Friday, January 29, 2010

Missiles over Canada, Part Deux

Missiles over Canada. I covered this a bit in yesterday's post, here.
So, what do we have?
We have 3 missiles over Newfoundland, Harbour Mille to be specific. We have witnesses, we have photographs.
Descriptions of the object, have the missile as long as a transport truck. One of the eye witnesses was initially told by the RCMP that the missiles originated from the territorial island of France, St. Pierre and Miquelon.
She says an RCMP officer called her at home twice and confirmed her suspicion that what the three neighbours saw were in fact missiles and were fired from the French islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon, about 25 kilometres off the southern coast of N.L.
"[The officer] said it was a missile and it was sent off over the French islands, and it was set off by the army over there," Ms. Pardy said.
"The investigation is ongoing and we will be working with our various partners," he said. "At this point it is not a criminal investigation so we will be doing very minor checks on it."


  1. My hypotheses (gut feeling entirly, no corroborating data): it's an israhellish launch and our* Sionist in chief (a.k.a. Sarkonazi) provides covering up.

    * I am allowed to say our because I'm French, even if I haven't voted for him.

  2. Personally I believe that the first one was nothing but swamp gas and due to atmospheric conditions at the time simply took on the shape of a French Missile, the second was nothing but a weather balloon that just happened to be shaped like A French missile and the third was nothing but the Frogs attempt at flying a piñata with which to shower party favors and goodies upon Western Canadians just as they have been doing for several hundred years.

    Thats my take on this anyway.

  3. Gallier, are you trying to kill me!
    If Israel is involved and sarkozy covers up... see my post on Verint doing security and you can see why I am nearing heart attack status!

  4. Silverfish, why I hardly recognize ya!

    you forgot aliens ;)

  5. You guys are all morons. Where was NORAD in this? Busy with other things, because this wasn't a missile. There's no reason France or any other country would engage in such a provocative act. If neither Canada or the US were aware of this, this is tantamount to a declaration of war.

    My guess? Three old women in Newfoundland either don't know what they're talking about or they're in on the hoax. Every single expert has already dismissed this claim.

  6. wow anonymous!

    You KNOW for a fact it wasn't a missile?

    Tell us then how do you KNOW?

    And since you KNOW that, why don't you enlighten Canada as to what it is?

    Because all the "experts" have dismissed this claim, and apparently you are an expert?

  7. It's Peter MacKay who said it was aliens, when he promised to build the landing strip for the UFOs.

    All joking aside, as usual the gov. has handled this poorly. Just say what it bloody well was and get over it - or invent a good lie, like they usually do.

  8. Morons!!MORONS?!!!! Well I never. The little woman calls me that all the time, but she's got a reason. I'll be dammed if I'm gonna take that from some creepy shit that won't even leave a name.

  9. Yeah, Penny, pretty much. I'm not going to go into my credentials right now.

    Ask yourself, what would France have to gain by launching a missile that close to Canada and NOT telling anyone about it?

    Now ask yourself, what would they have to LOSE???

    Now remember the old idiom, "the simplest explanation is usually the right one". Fact #1, France, Russia, and all other countries with SLBMs announce EVERY missile test before they do it, as well as the location. This is done for one simple fact - so seagoing mariners don't go to that area. Obviously it's a safety hazard.

    Fact #2. This is one picture taken by a few Newfoundlander women. Yeah, it's rocket-shaped. So is a kids' science experiment. You call my credentials into question, but how about theirs? I wonder if they've ever seen missile launches previously to compare this with.

    Fact #3. France has NOTHING to gain by secretly testing SLBMs in Canadian waters. They are a NATO ally, and not only would this anger Canada's government, but the US as well. There's no strategic reason for it.

    There's a reason why the government is making light of this matter.

  10. There's a reason "Silverfish". Enjoy your conspiracy theories though.

  11. anonymous, who is claiming to be an expert? What is your name? Because in this article a professor, who is putting his name and reputation on the line is giving his opinion and clearly there is no expert consensus as you are espousing.

    Experts differ on whether UFOs are missiles, models

    Aerospace specialists are split on whether objects spotted in the sky over Newfoundland this week were dangerous missiles, or simply model rockets.

    Dr. David Greatrix, a professor of Aerospace Engineering at Ryerson University in Toronto said he is 90 per cent certain the objects in the photographs are military rockets.

    “This is not an amateur rocket. This is more likely a military missile,” said Greatrix, who specializes in rocket propulsion.

    “If it was an amateur rocket launched from a boat as a joke, it’s possible, but the trajectory of that angle, you’d see it more vertical,” he said. The women described the objects as travelling diagonally upwards

  12. Penny, if it was a surface to air missile, don't you think there'd be a launcher somewhere?

    No ship in the vicinity, and subs don't have sub-surface launched SAMs, so what does that leave? Launched from the ground?

  13. Penny, I think you are being a little hard on our new friend. He's obviously been released a tad early from the Hasbara Academy and is probably on probation as far as the payroll dept is concerned. So I say, let's give him a name for a start, how about Harry Hasbarat, and give him a leg up in the business?

    So are you listening Harry? First up, you started by calling your audience 'morons'. It's a turn-off, no? And you want them on-side, yes? Got it? Good. So start with something a little ego stroking such as, "Those are some very good observations." And then introduce some doubts. OK?
    What you don't do is introduce open questions such as this, "Where was NORAD in this? because some of the smarties in the audience are going to fill it in in their minds with answers such as, "Banging each other, most likely". You see? it ruins the gravitas you want.
    "Busy with other things, . . " (yeah, well i think we have covered that) because this wasn't a missile". Now this is wrong because you've gone all black and white on us. Your audience is a bunch of smarties, right? And smarties don't like being told they're wrong. So you've got to introduce doubt.
    And when you're all knowing, then someone else will introduce doubt to what you say just like Penny did when she nailed you on not KNOWING and then KNOWING. Bang,. . egg on face straight away. See?

    "There's no reason France or any other country would engage in such a provocative act." Black and white again and you're gunna provoke those responses in the minds of these smarties as mentioned above. They're going to fill in a reason and with their dirty little minds it will probably be something like, "Yeah, bangin' each other and thumping the launch console to the rhythm of, "yes, Yes, YES"!!! It was three missiles that were shot off, wasn't it" So you got to keep this serious, you know. Gravitas, remember?

    "If neither Canada (n)or the US were aware of this, this is tantamount to a declaration of war" Well, for a start, declaring war is old hat. We don't do that any more. And get your grammar right. Who is declaring war, anyway? You've got to point the finger at your enemy but not directly, right? No point otherwise (notice the pun?) We're smarter now.

    "My guess?" Nobody (wave!) wants to know your fucking guess, OK? I'm being a little hard on you there, Harry, using 'smartie talk'. It's for your own good. The object is to keep the smarties guessing.

    "Three old women in Newfoundland either don't know what they're talking about or they're in on the hoax." Everyone's got a grandmother, so don't go there. And grandmothers don't go in for conspiratorial hoaxes. This just makes you look nutty and you, especially, want to avoid that. Again, it's all or nothing. You gotta leave yourself some wriggle room.

    Every single expert has already dismissed this claim" Remember you are appealing to smarties and smarties don't like experts 'cause that's why they're 'smarties'. See? They have this idiot idea that they know as much or more than trained mouthpieces whose pay and positions are dependant on what they say. And I'm going to have to do 'broken record' on your arse here, Harry. Remember what I just said about black and white, all or nothing. Keep that up and all you will end up with in your hand is either white or nothing.
    So pull yourself together, Harry, and see if you can come at this again from a different angle. I know you can do it. I know you pull it off, Harry.

    And no need to thank me; it's been a pleasure to give a nice young man like yourself a helping hand.

  14. And btw, I saw that article. I think this "expert" is going to end up looking quite foolish. Nice of you to take the whole second half of the article out, which provides a far better explanation as why this is almost certainly not a military missile.

  15. First of all there were three missiles, not one.

    Second of all, maybe it was France, maybe it wasn't. Merely following the news here.

    Therefore, if it wasn't them(France). why would they announce it?

    "Fact #1, France, Russia, and all other countries with SLBMs announce EVERY missile test before they do it"

    So your saying there is no such thing as secret military testing?

    I call your credentials in to question because your the one making claims to be an expert.

    The ladies who took the photos are not making those claims.

    There could be many reasons why the government is making light of it.
    Secret testing, military exercises?
    Who knows?

  16. Conspiracy theorists ≠ "smarties".

  17. Penny, there's a really good reason why you can't test missiles in flight in secret - a) it's visible to anyone within a pretty good chunk of distance and b) it's visible to pretty much ANYONE (i.e. NORAD, any number of Western countries, Russia, China, etc) with surveillance satellites.

    I think this story pretty much illustrates why you can't test missiles - at least in flight - in secret. Too many people would see it.

  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

  19. James ;)

    He is an expert and all the experts are in agreement.

    No one does secret testing?
    Because they will get caught.
    After the fact of course, when the test is done.
    Oh well, my bad.

    And all experts agree with him, Except for the experts of differing opinions

    And no one should dare ask what was flying over Canadian skies.
    Because experts such as anonymous, are here to tell people who ask what morons they are.

    And, to use ridicule to demonstrate his or her expertise, in something, likely not rocket science.

  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

  21. Penny, come on. Everyone "in the know" has said it's not a missile. You seem to think the PMO, the RCMP, DND, and possibly the French are all in cahoots with each other and mum's the word. We're literally talking about THOUSANDS of people here.

    So far, the only people I've heard of who thinks it's a missile are some ladies in Newfoundland and one professor at Ryerson who in all likelihood is not privy to tracking the position and movements of either Canadian or foreign warships.

    And quite frankly, "Penny", your last post reeks of ridicule. Yeah, I might have been a little harsh using the word "morons", I'll admit that, but every other post has been logical and reasoned. Can you say the same?

  22. It was ze french, You see, zey vant to take over zee vorld. Fist zey are ze best cooks, zen zey are zee best looveres now zey make zee best missiles because zey vant take over zee vorld.

  23. Whoo hoo what fun, is better to be Smartie than Moron.

  24. too funny! disinfo punks all sound the same.

    maybe our expert can explain what happened to the ethiopian jet that crashed off lebanon.... ?

  25. anonymous expert

    You show up here, nice little discussion going on-

    You bring alot of bluster, name calling,outrageous claims... experts all agree,provocative act,declaration of war,conspiracy theorists, etc.,

    But, from where I sit, and from what I read... your words are empty.

    All you actually brought was some basic propaganda techniques, name calling , ridicule, appeal to authority, bandwagon.

    There were still 3 missiles that flew over the heads of citizens of Canada, who have legitimate right to be concerned.

  26. These were not missles.

    They were 'flying seals'. They gained their ability to fly by comsuming far too much Screech, resulting in an imbalance of gas in their intestinal tract.

    There, problem solved. No aliens, sorry Peter, and no french. Just some rather drunk and gassy seals.

  27. Annonymous expert, why don't you use your expertise to tell us what happened on 9/11.

  28. I think William of Occam would vote for Gallier's hypothesis; the French testing israeli rockets for them and all the "authorities" in the know.

  29. I have another thought on this whole situation.... that sort of came from Galliers comment, combined with the last one from james and this entire subject in general.

    I do strongly feel that the government is sweeping this one under the rug... I notice the out and out dismissal of the concerns of the people in Newfoundland....

  30. Hey, the missiles were mentioned in the french media. On France Info (state radio) in the flash news report of 20h30 (MET), so good 2 hours ago. They talked about OVNI (french for UFO in its strict meaning as unidentified flying object) that were supposed to be be french launched missile flying over St Pierre et Miquelon. They said the submarine was in North-West Brittany and they landed, and that's the real kicker because it's the first time that I hear about that, in North-Carolina. First mention of the involvement of the US. My first hypotheses was not really serious, but the more it goes the more plausible it gets.

  31. If ze frrrench vant to take over ze vorld - I say let zem !!

    Viva la France !!

  32. Gallier: North Carolina?
    Can you clarify what was said?
    The US angle.
    Racking my brain over this incident, thinking if there was one county canada would cover for the US would be it.
    Also, the missile was in the opinion of some, in the ascent stage, it had just been launched.
    (fire still visible)
    If the launch had originated in the US that would make more sense.

  33. Exactly what I said, nothing more nothing less. Absolutly no comment or connecting the dots (where would we go if news would start to do things like that, ts ts ts).

    Here some links in french about the missile launch.

    Here they talk that the missiles will reach Canada or Brasil. One of the commenters is scandalized by that lauch because it is a clear violation of the NPT as the signees are not supposed to build new ballistic missiles after their signing and the M51 is a successor of the M44.,410837,page=1

    The blog from the photographer of the launch.

    A message from the 22nd January telling that a missile lauch is programmed between the 24th and the 28th of january.