The ORIGINAL gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!)
The Pentagon is lying. With all the Navy ships on the east coast, with their Aegis systems, there is no weak spot like they claim. Further, with Andrews, Norfolk , Quantico and numerous other bases in close proximity, you can bet there are constant AWACS in the air. How else would our F-22 fighter pilots (in Virginia)know when to launch against a threat? There is a hidden agenda here, like spying, via camera, on a huge segment of the population. Lying hairballs.
Snort. "guard against" is a nice way of saying detect in time to get to the bunker for the special few. Not much else to do for cruise missiles moving faster than the speed of sound; like the ones the Chinese have in their boomer subs. Recently saw an article on the chicoms subs being able to launch nuclear tipped cruise missiles with >1000 mile range, now this..
Damn they think we're dumb, don't they?
Let's start with some facts. The proposed aircraft aren't "blimps", they're "aerostats"; a tethered LTA device dating back to the Civil war. With modern technology they could surveil a circular "footprint" determined by their altitude and the type of observation tasked. In the real world this "altitude' is restricted by the aerostat size, its payload which includes the weight of its tether. There are also practical limitations due to air traffic which means ensuring avoidance of both the aircraft and its tether. All of these limitations compound with inclement weather. IOW, as others have stated, such a device/system isn't particularly suitable for any routine surveillance task, let alone the "justifying" one ! >Jeff
And will these futuristic air ships have names? Maybe after some of the Marxist Progressive honies they represent? Maybe names such as "Moochelle" Debbie Stabinow, Clare McCaskle, or will the best one be named the Hilda Beast after Thunder Thighs herself? They are what I think of when anyone mentions a blimp.
Post a Comment