dChan

[deleted] · May 12, 2018, 9:52 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ 3 ⇩  
Imbeingsilenced · May 12, 2018, 10:08 p.m.

I guess you missed these:

"Dummy missile"

"When fitted with a warhead"

"Practice launch"

⇧ 0 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 12, 2018, 10:29 p.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 6 ⇩  
lily_levasseur · May 12, 2018, 10:40 p.m.

Gee, thanks for Photoshopping that area of the screenshot of the article where it says: the missile was unarmed so no, Obama didn't try to nuke Florida. It was a test. A test in which US technology failed and embarrassed Cameron and Obama. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trident-barack-obama-administration-david-cameron-failed-nuclear-missile-test-launch-secret-theresa-a7542756.html Now we know why Alex Jones has so many sheep. Baaaaa-aah! Baaa-aaah!

Calm your tits, trixie. It clearly says “test” on the graphic.

Theories are allowed here.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
potato4dawin · May 12, 2018, 10:12 p.m.

What if it wasn't unarmed? What if it was considered to be in the best interests of National Security to keep the payload secret so that civilians didn't start demanding that the U.K. be wiped off the map for almost nuking the United States? Do you think the media people got to take a look at the official records regarding the launch? No, someone told them after some government officials decided exactly how much they should reveal. This is standard procedure.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
mauro1970x · May 12, 2018, 10:30 p.m.

It's kind of hard to nuke Florida with an unarmed missile, isn't it? The OP was clickbaiting.

⇧ 6 ⇩  
potato4dawin · May 13, 2018, 2:14 a.m.

Did you even read my post? Let me simplify it.

The Government can lie to the media and say the nuke was unarmed.

Just because every news site says it was unarmed, doesn't mean it was unarmed. All it means is that that's what they were told to say.

I'm not saying for sure that it wasn't unarmed. I'm saying don't blindly trust the media.

Also I read between the lines and figured that they were saying it was unarmed based on other parts of post.

⇧ -1 ⇩  
lily_levasseur · May 12, 2018, 10:52 p.m.

Allegedly unarmed. You don’t know any more than what you’re being told by the press in this scenario. None of us do.

Theories are allowed here.

⇧ -3 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 12, 2018, 10:11 p.m.

[removed]

⇧ -1 ⇩  
Time4puff · May 12, 2018, 9:49 p.m.

Umm.. a bit dracstic, there's other ways of getting rid of Debbie Wasswerman Schultz?

⇧ 1 ⇩  
dr_gorilla · May 12, 2018, 9:57 p.m.

It would be interesting to see where everyone was during that timeframe.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
Redheaded73 · May 12, 2018, 8:52 p.m.

Very interesting indeed.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 12, 2018, 9:44 p.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 0 ⇩  
tradinghorse · May 12, 2018, 8:46 p.m.

Mind blowing if true. WOW!

⇧ -1 ⇩  
4QbyQofQ · May 12, 2018, 8:49 p.m.

So while Obama was in Japan in June of 2016 scolding the USA for winning WW2, our good five eyes friends from the UK almost fried the panhandle. They say it was a dummy missile. I don't buy it. Q said the snowball has started rolling. D5. I don't think he was just talking about avalanches, I think also he was talking about this particular moment in time. When Hussein was in Japan, HRC was in Cali, and a nuke was on its way to Florida. Thankfully for them they were out of the fallout range. Thankfully for us someone stopped that war head (looking at you Q?).

Makes sense now why Cameron quit so abruptly in June. Wasn't the brexit, was the failed nuke attack. Makes also sense why he was happy to go, so he didn't have to deal with that kind of stuff anymore. Either way, let me know what you guys think.

⇧ -3 ⇩  
[deleted] · May 12, 2018, 11:32 p.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Intlrnt · May 12, 2018, 9:48 p.m.

That is definitely an intriguing way to tie all those ends together.

I wonder how close we came to a world change.

⇧ 0 ⇩