Joe Biden calling on all Conspiracy Theorists

[vector7]

Warnings from world leaders all within 72 hours



"Australian PM Kevin Rudd - “Nuke strike would make 9/11 insignificant” and other weird warnings"

"Over the last 72 hours there has been a strange melange of cryptic messages leaked from world political leaders about what could be in store for America over the next few months.

These predictions of impending doom come from England, France, Australia and the United States.

Biden told the top Democratic donors that a “generated crisis” will develop within six months and Barak Obama will need the help of community leaders to control the population as unpopular decisions are made and Americans resist.

Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
—Daniel 7:23

Biden speaking at the fundraiser, “I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate, And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you - not financially to help him - we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”

Biden’s ominous language at the Seattle Sheraton are followed with statements by long time establishment insiders Colin Powell and Madeline Albright both say there is a massive crisis on the horizon and Biden was simply making a “statement in fact.”

“The problems will always be there and there’s going to be a crisis which will come along on the 21st, 22nd of January that we don’t even know about right now.” Powell told Meet the Press.

Lord West, adviser to Prime Minister Gordon Brown on national security says, “There is another great plot building up again and we are monitoring. It dipped slightly and is now rising again within the context of severe. The threat is huge. We have done all the things that we need to do, but the threat is building - the complex plots are building,”

Across the channel from England you have the French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner warning the press that he believes Israel will strike Iran before they can develope nuclear weapons completley ignoring the fact that the chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohammed ElBradei, said that Iran lacks the key components to produce an atomic weapon.

“The devastation that could be wreaked by one major nuclear weapons incident alone puts 9/11 and almost everything else [in] to the category of the insignificant,” Rudd said.
Why are there so many high level politicians around the world in a seemingly coordinated effort warning of huge threats and developing crisis’ that may include a nuclear device? Are they preparing the masses for an event or series of events that have been in the making for some time? Is the public being prepared for new and forming enemies with a potential to plunge the entire world into war?
----end quote---

A number of notable public figures, to be sure; Biden, Rudd, Colin Powell, Matelaine Albright, Lord West and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner. Taken alone there are plenty of ready explanations, but within 72hrs.?

Are there any more recent examples out there?

(Daily News Caster)

http://www.thejerusalemgiftshop.com/...72-hours-.html

[American Patriot]

These people have their heads up their asses.

The Russians are saying "Missile Defense in any form is unacceptable"...

How stupid is that?

[Ryan Ruck]

So what should we think of their ABM system they've had in place that violated the ABM Treaty when that was in effect? You know, the one they've continued to expand all the while criticizing ours?

[American Patriot]

I think that's what I was wondering. lol.

If missile defense is unacceptable... I say "You first, Russia. Get rid of your stuff and we'll get rid of ours later...."

[vector7]

Fri., November 14, 2008 Cheshvan 16, 5769
Four crises on Obama's horizon

By Daniel Levy
Tags: Israel News

No one should be surprised that president-elect Barack Obama's first press conference, three days after his historic November 4th victory, was devoted almost exclusively to the economy. Obama was also quick to remind reporters that there is only one president at a time, and his turn does not begin until January 20. While domestic challenges will dominate his agenda, a not-insignificant list of Middle East crises will confront America's 44th president as well. Here are four of the more urgent issues in which Israel has a keen interest, and which are likely to force themselves onto the Obama team transition agenda and its early days in office.

Why not start with the issue closest to home, with Israel's upcoming February 11 election? Recent American presidents have had a decidedly mixed record of intervention in Israeli elections. President Bill Clinton hastily convened the March 1996 Summit of Peacemakers at Sharm el-Sheikh, but it did not save Shimon Peres in the polls that May. Clinton was more effective in ensnaring a peace-shy prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu with the Wye River Memorandum - paving the way to Netanyahu's downfall and Ehud Barak's May 1999 election victory. Before that, president George H.W. Bush tripped up Yitzhak Shamir on the issue of settlements, assisting Yitzhak Rabin in Israel's 1992 vote.

A new president, however, is unlikely to dip his hand in the shark-infested waters of Israeli politics, certainly not on Day 1, especially since the possible impact would be hard to predict. The Obama team would be best advised to simply remind Israelis of its own standpoint: a commitment to two states and to advancing the peace process "from the minute I'm sworn into office" (Obama in Amman, July 2008. To forget this pledge until after February 10 would in itself be an intervention of sorts, and an unwelcome one. Will Kadima, Labor or Meretz be able to ride the wave of Obama expectations? That will be for them to attempt and for the voters to decide.

Another upcoming Middle East election the new American president will have to navigate is in Iran, where presidential polls are scheduled for June 2009. The tricky balancing act here will be, on the one hand, not to lose time testing direct engagement with Iran, an Obama election pledge, while, at the same time, doing nothing that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could use to strengthen his own re-election efforts. Paradoxically, a less threatening, more open-for-business tone from the U.S. may be the best way to undermine Ahmadinejad.

Direct talks with Ahmadinejad are very unlikely to feature on the immediate Obama to-do list, and would almost certainly be ill advised. In any event, he is not the key address for diplomatic approaches. That would more likely be supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei. Expect discreet feelers and exploratory contacts with key Khamenei confidants, such as Ali Akbar Velayati and Ali Larijani, and expect not to know that they are taking place.

Israel's best posture on this is surely to avoid any public disagreement with the U.S. on Iran, to ensure that Israel has input into the agenda for talks, and to give American-Iranian negotiations a real chance, as the best option for addressing our concerns.

For Syria, a two-year waiting game ends on Inauguration Day. President Bashar al-Assad apparently decided some time ago that his best bet was to wait out the implacable opposition of French president Jacques Chirac and American president Bush. Syria has recently prepared for this day, for instance by relaunching peace talks with Israel via Turkish mediation, by assuming a constructive role regarding Lebanon, and by moving closer to Europe, most notably to Chirac's successor, Nicolas Sarkozy.

In some senses, Syria is seen as low-hanging fruit for a U.S. re-engagement that would reshuffle Middle East alliances in its favor. After all, Syria is a relevant player when it comes to Iraq, Iran, Lebanon and the Palestinian arena. A reorientation of Syria's policies will not take place overnight or following a brief diplomatic flirtation. But a new approach to U.S.-Syria bilateral relations, with reasonably calibrated benchmarks and including American support for Israeli-Syrian talks, stands a good chance of success. Look out for early indications of that change.

Finally, how to deal with Palestinian internal politics? One of the more devastating legacies of the Bush years was the failure to constructively navigate the Palestinian transition away from the strongman rule of Yasser Arafat and the single-party domination of Fatah. A stable Palestine and sustainable peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis cannot be built on a divided Palestinian house. The American position has been one of encouraging Palestinian division.

That needs to change urgently, not by an Obama administration directly engaging Hamas, but by it discreetly signaling an end to the American veto on Palestinian national reconciliation along lines similar to the Saudi-brokered Mecca deal of February 2007. Given the stop-start Palestinian talks now being brokered by Egypt, there might be some urgency to the American policy re-think on this issue - the peace process is deeply flawed in its absence.

Of course, Iraq will loom largest when president-elect Obama turns his attention to the Middle East - and therein lies the core challenge: Will the next administration, unlike its predecessor, appreciate both the extent and the nature of the interconnectivity between the region's varied crises? The signs at least are encouraging.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1037283.html

[vector7]

November 17, 2008
Barack Obama: US must capture or kill Osama bin Laden
Jenny Booth

Blog: Is Obama the techiest President ever?
Catching or killing Osama bin Laden will be one of the key targets of Barack Obama's administration as it is "critical" to American national security, the US president-elect confirmed last night.

In his first televised interview since his historic election, Mr Obama made good on his rhetoric from the campaign trail that the hunt for bin Laden would remain top priority for the US.

He told CBS that "it is a top priority for us to stamp out Al-Qaeda once and for all" and that killing or capturing the group’s mastermind Osama bin Laden was "critical" to the US.

Related Links

• White House dog will have to wait

• Obama brings hope of Iran talks, says Peres

• Obama set to appoint Republican to Cabinet

"Particularly in light of the problems that we’re having in Afghanistan, which has continued to worsen. We’ve got to shore up those efforts," the President-elect said.

Mr Obama also revealed that he is taking very seriously the threat of a major terrorist attack on America in the next few weeks, after warnings from both sides of the Atlantic that terrorists would step up the activity during the transition period during and after the dying days of the Bush presidency.

"I think it’s important to get a national security team in place because transition periods are potentially times of vulnerability to a terrorist attack. We want to make sure that there is as seamless a transition on national security as possible," he said.

The Bush Administration has been defined largely by the 9/11 attacks, which came within a year of his taking office, and President Bush has repeatedly described the acute vulnerability of the US during a transition.

Mr Bush's aides point out that al-Qaeda’s first assault on the World Trade Centre occurred little more than a month after Bill Clinton became President in 1993. There was an alleged attempt to bomb Glasgow Airport in Gordon Brown’s first days in Downing Street and a London nightclub attack was narrowly thwarted.

Mr Obama said that, as soon as he takes office, he will take other measures to minimise the terrorist threat, working with his security team and the military to reduce US troop numbers in Iraq, shore up Afghanistan and to eradicate al-Qaeda.

"I will call in the Joint Chiefs of Staff, my national security apparatus, and we will start executing a plan that draws down our troops (from Iraq)," he said.

On the campaign trail, Mr Obama vowed to pull one or two combat brigades out of Iraq every month until after 16 months, only a residual security force of unspecified size remains. Some of those brigades would head to Afghanistan.

Mr Obama also promised to put an end to what have been seen internationally as the worst mistakes of Mr Bush’s "war on terror", including the US military’s internment camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and harsh interrogations of captured terror suspects.

"I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America doesn’t torture. And I’m going to make sure that we don’t torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America’s moral stature in the world."

He did not elaborate on whether the Guantanamo prisoners would be transferred to civilian custody in the United States itself, put on trial, or released.

A command to redeploy troops out of Iraq or shut down Guantanamo could be done in short order under Mr Obama’s presidential prerogatives.

The faltering US economy however remained his top priority, and he promised to do "whatever it takes" to stabilise the economy, restore consumer confidence and create jobs.

"There’s no doubt that we have not been able yet to reset the confidence in the financial markets and in the consumer markets and among businesses that allow the economy to move forward in a strong way," he said. "And my job as president is going to be to make sure that we restore that confidence."

In Congress, his first legislative priority was getting another stimulus package passed to prop up the enfeebled economy, assuming that such a package isn't passed in the next few weeks.

He said that the economy would have deteriorated even more without the first $700 billion bank bailout passed by Congress.

Next, he would ensure that Congress put new regulation in place to control the banking industry, he said, not to crush "the entrepreneurial spirit and risk-taking of American capitalism; but to "restore a sense of balance."

Mr Obama made plain that he would not be afraid to increase America's debt to save jobs and livelihoods, saying that it would be a disaster for the government to stand by and let the cash-strapped General Motors and the automobile industry in general collapse.

Economists from left and right agreed that "we have to do whatever it takes to get this economy moving again", he said. "And that we shouldn’t worry about the deficit next year or even the year after. That short term, the most important thing is that we avoid a deepening recession," he said.

Mr Obama also attempted to offer hope to families struggling with their mortgages, saying that not enough had yet been done to address bank foreclosures and distressed homeowners, he said.

"We’ve gotta set up a negotiation between banks and borrowers so that people can stay in their homes. That is going to have an impact on the economy as a whole. And, you know, one thing I’m determined is that if we don’t have a clear, focused programme for homeowners by the time I take office, we will after I take office."

The President-elect paid a double-edged tribute to Henry Paulson, Mr Bush's Treasury Secretary, for trying to remedy "an unprecedented crisis" on a scale that the country hadn’t seen since the Great Depression.

"Hank Paulson has worked tirelessly under some very difficult circumstances," Mr Obama said. "And I think Hank would be the first one to acknowledge that probably not everything that’s been done has worked the way he had hoped it would work."

A member of the transition team works with Mr Paulson every day, Mr Obama said, getting the necessary background and sometimes offering approaches to address the economic meltdown engulfing the US.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5170644.ece

[vector7]

November 15, 2008
Barack Obama is warned to beware of a ‘huge threat’ from al-Qaeda

Security officials fear a ‘spectacular’ during the transition period



Tom Baldwin in Washington and Michael Evans, Defence Editor

Barack Obama is being given ominous advice from leaders on both sides of the Atlantic to brace himself for an early assault from terrorists.

General Michael Hayden, director of the CIA, this week acknowledged that there were dangers during a presidential transition when new officials were coming in and getting accustomed to the challenges. But he added that no “real or artificial spike” in intercepted transmissions from terror suspects had been detected.

President Bush has repeatedly described the acute vulnerability of the US during a transition. The Bush Administration has been defined largely by the 9/11 attacks, which came within a year of his taking office.

His aides have pointed to al-Qaeda’s first assault on the World Trade Centre, which occurred little more than a month after Bill Clinton became President in 1993. There was an alleged attempt to bomb Glasgow airport in Gordon Brown’s first days in Downing Street and a London nightclub attack was narrowly thwarted.

Related Links

• Obama in secret talks with Clinton over top job

• Sarkozy calls for rethink over US defence system

• Two thirds of Obama staffers come from Clinton era

Multimedia

• BLOG: Obama's runners and riders

Lord West of Spithead, the Home Office Security Minister, spoke recently of a “huge threat”, saying: “There is another great plot building up again and we are monitoring this.”

Intelligence chiefs on both sides of the Atlantic have indicated that such warnings refer more to a general sense of foreboding than fear of an imminent or specific plan.

Referring to the attacks in 1993 and 2001, General Hayden told a Washington think-tank on Thursday night: “For some people two data points create a trend line. For others, there may be more hesitation to call it that.” He said that the chief danger comes from remote areas in Pakistan that border Afghanistan.

“Today virtually every major terrorist threat that my agency is aware of has threads back to the tribal areas. Whether it’s command and control, training, direction, money, capabilities, there is a connection to the Fata [Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas].”

General Hayden said that al-Qaeda remained a “determined, adaptive enemy” operating “from its safe haven in Pakistan”. He added: “If there is a major attack on this country it will bear the fingerprints of al-Qaeda.”

He said that the border region remained the base of al-Qaeda’s leadership, which had developed a more durable structure and a deep reserve of skilled operatives. “AlQaeda, operating from its safe haven in Pakistan’s tribal areas, remains the most clear and present danger to the safety of the United States,” General Hayden said.

The hunt for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden “is very much at the top of CIA’s priority list,” he added. “Because of his iconic stature, his death or capture clearly would have a significant impact on the confidence of his followers.”

The CIA chief also suggested that the terror group was seeking to recruit Western-looking operatives who would not cause attention if they were standing in airport screening queues.

Hours after he spoke, a suspected US missile attack killed 12 people in Pakistan, including five foreigners. Such strikes are hugely controversial, with Islamabad claiming that they fuel anti-American extremist groups. But Mr Obama has been clear that he wants to pursue al-Qaeda aggressively across the Afghan border.

In Britain, security officials say that there is genuine concern that alQaeda will attempt a “spectacular” in the transition period, but suggest that it may be aimed more at Mr Bush than Mr Obama.

“As far as we know there is nothing from the intelligence world to indicate that anything has changed dramatically in recent months to put us on alert for an attack at the moment,” a source said. The present threat level is “severe”, which is the second-highest alert status. But a senior counterterrorism official suggested last month that this should be regarded as “the severe end of severe”. This would point to Britain facing a terrorist threat nearly as high as the period in the summer of 2005 when terrorists killed 52 people on London’s transport network on July 7 and attempted a similar attack on July 21.

Britain and the US are sharing all intelligence on suspected terrorist activity because of the high risk of a plot involving transatlantic flights. Al-Qaeda is understood still to be obsessed with mounting an attack using passenger airliners. There have also been warnings of al-Qaeda interest in developing a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) device. The US has anti-CBRN units on constant patrol in main cities.

Al-Qaeda is known to be experimenting with biological agents, particularly anthrax, which they acquire from dead animals and then create cultures. The key man involved in these experiments is Abou Kabbah al-Masri, who was engaged in the biological trials including tests on rabbits that were uncovered in Afghanistan when the Taleban were overrun after the US invasion in 2001.

James Lewis, a security expert with the Centre of Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that al-Qaeda may wish to provoke a reaction from the next US Administration designed to show the rest of the world that “America is still the evil crusader”.

Last month Joe Biden, the Vice-President-elect, told campaign donors: “Watch, we’re going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle [of Mr Obama].”

Mr Lewis said that many Muslims were intrigued by Mr Obama’s arrival in the White House and “there may be political downsides” in attacking America too early. “It is hard to fathom the level of sophistication of their operatives and whether the chatter we intercept is dissent or intent. If they are gong to do something, they may wait until after the inauguration.

“At present there are policemen standing on policemen at possible targets.

That won’t be the case three months into the new administration.”

The arms race
1945 US drops atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
1953 Russia tests its first atomic bomb
1962 US discovers Soviet Union building a nuclear missile base in Cuba. After seven days of intense talks a naval quarantine is placed around Cuba and is only removed once President Khrushchev agrees to dismantle the base
1983 President Reagan launches the Strategic Defensive Initiative – Star Wars. This would allow the US to detect a nuclear weapon being launched and, by using laser technology, give it time to launch its own weapon to destroy the enemy missile
1986 President Gorbachev proposes a 50 per cent reduction in the nuclear arsenals of both sides. The discussions finally dissolve with no agreement reached
2008 US strikes deal with Poland and Czech Republic on Missile Defence Shield. Russia retaliates on day that Barack Obama is elected US President by threatening to station missiles in Kaliningrad, near its border with Poland

Source: Times archive

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5158569.ece

[vector7]

Al Qaeda says order given for US attack “far bigger than 9/11”

DEBKAfile Updates DEBKA-Net-Weekly Exclusive
November 16, 2008, 4:43 PM (GMT+02:00)


Osama bin Laden plans to test Barack Obama like two former US presidents

DEBKAfile’s counter-terror sources report that US president-elect Barack Obama, European and Russian heads of state in Washington for the G20 conference over the weekend were briefed about a probable early al Qaeda attack.

Obama and his team have been advised that a new al Qaeda strike is highly probable in the United States or against a key US target in Europe, North Africa or the Middle East.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly 372 of Nov. 14 disclosed that al Qaeda’s Yemen base, a reliable barometer for Osama bin Laden’s schemes, issued a Directive to All Fighters in Arabia on Nov. 9 presaging a major operation in the United States that will “change the political and economic world” and be “far bigger than 9/11.”

The notice said “the operation is very near” and “precise instructions were in the hands of “the fighters, who are already on their way to America” armed with bin Laden’s orders. The pretext offered for the attack is the rejection by the US and Europe of al Qaeda’s four-year old truce offer whose original pre-condition was the withdrawal of their armies from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The day after the new president’s election, al Qaeda issued a little-noticed statement declaring Barack Obama a murtad, i.e. an apostate whose betrayal of Islam is judged the most heinous. Believers have the duty to execute a murtad unlike other non-believers whose death sentence is optional.

Thursday night, Nov. 14, Central Intelligence Director Gen. Michael Hayden said: “Al Qaeda, operating from its safe haven in Pakistan’s tribal areas, remains the most clear and present danger to the United States.” He was addressing a Washington think-tank.

“Today, virtually every major terrorist threat that my agency is aware of has threads back to the tribal areas. Whether it is command and control, training, direction, money, capabilities, there is a connection to the FATA (Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas.)”

Hayden also mentioned Yemen and Somalia as important al Qaeda theaters of operation.

In private, most heads of the intelligence agencies fighting al Qaeda admit that an attack on the United States or major American interest outside is only a matter of time.

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5715

[vector7]

U.S.-Canada Military Plan Could Place Troops in Each Other’s Country

Matthew Rothschild

The Progressive

November 18, 2008

The militaries of the United States and Canada are wrapping up a seven-day exercise called “Vigilant Shield” on Tuesday. This marks the continuation of an ever-closer relationship between the two.

For instance, did you know that the United States military could go into Canada in times of emergency? And the Canadian military could go into the United States?

This extraordinary fact appears in a joint document of the U.S. Northern Command and the Canada Command. (The Pentagon established NorthCom in October 2002, and the Canadian military established the Canada Command in June 2005.)

The document is entitled “Canada-US Civil Assistance Plan,” and it is dated February 14, 2008.

David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen broke the story about this plan at the time, but it received little attention in the United States.

“The purpose of the Canada-United States Civil Assistance Plan (CAP) is to provide a framework for the military of one nation to provide support to the military of the other nation in the performance of civil support operations (e.g., floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes, and effects of a terrorist attack).” This framework is designed “to save lives, prevent human suffering, and mitigate damage to property,” the plan says.

The plan anticipates scenarios for using for using violence. “Opposing forces are not expected during the conduct of operations described in this plan,” it says. “However . . . commanders should consider the following Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection issues:
(1) Terrorists organizations could conduct operations against the Canadian or US force, or in the civil support operations area;
(2) State/provincial and local police capabilities could be severely degraded in the area of operations, allowing a corresponding rise in criminal activity that could affect the Canadian or US force; and
(3) Environmental factors ranging from weather to contamination and disease could significantly affect the Canadian or US forces.”

Both the Canadian and U.S. forces have the right to use deadly force in self-defense, the plan says, though “there are no standing . . . rules of engagement or rules for the use of force,” the plan says. “Consequently, every mission will require unique guidance to deployed forces.”

“Support for law enforcement operations is not covered in this plan,” the document says. But it “will be included in the Canada-United States Combined Defense Plan.” That plan is not readily available.

Cross-border support “will only be provided when agreed to by appropriate authorities in both the Government of Canada and the U.S. Government,” the document says. Canada Command and NorthCom “will develop potential options of the military forces of one nation to support the military forces of the other.” These options will then go to Canada’s Chief of the Defence Staff, which will seek the approval of the Canadian government. On the U.S. side, NorthCom “will present military options to the SecDef, who will subsequently seek the approval of the President to deploy military forces to Canada.”

“Execution authority,” the document says, rests with the Canada Command and with NorthCom.

Training for such eventualities has already been approved. “Cross-border movement of military resources is authorized for training and exercises in preparation for bilateral military-to-military civil support,” the document says.

The document was signed by Lieutenant-General M. J. Dumais, commander, Canada Command, and General Victor E. Renuart, commander, US Northern Command.

“It’s completely bizarre and it’s frightening,” says Kevin Best, a social justice activist in Canada who has long worried about the increasing U.S. military presence in Canada.

As far as Canada’s military presence in the U.S., Best said, jokingly, “That’s really scary for you guys, isn’t it?”

http://www.progressive.org/mag/wx111708.html

[vector7]

Foreign Troops Take Part in “Drill” at Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson

Carol Ann Alaimo Arizona Daily Star November 16, 2008 To troops downed in combat, few sights are sweeter than the approach of military rescuers. In a few weeks, Tucson will be at the center of efforts to speed up that lifesaving process.Personnel from around the globe will converge at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base from Dec. 1 to Dec. 12 for the largest rescue exercise of its kind. The effort, dubbed Angel Thunder, will involve the U.S. Army and Air Force, troops from Germany, Chile, Colombia and observers from Canada, Mexico, Brazil and Pakistan. Several non-military U.S. agencies such as the State and Justice departments, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and the National Reconnaissance Office, also will take part in the drills, which aim to smooth interaction between military branches, allied nations and civilian agencies. With about 450 personnel involved, Angel Thunder “is the most complex and largest Department of Defense personnel- recovery exercise to date,” said a news release from Air Combat Command in Langley, Va. D-M will be at the hub of the effort, but most of the mock rescue action will take place elsewhere in Arizona and in New Mexico. http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/267361