were leaving even a faint line.
• The speed of the movement in the sky dismisses the aircraft cover story. Aircraft contrails/chemtrails take a relatively long time to be created and then spread out, compared to this missile shooting up and forming a thick exhaust plume as it went up in a matter of less than a minute. That’s why the shills put up still photos of aircraft contrails, to hide how long they take to form.
• Then there’s the fact that the exhaust plume formed immediately at the missile, rather than after a clear space behind an aircraft that a contrail would need to condense.
• The plume itself is very thick and immediately frothy and doesn’t disperse, like a condensation contrail would.
• There is only one single plume. Aircraft have two engines, and only distance and time seem to blend their contrails together into one. In this case, the missile obviously had only one exhaust point.
• The exhaust plume twisted as it rapidly rose, as would happen with a rotating SLBM missile in it’s first stage of boost. Passenger jets don’t twist unless they’re crashing.
• While Flight 808 might normally have been in the area, the FAA does not declare this was the source of the event, because this flight has been found to have been diverted north around the launch area by the FAA itself in order to avoif “military operations” - that’s why the FAA said that there was no aircraft in the area.
• US military assets would not have allowed any launch-capable platforms so close to the continental US - count on it, that is job number 1. But if it did somehow happen, let alone been the source of a presumable nuke missile launch - the sea 35 miles off of LA would have been instantly turned into a frothing, churning steam of radiactive hell by our immediate response against the launch platform, and we would have been put on war footing at the same time.
So the remaining facts are:
1) WE launched an SLBM from a sub within visible range of LA, during the day, and had it filmed, all so “we” would be sure it was seen.
2) Now “we” are denying any launch and any missile and dropping the event from the media radar as fast as possible.
Conclusions:
1) We DID mean to do exactly what is happening - let everyone see it, and then deny it. Goal? To expose the population to something not only very scary, but directly linked to war, that they clearly understand, and then force them to accept our denial of it and our ridiculous cover story. Why? All I can think of is psyop - crush the population every harder into frightened obedience, vulnerability, despair, frustrated rage and fear of attack, because that’s exactly what the effect actually now IS. The question therefore is, who does this serve, and why?
2) We did NOT mean to do what is exactly happening - which means something went wrong, presumably after launch because the launch environment seems as if it was set up for viewing, and thus under control. Which leads to the question, what then went wrong? Where was the missile supposed to go? Did it get there? Was it armed? Was it a nuke? Where is it now? And above all, what was the original intent?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.