 |
|
Add to My Group
|
September 7, 2007 at 16:50:39
Was a Covert Attempt to Bomb Iran with Nuclear Weapons foiled by a Military Leak? by Michael Salla, Ph.D. Page 1 of 2 page(s) |
|
 
|
On August 30, a B-52 bomber armed with five nuclear-tipped Advanced Cruise missiles traveled from Minot Air Force base, North Dakota, to Barksdale Air Force base, Louisiana. Each missile had an adjustable yield between five and 150 kilotons of TNT which is at the lower end of the destructive capacities of U.S. nuclear weapons. For example, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of 13 kilotons, while the Bravo Hydrogen bomb test of 1954 had a yield of 15,000 kilotons. The B-52 story was first covered in the Army Times on September 5 after the nuclear armed aircraft was discovered by Airmen (see: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/09/marine_nuclear_B52_070904w/ ). What made this a very significant event was that it was a violation of U.S. Air Force regulations concerning the transportation of nuclear weapons by air. Nuclear weapons are normally transported by air in specially constructed planes designed to prevent radioactive pollution in case of a crash. Such transport planes are not equipped to launch the nuclear weapons they routinely carry around the U.S. and the world for servicing or positioning. The discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists, the first time in 40 years that a nuclear armed plane had been allowed to fly in the U.S (see: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2007_9_5.html#149D6ECF ). Since 1968, after a SAC bomber crashed in Greenland, all nuclear armed aircraft have been grounded but were kept on a constant state of alert. After the end of the Cold War, President George H. Bush ordered in 1991 that nuclear weapons were to be removed from all aircraft and stored in nearby facilities. Recently, the Air Force began decommissioning its stockpile of Advanced Cruise missiles. The five nuclear weapons on the B-52 were to be decommissioned, and were to be taken to another Air Force base. An Air Force press statement issued on September 6 claimed that there “was an error which occurred during a regularly scheduled transfer of weapons between two bases.” Furthermore, the statement declared: “The Air Force maintains the highest standards of safety and precision so any deviation from these well established munitions procedures is considered very serious.” The issue concerning how a nuclear armed B-52 bomber was allowed to take off and fly in U.S. air space after an ‘error’ in a routine transfer process, is now subject to an official Air Force inquiry which is due to be completed by September 14. Three key questions emerge over the B-52 incident. First, why did Air Force personnel at Minot AFB not spot the ‘error’ earlier given the elaborate security procedures in place to prevent such mistakes from occurring? Many military analysts have commented on the stringent security procedures in place to prevent this sort of mistake from occurring. Multiple officers are routinely involved in the transportation and loading of nuclear weapons to prevent the kind of ‘error’ that allegedly occurred in the B-52 incident. According to the Air Force statement, the commanding officer in charge of military munitions personnel and additional munitions airmen were relieved of duties pending the completion of the investigation. According to Kristensen, the error could not have come from confusing the Advanced Cruise Missile with a conventional weapons since no conventional form exists. So the munitions Airmen should have been easily able to spot the mistake. Other routine procedures were violated which suggests a rather obvious explanation for the error. The military munitions personnel were acting under direct orders, though not through the regular chain of military command. This takes me to the second question 
Who was in Charge of the B-52 Incident?
Who ordered the loading of Advanced Cruise missiles on to a B-52 in violation of Air Force regulations? The quick reaction of the Air Force and the issuing of a public statement describing the seriousness of the issue and the launch of an immediate investigation, suggests that whatever occurred, was outside the regular chain of military command. If the regular chain of command was violated, then we have to inquire as to whether the B-52 incident was part of a covert project whose classification level exceeded that held by officers in charge of nuclear weapons at Minot AFB. The most obvious governmental entity that may have ordered the nuclear arming of the B-52 outside the regular chain of military command is the last remaining bastion of neo-conservative activism in the Bush administration.
Vice President Cheney has taken a very prominent role in covert military operations and training exercises designed for the “seamless integration” of different national security and military authorities to possible terrorist attacks. On May 8, 2001, President Bush placed Cheney in charge of "[A]ll federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction, consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies" (see: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011805_simplify_case.shtml) . Cheney subsequently played a direct role in supervising training exercises that simultaneously occurred during the 911 attacks.
According to former Los Angeles Police Officer Michael Ruppert, Cheney had a parallel chain of command that he used to override Air Force objections to stand down orders that grounded the USAF during the 911 attacks (see: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011805_simplify_case.shtml ). Ruppert learned that the Secret Service had the authority to directly communicate presidential and vice presidential orders to fighter pilots in the air thereby circumventing the normal chain of command. (Crossing the Rubicon, pp. 428 – 429). Furthermore: “It is the Secret Service who has the legal mandate to take supreme command in case of a scheduled major event - or an unplanned major emergency - on American soil; these are designated "National Special Security Events".” http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011805_simplify_case.shtml .
Ruppert and others have subsequently claimed that 911 was an “inside job;” and Cheney through the Secret Service, played a direct leadership role in what occurred over 911. Consequently, it is very possible that Cheney played a similar role in circumventing the regular chain of military command in ordering the B-52 incident. It is likely that the B-52 incident was part of a contrived "National Special Security Event" directly controlled by Cheney by virtue of the authority granted to him by President Bush, and through the Secret Service which has the technological means to by pass the regular chain of military command. I now move to my third key question.
Why was the nuclear armed B-52 sent to Barksdale AFB?
If initial reports that the weapons were being decommissioned, but were mistakenly transported by a B-52 bomber, then the weapons should have been taken to Kirtland Air Force Base. According to Kristensen, this is “where the warheads are separated from the rest of the weapon and shipped to the Energy Department’s Pantex dismantlement facility near Amarillo, Texas” (see: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2007_9_5.html#149D6ECF ). However, it has been revealed that Barksdale AFB is used as a staging base for operations in the Middle East (see: http://tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/sep/05/staging_nuke_for_iran ). This is circumstantial evidence that the weapons were being deployed for possible use in the Middle East.
There has been recent speculation concerning a possible attack against Iran given reports that the Pentagon has completed plans for a three day bombing blitz of Iran according to a Sunday Times report (see: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2369001.ece ). The Report claims that 1200 targets have been selected and this will destroy much of Iran’s military infrastructure. Such an attack will devastate Iran’s economy, create greater political instability in the region, and stop the oil supply. A disruption of the oil supply from the Persian Gulf could trigger a global economic recession and lead to the collapse of financial markets. In a synchronistic development, there have been reports of billion dollar investments in high risk stock options in both Europe and the U.S. that would only be profitable if a dramatic collapse of the stock market were to occur before September 21. Similar stock options were purchased weeks before the 911 attack in 2001, and investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for possible insider trading. The combination of the Sunday Times report and the Stock market option purchases is circumstantial evidence that plans for a concerted military attack against Iran have been secretly approved and covert operations have begun (see: http://exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-57.htm ).
Seymour Hersh in May 2006 reported the opposition of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.
In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran's uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. …. "Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning," the former senior intelligence official told me. "And Pace stood up to them. Then the world came back: 'O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.' http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/10/060710fa_fact .
Given earlier opposition by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it is likely that the present attack plans for Iraq drawn up by the Pentagon don’t involve the use of nuclear weapons. In order to circumvent the regular chain of command, opposed to a nuclear attack, it is very likely that Vice President Cheney contrived a “National Special Security Event” that involved a nuclear armed B-52. This would have given him the legal authority to place orders directly through the Secret Service to the Air Force officers responsible for the B-52 incident.
Conclusion: Exposing those Responsible for the B-52 Incident
1 | 2
www.exopolitics.org
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 29 comments |
|
Perish the thought, but ...
could that, " ... August 30, ... B-52 bomber armed with five nuclear-tipped Advanced Cruise missiles travel[ling] from Minot Air Force base, North Dakota, to Barksdale Air Force base, Louisiana...[with each] missile ha[ving] an adjustable yield between five and 150 kilotons of TNT which is at the lower end of the destructive capacities of U.S. nuclear weapons..." have been a dry run for Chertoff's wrenching gut feeling that something bad was going to happen this summer, (and not precisely over Iran but more so over these United States, so as to give Bush the power, more like excuse, to totally and completely cancel democracy in this country?" Coming from the bushes and their lust for power and control anything is possible. by elena dumas (62 articles, 18 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 111 comments [24 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 5:51:47 AM  (0+)
|
|
Great article Michael,
by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 698 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 6:34:22 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Stock Market Put Options
Those billion dollar put option investments have mystified most stock market analysts. They only make sense if someone knew that a dramatic event was going to happen before September 21 that would drive down the stock markets. I think the use of nuclear weapons would qualify for such a dramatic event. Amazing to think insiders would view this as an opportunity to cash in on a stock market collapse. by Dr Michael Salla (22 articles, 19 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 30 comments) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 9:29:46 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Hi Michael
If some big wigs in the markets have advance warning (which they apparently did before the Iraq war because of the “energy taskforce meetings”) then I have to wonder if it is just because they are reading the tea leaves in the news, or if they have been tipped by someone. My guess is the latter. I read over at TheStreet that they are calling these the "Bin Laden Options Trades". They have an interesting article on it there that doesn’t dismiss any of the theories of what it means. by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 698 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 10:05:13 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: More links on August Put/Call Options
Hi John, there's more useful articles on the mysterious put and call option investments made in late August both in the US and Europe here: http://www.anomalicresearch.com/optioncall.html It's interesting that these occurred roughly one week before the August 30 B-52 incident. I think there is a connection. Insiders knew that there would be a dramatic shift in the Stock Market for different stocks if nuclear weapons were suddently detonated somewhere. Some stocks collapsing while others would rise quickly. The insiders attempted to cash in. Whether the leaking of the B-52 incident puts an Iran attack on hold and threatens the put/call option investments that expire on Sept 21 is a good question. My view is that the B-52 incident was leaked by the Army Times since military insiders wanted to ensure that Secretary Gates, et al, would put a stop to what Cheney and co, were planning. Now I think they have reason to push Cheney out the door. by Dr Michael Salla (22 articles, 19 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 30 comments) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 12:03:15 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Broken Arrow?
Michael, your article states it was 5 missiles that were on the bomber, yet I am pulling up a number of reports that state the number is 6. Do you have any additional sources on the details in this matter? I have already come across some blogosphere speculation that we have a "broken arrow" in progress, with a missing nuke being deployed to some nefarious secret purpose. Any info? by jasper sneed (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 9:55:49 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Put Options
You are absolutely right about this. BUYING put options is a gambler's act, unless you have INSIDE INFORMATION. A real investor (anybody with that kind of money) would SELL CALLS if they believed the economy was headed lower, but would only BUY PUTS if they were ABSOLUTELY SURE it was headed lower and would ABSOLUTELY DO SO within that very limited time frame. The buyer of put options will lose ALL THEIR MONEY if the economy doesn't crash before September 22. ALL THEIR INVESTMENT. EVERY PENNY OF IT. by Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 747 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 14, 2007 at 11:43:50 AM (0+)
|
|
Very interesting and disturbing stuff
First of all, from a personal perspective as a former blue suiter, this is embarrassing. My current friends who are former members of other branches are having a field day with this, ragging me incessantly. This is completely unacceptable. Any current or former member of the USAF should be embarrassed. There are safeguards, upon safeguards, upon regulations, upon regulations, upon redundancies that are geared to preventing this from happening. There is no excuse for it. I dont know what to think of the items posted by Salla, but I will say this, among all the branches, USAF personnel least fit the stereotype of mindless automatons blindly following orders. Most people know that virtually all officers in the military have at least bachelors degrees, but even among Air Force enlisted people, last time I checked, nearly 70% of enlisted USAF had at least two years of college. It is a highly educated branch with people who know how to think for themselves. You don't hear about allegations of Air Force personnel on the ground in Iraq torturing or killing people, and there are USAF people on the ground in Iraq at various Air Bases, with support people doing various things including security. The point of all that is, it is impossible for me to conceive of a way this happened. It would have required mistakes on the part of too many people, probably close to two dozen enlisted airmen of various ranks and a dozen officers. And people in the military are encouraged to question things where nuclear weapons are concerned, particularly in the absence of a national emergency. Taking one of Salla's items at face value, if it is that rare for nuclear weapons to be loaded on a B-52, I cannot imagine how most of those involved weren't screaming. What if this had been a training mission? There are bombing ranges in the US where bomber crews train with dropping dummy munitions. A cruise missile is harder to make a mistake with in a circumstance like that, but if it could happen (a live nuke loaded instead of a dummy weapon) with a cruise missile, it could happen with a gravity weapon. It is just impossible to understand how this happened. And Salla's theories regarding Cheney are not really, in my opinion, adequate to explain it. Too many Airmen would have been involved and they would have asked questions and there are people to whom they could have gone to on base to immediately raise concerns. I've seen situations where enlisted Airmen with just a few stripes have gone to the base inspector general with an issue of misconduct and the result was the forced retirement of a general, and that was with an issue that doesnt come close to the seriousness of the mishandling of nuclear weapons. by Steven Leser (261 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2163 comments [66 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 12:25:19 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Some questions for you.
With the state of tension in the world today, why would anyone allow nuclear bombs to be loaded on the wing pods of an Air Force bomber? If people in the Air Force are more intelligent that those in the other services, why did a pilot, grounds-men, flight personnel or Air Force generals allow this plane to be loaded and flown anywhere? Who gives orders for what is loaded onto a plane and where that plane is to go? I personally and physically would have sat on a nuclear bomb and not have allowed it to move until I got some real answers. This one incident could be the end of our civilization. If I were Russia or China, I would have my finger on nuclear bomb retaliatory buttons now. How could this happen? Have you tried to find out why and who would allow this? by Jimmy Porter (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 1:43:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Very hard to answer
Many of my responses will be best guesses, let me just say that right off of the bat: Some questions for you. With the state of tension in the world today, why would anyone allow nuclear bombs to be loaded on the wing pods of an Air Force bomber? If this involved a group of Airmen and officers who were lax in their following of procedures, it may be that they felt the opposite was the case, that with good relations with Russia and China, this really wasnt a big deal anymore. Again, there are two assumptions in that answer. If people in the Air Force are more intelligent that those in the other services, why did a pilot, grounds-men, flight personnel or Air Force generals allow this plane to be loaded and flown anywhere? It is so beyond believable and understanding that if the military and government didnt acknowledge that it happened, I would have a hard time believing that it did. You have the munitions people who handle the storage of the weapons and would have to account for their transfer, you have the military police who guard the munitions areas, you have the crew people who load the planes, you have the pilots and other folks who actually fly on the plane, you have the tower personnel, who would have noticed cruise missiles sitting on the wings of the plane. I just dont get it. There must have been orders of some sort that explained it all, but what kind of orders? Were they orders to have the weapons transferred for dismantling? But everything about the way the weapons were handled was odd. Who gives orders for what is loaded onto a plane and where that plane is to go? Well, lets go a step further. There is only one person that could authorize a nuclear attack and that is the President or in the case of the incapacity of the President, the Vice President or on down in the line of succession. I personally and physically would have sat on a nuclear bomb and not have allowed it to move until I got some real answers. As would most people I knew in the USAF in a similar circumstance. This exercise in answering your questions has been useful, because in doing so I have come to the realization that there must have been a convincing set of orders that explained all of it so well that even in a situation that might have seemed odd, no one asked questions. The only problem for all of us is, we will never see those orders or know what they said. That will fuel all sorts of conspiracy theories. And why shouldnt it? This scares me to death. This one incident could be the end of our civilization. If I were Russia or China, I would have my finger on nuclear bomb retaliatory buttons now. How could this happen? Have you tried to find out why and who would allow this? I wasnt nearly high enough in pay grade to have the ability to ask those questions of people in the know. But, you are right. Whether we find out about it or not, as a result of what just happened, Russia and China and everyone else who has WMD will be altering their routines to allow a more rapid response in the event we do something foolish. They will also do what they can to try and harden their own weapons stores and platforms. As you said, that all translates to a greater danger worldwide of an accidental release of nuclear weapons or other WMD. by Steven Leser (261 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2163 comments [66 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 2:35:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: I know this is silly but
I'd like your take on it. What about all of the evangelical Christians now coming out of the Airforce academy. Sounds like the actual nature and constituion of the airforce is being modified..... by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1410 comments [429 recommended, 11 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 2:45:41 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Do you have a source for that?
It's not that I doubt you, I have heard that before, but I'd like to see exactly what it says. If I understand the idea behind the question, you are implying that the new officers would be either more compliant with orders, or more willing to see something that would usher in the end of the world via a nuclear armageddon. I would need convincing that any of this was true. First off, the service academies only take the brightest of high school students. Now, we all know it isnt exactly hard to get straight A's in high school. High school is designed so that if you apply yourself, even a kid with average intelligence can get A's, but the academies also require that a kid show some evidence of leadership ability to get in. Secondly, in order to produce officers who will be successful in combat, you have to train them to not only be able to think well, but to do so under the hellish conditions of the battlefield or pressures of a national emergency. That does not mean they will not sacrifice themselves or the people under them if the situation requires it for an overall objective, but they wont do it on a whim either. If you understand all of that, then you understand what the academies, the college ROTC programs and the Officer training schools are at least attempting to teach. These folks are not going to gloss over a situation where the the mishandling of nuclear weapons is involved. As I said in a previous response, there had to have been detailed orders that made all of this seem normal even to people trained to pay attention to detail and be cautious with the weapons under their charge. by Steven Leser (261 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2163 comments [66 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 3:00:41 PM (0+)
|
|
Impeach the Fool
After all the mistakes of Cheney, why would any one doubt his culpability. He needs to be impeached now rather than later. He is just hatching another ploy to nuke Iran. As for eduction denoting integrity .Most of the neocons are educated and some even highly intelligent, Cheney is .That is why he can mislead so many with his measured arguments. Many intelligent people are fools. No he will not resign. He must be impeached. by cluelessfl (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 188 comments) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 1:07:51 PM (0+)
|
|
Now I am scared.
If this article is the tip of the ice berg, I am afraid, not of the terrorist, but of my own government. If they curcomvented laws in place to inhibit the transportation of nuclear weapons and more importantly if they intend or do use them all hell will break loose. I have not nor will I ever give my government the right to use these weapons. If they ignore the wishes of the people they govern, they can expect to be railroaded out into the ocean at gun point. Tell me they were not going to use these? What has happened to them now? Where are they? Loaded on external pods of a big bomber? Against our laws? by Jimmy Porter (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 1:12:38 PM (0+)
|
|
OFFICIAL PROPAGANDA FOR THE PUBLIC
Now I wish I had paid attention more closely. For several months the White House has been announcing that the evildoers were planning an attack. Then the Bin Laden tape comes out. Then . . .apparently they didn't quite have their way. It looks like nor only was Dr. Strangelove prophetic, he was way too reticent. by Guajolotl (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 131 comments) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 4:13:07 PM (0+)
|
|
They Have Pulled the "Trigger" on us.....Once again
Our nuclear warfighting elite are hard at work trying to get us exterminated before we all wake up to what they have done to us. "They" have pulled the nuclear "Trigger" on us once again. The Extraterrestrials allowed them to launch 1 nuclear tipped cruise missile and then locked out the other 5 missiles so that "They" are now short one missile. Steve Fossett, spending a life time embracing the murdering rich, took a dive and now we have a cover story for the Air force to put up a large scale search effort. Where is the 1 missing cruise missile? It could be that "ET" has placed it into their little storage box, awaiting a prime moment to turn it over to us so that we may sooner or later get a clue. Here's a clue: Our nuclear war fighting elite have repeatedly pulled the nuclear trigger on us for several decades now. We are the "Living Dead." The Secret Service who had the ability to do this act on Cheneys orders, are the enemy within. Chertoff had a "Gut Feeling," that something was about to explode upon America. Did Chertoff have fore knowledge of "Operation Overkill?" Rather than a covert attempt to bomb Iran with nuclear weapons, we have just lived through another attempt to begin a general nuclear war with the predetermined plan to destroy the mass of the human race. Let us recall the words of the late Senator John Stennis: "When the people find out whats going on; 'It is going to blow the Pentagon right out of the water.'" by Patrick (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 524 comments [23 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 4:51:50 PM (0+)
|
|
Holy Shit!
I am totally blown away by this and relieved that some airman had the presence of mind to say something. I continually ask myself "Who are these freaks running our country?" What has the the US government morphed into? It is a freaking monster running amok with hardly anyone of significance asking the hard questions. Where the hell are our Senators and Congressman? Why are they not jumping to their feet and freaking out? All I can say is that I am going to stay here in the Philippines until I feel that it is safe to go back home to Oregon. I am going to continually speak my mind for the rest of the complacent american "sheep". Here are my feelings in a nutshell; I am a retired US Navy veteran and also an American expat (my US address is for mailing only). I left the US when Cheney and his pet pooch Bush were selected. I knew what would happen while most of my freinds and family thought I was just spouting political BS. Now I can say "I told them so". This administration is dangerous, deceitful and totally out of control. This war and everything that led up to it is a thinly vieled illusion to hide the self serving interests of the Cheney administration. I am totally blown away by the fact that a majority of the American public stand by and say nothing while the facts are right in front of them. Thank you for helping keep this issue in the forefront and raising the awareness of the American public. by Philip Madlem (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 8:57:01 PM (0+)
|
|
Attempt to bomb Iran
Going back to the start of the Bush administration and 9/11. George Bush and Dick Cheney are capable of any thing. i remember there was a narticle of something like $25,000,000,000 Billion Dollars missing after 9/11. were is this money? Stock Matket collapse. it is possible. remember wealthy people control our government. they are intent on destroying america. to fill there pockets.(Greed) surley. the fact is we americans must clean up our government. a rebellion is needed. by vincent passiatore (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 185 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 at 10:37:43 PM (0+)
|
|
Citizen Amendments to the United States Constitution
Hi: The addition of the Citizen Amendments to the United States Constitution is the only way that America will be Free Again. Get your copy at www.CitizenAmendments.org Have a good day Tony 100% Citizen of the United States of America by Anton Grambihler (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 318 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 2:09:05 AM (0+)
|
|
? More of Cheney's shenanigans ?
In Canada, we require a min. of 10 signatures in various log books to ship any munition by air, and since we are talking about nuclear ordinance here, that would require about 8 more. So what do we now have on our hands? B) They were fully activated and mounted in flight, no doubt to verify their operational capability. Remember that the original story was '5' nukes'; the revised figure is now '6', but I believe we still have only '5' accounted for. It would appear one is missing."Houston, we have problem...". by The Pundit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 10:42:08 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Another article
Here is another article from a former Army military intelligence and public affairs officer, as well as a former NBC editorial writer. His political and military analyses have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, the Houston Chronicle and Military Intelligence Magazine. by Bleeding Heart Liberal (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 48 comments) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 10:50:21 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: That analysts comments sound much like mine
no former military person can understand this. It is inconceivable. by Steven Leser (261 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2163 comments [66 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 11:37:41 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Worse thanwhat you said
I think it is even worse than what you said. My read on this is as follows - 2) When these missiles are "normally" shipped for dismantling, they are shipped in special C-130 cargo planes and not B-52 Bombers 3) These missiles were supposedly "locked and loaded" on to B-52 Bombers, and went to an air base that does not do dismantling. The missiles were mounted onto the pylons of the bomber’s wings 4) This was so egregious that 3 USAF officers on condition of anonimity went to the "Military Times" by Bleeding Heart Liberal (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 48 comments) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 12:03:48 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Inconcievable?
"I'm not sure (in the context of what these nut jobs can concieve of) that word means what you think it means." (PRINCESS BRIDE, William Goldman) by Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 747 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 14, 2007 at 11:57:13 AM (0+)
|
|
Minot Staff - for those who are interested
Lt. Gen. Robert J. Elder Jr. The directly responsible: Col. Emig The enlightened: (those who should immediately be given 24 hr protections) …or we’ll have another Ft. Bragg ’situation’. by The Pundit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 3:41:39 PM (0+)
|
|
Covert attempt?
There are a lot of nonsensical aspects to this stories official explanation. One article I read said the pilots were not aware the misiles were aboard. Other reports explained the misiles were mounted on 'pylons' under the wings. They look way too big to fit 6(or5) into the bomb bay. by Dutchmajician (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments) on Sunday, Sep 9, 2007 at 11:11:23 PM (0+)
|
|
Concluding too much with too little
Because my name appears several places in Mr. Salla's article, I have received several calls and emails from people who have gotten the impression that I somehow collaborated with Mr. Salla about this article. I therefore have to make it absolutely clear here that I do not agree with the analysis or conclusions nor did I collaborate in any way. With all due respect to Mr. Salla, I think he concludes too much based on too little, combining individual but unrelated pieces of information to end up with a fantastic conclusion that he doesn't prove or make credible. To me the explanation for the Minot incident seems much more straightforward; someone goofed up in the custodial system. Period. I'll await the official report before making any final observations, but to suggest that this incident was somehow a covert attempt by Cheney to bypass the system and strike Iran is, I think, just ridiculous. There is no need to make the Minot incident bigger. It's bad enough as it is. Hans Kristensen by Hans Kristensen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Thursday, Sep 13, 2007 at 3:41:17 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: The Custodial System
Now, I know that regimented systems can be subverted by creating a highly credentialed order at the start, and then the entire system works FOR the mistake (allowing it to continue, gain additional traction, and in some cases escalate), rather than against it (catch the mistake early and stop it). That is ONE possibility. The first person in the chain of mistakes has to be convinced that everything is "A-OK." After that, everybody else assumes that it MUST be "A-OK" because it got to them. They are relying on the capability and security of the person in the chain BEFORE them to have done THEIR job. But, in the case of nuclear weapons, we are dealing with systems that are NOT supposed to accept outside or previous credentials but are supposed to RE-CONFIRM THE ORDERS THEMSELVES at EACH and EVERY STEP. This is a totally different protocol. It should, based on the procedures and policies in place, be easier to steal ALL of the money in the U.S. Mint AND the plates themselves than steal or mis-direct a nuclear weapon under control of the U.S. Military. by Charlie L (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 747 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 14, 2007 at 12:36:03 PM (0+)
|
|
I guess this is just a coincidence?
Since the story broke 7 days ago, about the missing nuke\clandestine operation from Minot, we have the following for those who are paying attention: by The Pundit (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Sunday, Sep 16, 2007 at 12:04:18 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
