“It makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck.” ---Pentagon official
There is something deeply disturbing about the Air Force’s official report on the Aug-29-30 “bent spear” incident that saw six nuclear warheads get mounted on six Advanced Cruise Missiles and improperly removed from a nuclear weapons storage bunker at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, then get improperly loaded on a B-52, and then get improperly flown to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana—a report that attributed the whole thing to a “mistake.”
According to the Air Force report, some Air Force personnel mounted the warheads on the missiles (which are obsolete and slated for destruction), and another ground crew, allegedly not aware that the missiles were armed with nukes, moved them out and mounted them on a launch pylon on the B-52’s wing for a flight to Barksdale and eventual dismantling. Only on the ground at Barksdale did ground crew personnel spot the nukes according to the report. (Six other missiles with dummy warheads were mounted on a pylon on the other wing of the plane.)
The problem with this explanation for the first reported case of nukes being removed from a weapons bunker without authorization in 50 years of nuclear weapons, is that those warheads, and all nuclear warheads in the US stockpile, are supposedly protected against unauthorized transport or removal from bunkers by electronic antitheft systems—automated alarms similar to those used by department stores to prevent theft, and even anti-motion sensors that go off if a weapon is touched or approached without authorization.
While the Air Force report doesn’t mention any of this, what it means is that if weapons in a storage bunker are protected against unauthorized removal, someone—and actually at least two people, since it’s long been a basic part of nuclear security that every action involving a nuclear weapon has to be done by two people working in tandem—had to deliberately and consciously disable those alarms.
Since the Air Force report does not explain how this hurdle to unauthorized removal of the six nukes could have been surmounted by “mistake,” the report has to be considered a whitewash, at best, or a cover-up.
That leaves us speculating about what actually happened, and about who might have authorized the removal of those nukes from storage, and why the Defense Department would be covering up the true story. We know that the loading of nuclear-armed missiles or bombs onto an American bomber has been barred since 1991, even for practice and training purposes. We know also that the carrying of nuclear weapons by bombers flying over US airspace has been banned for 40 years. So if the evidence suggests strongly that the removal of the nukes from the bunker was done intentionally and with some kind of authorization from higher authorities, then the loading of nukes onto the plane, and the flight of those nukes to Barksdale have to also be assumed to have been authorized.
This possibility has been dismissed out of hand by the Air Force and Defense Department. The very idea is, in fact, not even discussed in the Air force report released in mid-October.
Yet we are left with the unresolved question of how the weapons could have been moved out of the bunker accidentally.
The Air Force has not been forthcoming about the automated alarm protections on American nuclear weapons, refusing to confirm or deny that they even exist. But we can know that they are in place for several reasons. One is that since writing about this incident in ghd current edition of American Conservative Magazine ("The Mystery of Minot," Oct. 24, 2007 ed.) and in several online venues, I have been contacted by several active-duty and retired military people who have assured me that such electronic protections are in place. A second is that an article in the Oct. 31 issue of the New York Times, reporting on the early completion of a project by the National Nuclear Security Administration, to secure Russian nuclear weapons, said that the measures implemented at 25 classified sites on 12 Russian nuclear bases included “measures that have long been part of American efforts” to secure nuclear weapons, and that these included “alarm and motion detection systems,” as well as “modern gates, guard houses and fighting positions, “ and also “detectors for explosives, radiation and metal.”
Ask yourselves, would American nuclear weapons be equipped with lesser security systems than those that the NNSA is providing for Russian weapons?
Of course not!
And yet we’re asked to believe that some low-ranking ground crew personnel at Minot AFB simply walked out of a nuclear weapons bunker with six nuclear armed Advanced Cruise Missiles, not knowing what they were carrying, and labored for eight hours to mount those missiles and their launch pylon on the wing of a B-52 strategic bomber without ever noticing that they were armed with nuclear weapons. We’re asked to believe that none of those electronic alarms and motion sensors built into the system went off during that whole process.
When I mentioned the automated alarm and motion sensors to Lt. Col. Jennifer Cassidy, a public affairs person at the Department of the Air Force, and asked her how the movement of the six nukes could have occurred without those alarms being disabled, she said, “It’s an intriguing question, and it makes the hair stand up on the back of my neck.”
Dave Lindorff, a columnist for Counterpunch, is author of several recent books ("This Can't Be Happening! Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy" and "Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal"). His latest book, coauthored with Barbara Olshanshky, is "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office (St. Martin's Press, May 2006). His writing is available at http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
It IS very disturbing, and I have been following your
articles very closely, particularly since I am a former blue suiter. But there is still too much of a leap necessary to paint this as an attempt to attack Iran. I'm not saying it is impossible, but there are very big holes in the chain of events that you are attempting to establish.
From experience, I'd have to guess that all of the questions and investigations that you want are being conducted but that the investigations are top secret and only being provided to those members of congress with adequate clearance, which probably includes some of the members of the house and senate armed services committees who no doubt have demanded them.
The answers and public investigations you desire cannot be had/given. They would reveal too much about the inner workings of the way our nuclear weapons are handled and too much about how orders for their use and disposal are supposed to be given. I can see how having that information in the public domain would be dangerous. That is a shame because I too would really like to have a complete picture of what has happened here as I am sure would every other current and former member of the USAF just from an embarrassment perspective, let alone the other more serious concerns.
You make a lot about the scape-goating of the Wing Commander. Unfortunately that is common in Air Force culture and history. Wing Commanders are frequently held accountable for sloppy performance by people under their command even where, in my opinion, it wasnt their fault. One of my coworkers while on active duty related an incident that a Colonel who was Wing and Base Commander at Kunsan AFB in Korea and was thought to be a strong candidate for Brigadier General was denied that promotion because of a crash by one of the pilots under his command. It was suggested that he did not emphasize safe flying and landing habits enough by the pilots under him (as if anyone piloting a plane needs reminding to be safe? Hello, their life is at stake? If that isnt enough to motivate them, what is their commander supposed to do?). Boom, just like that, he ends his career at Colonel.
This incident with the nukes is obviously much more serious and if the official story is to be believed, involves 70+ people who were not performing their duties according to regulations. I would have bet without hearing it before hand that their wing commander would be held responsible. In this case, it may be well warranted. You listed things like motion detectors and sensors, none of that helps if there the people overseeing those systems are lacksidaisical about what they are doing.
The part where this gets more interesting is the periodic inspections that happen at units at bases. That is one thing you should be researching and talking more about. They are called ORIs or Operational Readiness Inspections. There are a couple of different kinds ORIs that happen, but basically, an independant group descends on your base and unit and goes over everything about your job and compiles a list of things that you do and whether or not you do them according to regulation. These things are reported to the highest levels of the Air Force and kept on record. Here is a description of one such inspection and a group patting itself on the back for achieving the highest possible rating (Outstanding) http://public.fairchild.amc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123049644 .
What I am saying is that poor performance of the kind that produced this bent spear incident should have been caught at an ORI and the personnel involved read the riot act at that point. Usually if you receive a poor ORI rating, they reoccur with greater frequency (makes sense, right?). It may not be possible to get the fine details of the latest ORI inspections at Minot, but the overall grade should be obtainable. If the particular unit involved in this nuclear weapons disgrace received anything better than an "Unsatisfactory" which is the lowest grade possible, that will tell us something.
by
Steven Leser (227 articles, 49 quicklinks, 34 diaries, 1636 comments)
on Wednesday, October 31, 2007 at 11:47:53 PM
by Senior Airman Danny Monahan Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs
5/5/2006 - MINOT AIR FORCE BASE, N.D. -- The 5th Bomb Wing’s Nuclear Operational Readiness Inspection rating was announced to a full house at Dock 7 April 28.
After 10 days of around the clock hard work and weeks of preparation, the labor put forth by the Minot’s Warbirds finally earned the wing an Excellent rating from the Air Combat Command Inspector General Team.
“We noticed a tremendous sense of pride throughout the 5th Bomb Wing that directly impacted the warfighting capability,” said Col. David McFaddin, ACC IG team chief before presenting a slide show highlighting Minot’s top performers.
As each name graced the screen, the audience cheered with sirens, whistles and even bullhorns.
After the results were read, the 5th BW Commander, Col. Eldon Woodie took the stage saying he was tickled to be the commander and thanked everyone for their hard work and coming out.
“To the warriors of the ACC IG team I thank you for the tough scrub,” said Colonel Woodie. “You are truly are leaving us better than you found us. Sweating during training prevents bleeding on the battle field,”
Colonel Woodie thanked not only the Airmen and Department of Defense civilians, but the members of the local community, reminding the crowd that none of this would be possible without them as well.
“We were truly impressed with the professionalism, devotion and dedication to the mission displayed throughout this inspection,” said Colonel McFaddin. “We’d be proud to go to war and fight side by side with your unit any day. I want to congratulate you on a successful completion of this inspection.”
Note, the 5th Bomb wing was the Wing involved and the Commander of the 5th Bomb Wing, Colonel Bruce Emig, along with the commander of one of the Groups underneath Emig, Colonel Cynthia Lundell, commander of the 5th Maintenance Group, were both relieved of command due to this Bent Spear incident with the nukes.
So, one year prior to this incident, and under the previous Wing Commander, the Wing received an Excellent on their ORI. So three possibilities, either:
1. The ORI missed a lot, as in everything possible that was important
2. Attention to detail and regulations took a nosedive under the new commander
3. The conspiracy that you are theorizing is correct.
by
Steven Leser (227 articles, 49 quicklinks, 34 diaries, 1636 comments)
on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 12:10:02 AM
I don't agree with this layer on layer of conspiracy
Cheney as chairman of Hallilburton before becoming VP was right in that inner circle of corporate leaders who are the oligarchy that runs the country.
Unless you want to argue that the country is REALLY run by the Rockefellers and the Gates's and the Buffetts and the Hunts of the world--the people with the really big money--but then they don't all agree about things, either.
So who's running things?
At some point, it's self-defeating to imagine such layers of secret government. You can't do anything at that point, so you might as well just give up.
by
Dave Lindorff (354 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 163 comments)
on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 7:27:38 AM
Check the post URL's I have sent on this thread. 1st the blog post on the "suspicious" deaths at Minot. Then the second...isn't is hella' ironic that the author of a book on Mumia abu Jamal would cite as a source for a, "Secret Pentagon Report, " on martial law, a Raving Neo-Nazi by the name of Hal Turner? Seconded by UFO nut, (and supporter of Neo-Nazi, Ernst Zundel), Jeff Rense. Lindorff is a conspiranoid with bad sourcing.
by
Jay Lovestone (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 103 comments)
on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 9:12:13 AM
Do you have any issues with sources on THIS article?
Once, again, look at click here And given the negative attn. here on a 9-11 diary yesterday to a longtime LaRoucheite, Webster Tarpley, Lindorff ought to refuse to speak on panels with Tarpley, cadre of an org. which assulted socialists and communists in the 70's in, "Operation Mop-Up". Photos at the website of Political Research Associates.
I see now. But that deals with only one small part of David'
s assertions.
David - do you have any comment? There are a number of good accounts of the deaths on the web that completely debunk the theories that the deaths were related to the nuclear incident.
Joe - Do you have any other issues with any other parts of this article?
by
Steven Leser (227 articles, 49 quicklinks, 34 diaries, 1636 comments)
on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 12:42:35 PM
Dave, the Military Times website has important details on
this. Many posts were made to the M.T. site by former military personnel who are knowledgeable about the security procedures for nuke-tipped weapons. The account I read includes many direct quotes from such people -- it's at http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/sep2007/nuke-s14.shtml
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1216 comments)
on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 12:31:22 PM
If you keep writing about the Minot B-52 nuclear armed cruise missile attack upon America and Americans, you are liable to wake some of the Living Dead up Dave.
Having slept with nuclear misslies mounted both above deck in launch tubes and several kept in storage below deck for nearly 4 years (!965-1969) It was obvious, that if 1 of these weapons were to be used in a hostile manner, that it would eventually lead to an all out nuclear war and the immolation of us all.
It is only in more recent times that I have learned that that was the exact plan, and is still the plan today.
That is, the plan from the beginning of the nuclear age was and continues to be the absolute and total extermination of the mass of humanity in an all out nuclear war.
War itself is aimed at the domestic population and is a "Sport" of the "Master" class, waged for both fun and profit. Our particular variety of "Master" is also a genocidal cannibal, stuck on Animal Primitivism. "ET" has stepped in to give "Master" a 'Time out," of sorts.
You may have noticed that Steve Fossett is still missing? You may recall the massive Air force funded search for good ole Stevie boy$ He hid to allow the search to go forward to find the missing cruise missile that was launched on that day.
The search was called off after the Air force recovered the 1 nuclear armed cruise missile that was fired at us. A true day of infamy.
The attempt to launch a nuclear armed cruise missile attack upon us is merely to carry forward with a well designed and implemented plan to genocide the mass of the human race, that was put into operation way back in 1946.
Who would of ever guessed that the Extraterrestrials-who have intervened- would continue to take the "Keys" to the nuclear war machine away from our nuclear war fighting elite for all of this time.
We continue to exist not due to the people who have directed the creation of the nuclear war machine, rather we continue to exist in spite of their plots plans and repeated attempts over the decades to exterminate us all in an all out nuclear holocaust.
The original decsion to exterminate humanity-made in 1946-was based upon the notion that "Self Sacrifice is a necessary component of survival."
That they have failed to kill us all, is not due to not trying hard. We exist only due to the direct inntervention of the "ET."
The plan is still in place to exterminate the mass of the human race with the use of nuclear weapons; our nuclear war fighting elite are adamant in their demand that we must be destroyed.
Our duty to ourselves is to take action to prevent our immolation. We must first "Unseat" the people responsible for the repeated attempts to exterminate us.
Then we must select a new strategy; one that does not include waging nuclear war. A strategy of Peace.
We may need to sequester our nuclear war fighting elite, so that they no longer can implement any plans to molest or assault humanity with the use of nuclear weapons.
We can do it, even though we are the Living Dead, we still are not truly dead, just yet.
.
by
Patrick (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 417 comments)
on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 2:57:15 PM
AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missile does not use GPS guidance
Respectfully request a correction...
Mr. Lindorff wrote: "The Advanced Cruise Missile, a stealth weapon almost impossible to spot on radar, is designed to be launched from a remote location by a B-52, and then to fly close to the ground to its target, using terrain maps and GPS guidance."
"Missiles are guided using a combination of inertial navigation and terrain contour matching enhanced with highly accurate speed updates provided by a laser Doppler velocimeter."
At the time of the cruise missile conceptual development, my understanding is that the Air Force believed no off-board navigation sources were acceptable for a weapon to be used after enemy nuclear weapons had knoocked out our GPS constellation or rendered the ionosphere so opaque to the GPS signals that GPS receivers would be useless. Also, GPS was not fully available (24 satellite constellation) when the AGM-86B ALCM and AGM-129 ACM were first fielded. Perhaps subsequently designed and produced conventional warhead cruise missiles use GPS but the nuclear-capable cruise missiles don't and never did.
I have spotted several other errors in your piece and I will post those requests for corrections later.
by
Form (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 25 comments)
on Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 11:32:52 PM
"Why hasn’t the Air Force or the FBI investigated the 6-8 untimely deaths including three alleged suicides, one of a Minot weapons guard, one of an assistant defense secretary, and one of a captain in the super-secret Air Force Special Commando Group, as well as alleged fatal vehicle “accidents” involving four ground crew and B-52 pilots and crewmembers at Minot and Barksdale?"
I believe this statement is partially incorrect.
I read the Washington Post obituaries daily (to make sure I'm not there!). The closest death reported to an "assistant defense secretary" is the obituary for Charles Riechers who apparently died by his own hand and at the time of his death (on or about Oct 14 2007) was nominated to be the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition.
The Washington Post coverage of his death was challenged by the Air Force. Controversy arose because of the nature of Mr. Riechers contract work with the Air Force while awaiting confirmation. I have seen no account in any media that connects his death with the Minot nuclear weapon debacle. See the Post's ombudsman report on the story at the url below.
click here Request Mr. Lindorff correct his claim or identify the "assistant defense secretary " by name.
Mr. Lindorff also wrote:
"Secretary Robert Gates ordered an unprecedented stand-down of all air bases in mid-September to check out and account for the entire nuclear inventory, and a general was dispatched immediately to Minot after the discovery of the wayward nukes on August 30 to investigate what had happened."
The actions listed were ordered by the Air Force, specifically General Ronald Keys. Secretary Gates was informed of this failure of nuclear procedures shortly after discovery by the Air Force leadership. He was likely briefed on the corrective action the Air Force contemplated but i can find no record that he issued the orders as claimed by Mr. Lindorff. I request Mr. Lindorff correct his narrative or cite authoritative sources accordingly.
Mr. Lindorff also wrote:
"Congress appears ready and willing to accept the Air Force whitewash at face value: It was an accident. It won’t happen again. That is not good enough! We need honest answers to some hard questions."
I agree we need honest answers. I differ with Mr. Lindorff, Mr. Madsen and others that honest answers have not been provided. Please refer again to url
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=47859 where it states "Congress has called for a “top-to-bottom” review of nuclear procedures in the Defense and Energy departments." as well as other reviews. This is not being whitewashed and court martials for criminal negligence by those directly involved remain a possibility.
This event is a huge debacle but I can find no credible evidence this was a deliberate act to prepare for an attack Iran or some other plot. My only criticism of Mr. Lindorff, while I respectfully disagree with his thesis, is that his descriptions of certain military activities and capabilities are inaccurate. After all of the reviews and court martials are complete we will have a large record to assess to determine if this was a series of failures to follow nuclear custody procedures or something else. I do not fault Mr. Lindorff for looking for something else but I don't think his thesis will lead us to the truth.
by
Form (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 25 comments)
on Sunday, November 4, 2007 at 11:20:37 AM
18 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Printable story
E-mail story
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
