Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nukes Over Amerika (Weekend Edition)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:17 PM
Original message
Nukes Over Amerika (Weekend Edition)
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 07:25 PM by Rick Myers
For those just tuning in, this is the continuing story of 6 lost and lonely AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles, each packing a W-80 variable yield nuclear warhead...

Somehow, some way, they were loaded onto the wing pylons of an active duty B-52 bomber, the B-52 was flown to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana from Minot AFB in North Dakota, then the missiles were left hanging on the unsecured, parked airplane for about ten hours.

A LIVE nuclear weapon has NOT flown on a US combat aircraft since 1968.

I have now heard from five retired and active duty Air Force members, each having some experience on the flight line, a crew chief and command and control types. NOT A ONE can concieve of ANY way this could have been an 'accident' or 'mistake.' Everyone agrees that these weapons were some how 'ordered' onto the aircraft (by someone, somehow) and that the flight crew DID NOT KNOW they were carrying nuclear weapons. No one can provide any sort of explanation as to how this could have occurred.

Eariler today I posted about this incident on a blog related to military issues, and the post was delieted later in the day. There was no 'tin-foil' material in the post, just a statement of known facts and some questions. No one in the MSM has picked up on this story, but it is a SERIOUS and SIGNIFICANT national story.

It is known that the Air Force is reviewing it's 'control protocols' and I have recieved a list of the various systems used to manage nuclear weapons. I will be looking into these systems this evening.

BTW: I have seen at least 4 tin-foil scenarios tossed out on the Internets. Some are completely crazy, but at least one requires some further research.

Here's a link to yeaterday's thread on this story: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Thanks for tuning in...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. I know this is probably a dumb question, but...
I know this is probably a dumb question, but why do we need nukes on bombers to attack mid-east targets, when we have perfectly good silo-based ICBMS that do not have to be moved around, raising suspicion?

I always thought that nuclear bombers were a deterrent against a nuclear first strike.

Why do we need bombers against a country that doesn't have a nuclear retaliatory capability?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Not a dumb question at all
These nukes are not your 'run of the mill' nukes. While the AF has floated the story that these cruise missiles were being transported for 'decomissioning,' THERE HAS NOT BEEN A LIVE NUCLEAR WEAPON aboard a combat aircraft since 1968! Nuclear weapons are ALWAYS transported in sections in cargo aircraft with armed DOE couriers.

In previous threads I have shown a USAF budget document that indicates that 38 of these missiles are being UPGRADED this year and that they will remain in inventory until fiscal year 2030.

These weapons were LIVE and placed on the bomber in deployment position. And they are not just nuclear weapons. The AGM-129 is a STEALTH cruise missile designed to strike HARDENED targets. With a variable nuclear yield of 5 to 150 kilotons, and specially reinforced airframes, they are designed to hit bunkers and underground facilities. There is NO conventionally armed version of this weapon.

At this point, no one can explain how they were loaded, how they were MISSED in pre-flight by the aircrew, and how they were missed on the ground at Barksdale.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. And we don't have something like that which can be launched from a silo or submarine? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. The short answer is... NO
not at least the stealth component

The long answer is US Doctrine requires a triad for effective deterrence

SAC is but one of the three legs

The silos are the second

The Subs are the third

The whole idea is to effectively guarantee the destruction of the enemy even if somehow they manage to strike first
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Ahh... then this makes much more sense now. We're all going to die. Thanks!
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 08:22 PM by IanDB1
All those Repukes are resigning to "spend more time with their families"... because they KNOW it is the LAST time they'll be able to spend with their families.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. That has been long standing doctrine
going back to the 1950s

It is not bush who'se brought it up

It was meant for the cold war, and I'd hazzard to say this is why the Soviets never openly atacked
us, and why we didn't openly attaced them

Mutually Assured Destruction... MAD

These days ... with our current leaders... I don't know what to tell you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nevernose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #17
44. A small point of disagreement:
...this is why the Soviets never openly attacked
us, and why we didn't openly attacked them.


The Soviets never had any real REASON to attack us, nor us, them. If anything, the "Cold" War was good for both of us. We got to engage in proxy wars (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Africa, etc.) without actually having to go toe-to-toe, but, more importantly, there was nothing to gain.

One of the few truisms that I've heard in my life that was actually true is "follow the money." Wars seldom have anything to do with ideology; wars frequently have something to do with money. The Soviets had nothing to fear from us, since we were too busy making money and controlling our populace with the threat of imminent invasion, and we had nothing to fear from the Commies, because they were too busy both keeping their heads above water economically by scaring them into submission.

Although our nuclear trifecta was, IMO, an absolutely brilliant political ploy, it had nothing to do with the collapse of Soviet style communism or the prevention of a nuclear war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. I agree, it has nothing to do with the fall of the USSR
Hell if you ask ideologues in the US, it was reagan, in the ME, it was bin ladin

If you ask those in the know, the USSR collapsed for the same exact reason we will collapse, essentially over extension and overspending

;-)

Didn't Rome collapse for that reaon too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #46
97. Rome also collapsed because they poisoned their whole population (with lead)...
and depleted all their forests.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #97
117. And also "privatized their military too!" (aka Blackwater!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NeoGreen Donating Member (299 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. If I may interject...
SAC (Strategic Air Command) held two of three components of our "Triad" defense structure.

1) Bombers (SAC) - rapid response (designed to go from cold (on the ground) to hot (in the air)) as quickly as possible in response to attack. Actual times change with each upgrade (think B-52 vintage to B-1B).

Pros (flexible platform)
Can be redirected in the air.
Relative cheap (when compared to other two members of triad)
Easily upgradeable

Cons
Crews could be potentially unreliable
Can be redirected in the air.

2) Missile Silos (SAC) - hardened response, (designed to be able to survive and initial attack and response in kind). The missile field for Grand Forks ND AFB (sister base to Minot)was spread out over an area the size of NJ. If I remember correctly, at its peak there were 300 silos, each a member of a group of ~10 with an independent launch center. Don't forget, each silo held a MIRV. So even if only a handful of one base worth of missiles survive to launch, it's still curtains for the Northern hemisphere.

Pros (survivable platform)
Hardened - can survive initial attack

Cons
Difficult (impossible) to re-direct/re-call after launch
High cost to maintain

3) Ballistic Submarines (NAVY) - somewhat of a compromise between survivable & mobile benefits of the two above.

Pros (compromise platform)
Somewhat survivable (assuming you evade the sub hunters)
Somewhat mobile (as long as you're not being hunted)

Cons
High cost
Difficult/dangerous to operate (subs are not easy to keep and maintain) add a nuke to one and suddenly everyone wants to know where you are.

Currently, SAC, as an entity, does not exist. We now have "Combat Commands". Since the CC's are after my time, I don't have a lot to add on their functionality/capabilities.

hope this helps,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EnricoFermi Donating Member (139 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #21
152. I'd like to add to your first point

1) Bombers (SAC) - rapid response (designed to go from cold (on the ground) to hot (in the air)) as quickly as possible in response to attack. Actual times change with each upgrade (think B-52 vintage to B-1B).

Pros (flexible platform)
Can be redirected in the air.
Relative cheap (when compared to other two members of triad)
Easily upgradeable


I see another pro as:
Russia is less likely to misinterpret it as an attack on them if we decide to hit Iran with one of these. I know they can tell trajectories, but trust me, if they saw an ICBM or a submarine launch, they would freak the hell out, possibly nuking us in the process. If a bomber launches one of these smaller missiles, which is relatively undetectable due to its ability to avoid radar, they aren't going be as likely to nuke us, and they'll first learn about it when they "see" the mushroom cloud over Iran.

Both subs and silos would immediately alert all major powers, possibly triggering MAD. A bomber could be anything, and you wouldn't necessarily know until its missile hit its target.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
22. The somewhat longer answer is that those warheads make too big of a boom.
The strategic missiles are in the megaton range, not the 50-150 kiloton range. These are 'tactical', I use the scary quotes because of the oxymoronic aspects of the idea of a tactical nuke.

Now, assuming that this happened outside of the normal chain of custody, then these would be the weapons available without having to recode targeting. The question becomes, who benefits?

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. OK, I'm gonna step into 'tin-foil' land for a minute...
IF you were going to 'false flag' a hit on, say, an American city... You'd need a warhead that 'emulated' an old Soviet 'suitcase bomb.' Anything too big would be obvious. This warhead can be dialed down to 5 kt. Six of them sat on the empty tarmac at Barksdale for 10 hours. Your tax dollars at work???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Well, a false flag op doesn't fit well with moving them to Barksdale...
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 10:03 PM by hootinholler
IF one's objective was a false flag op on the mainland, why park the platform after you gained control of a missile that can hit anywhere in the mainland from basically anywhere in the central US?

Edit to say I didn't realize they could be dialed down that low.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #28
41. Hoping to remove a warhead while the plane sat unguarded???
All they need is one little warhead. Drive it anywhere. But something went wrong? Just a crazy guess....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #41
70. Cheney said all they needed was one bomb.
Why the initial discrepancy between 5-6?

Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest - some do-minions trying to oblige?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #70
164. Maybe the B-52 dropped on in flight and that's why we're looking for Fossett
One theory is that the Fossett search is a cover operation for the search of a lost (intentionally or otherwise) dial-a-yield nuke.

Maybe it landed with 5 but took off with 6.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #26
35. and that was my tin foil when this broke
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #26
65. My theory:
There is plenty of loose nuke material running around (probably a lot more of it since Plame was outed) for a false flag operation to utilize. If a suitcase nuke were to be detonated here in the US there would not need to be a horrific result for the war mongers to justify retaliating with nukes.

I think that they are just staging everything, putting all of their ducks in a row so that they can go with nuking Iran without political debate, international appeal for reason, or the interference of facts.



Rick, I want to thank you for keeping this story out in the open. Your work is appreciated. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #22
33. Another thing about the W-80 warheads
IIRC, these are "Dial-a-Yield" weapons, which can be set to explode with a set yield between 5 and 100 kilotons.

So the boom can be as big as they want it to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. I know this question would need a physicist to answer ( and I readily admit not being one)
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 11:05 PM by Wiley50
But how can a "Dial-a-Nuke" weapon exist?

Seems to me, in a violent reaction such as a nuclear detonation

that yield would have to be determined by the amount of fissile material (plutonium) present.

In such a situation, all mechanical restraints on yield would fail due to the violence of the reaction

In other words: more fuel= more BOOM

In a big way, I realize that this is a distraction from the more important questions involved:

How the fuck did they get on the hard points of that bomber and WHY?

But, in the interest of being accurate (and not leaving any room for criticism),

Are we sure that these assets are not manufactured in increments of yield?

And that they are not kept in inventory according to those yields?

( I mean, we do have an inventory of almost 10,000 weapons)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #39
42. Nuclear explosions are hard to produce.
Well, I don't think it's the mass of fissionable material in the device, but the mass of the fissionable material in the critical mass zone. Nukes are not 100% efficient, so the parts that don't contribute to the boom become fallout.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #39
43. Plutonium would be a fusion reaction (H-Bomb)
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 11:27 PM by Rick Myers
The W-80 is a dial-a-date fission bomb. Much lower yields from a U235 - 236 core.

on edit: wrong, they ARE fusion devices, see next post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #43
48. No, both plutonium and uranium are fission material
Plutonium-239 and uranium-235 are what's used in nukes. I guesss it's easier to make weapons-grade Pu239 than U235 because you don't need centrifuge it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #39
45. They are fusion weapons
A small fission bomb of a fixed yield initiates the nuclear fusion reaction. The fusion fuel is some mixture of deuterium with (I believe) some lithium isotope. The bomb must have some way of selecting how much fusion fuel gets injected into the fusion chamber just before the fission bomb goes off.

Probably, the lowest yield available is just the fission bomb's detonation. No fusion fuel is added. At the far end of the scale, injecting the entire load of fusion fuel give you the 150 kilotons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. I should have known that. My mistake, too late for me!!!
Thanks for the correction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #45
52. And Thanks For The Nuclear Physics Lesson n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #45
61. Pardon Me, But this Begs another Question ( although related to my original premise)
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 12:37 AM by Wiley50
OK

"The bomb must have some way of selecting how much fusion fuel gets injected into the fusion chamber just before the fission bomb goes off."

An Atomic detonation, by definition, is a situation violent enough that the very atomic structure is in flux, protons, electrons and neutrons go flying, changing one element into another and creating new elements not found in nature.

So how could any humanly manufactured "fusion chamber" define which parts of available primary substances (fusion fuel) are able to become part of the reaction? How could this possibly be?

I mean, any element in the vicinity is, again by definition, in atomic flux.


on edit (in a nervous attempt at humor): I think we are about to be atomically Fucked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #61
77. Fusion is harder to sustain than fission
I've heard there was some question about whether or not the atmosphere would go critical during the early fusion tests.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #77
119. I Remember That Too, And It Has Always Amazed\Bothered Me !!!
"Ya know, some of the scientists worry that a fusion test might ignite the entire atmoshere."

"Yeah, I heard that too. Ready? 3... 2... 1... FIRE!!!"

:wtf: :wtf: :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #61
86. It's an area that exists for only a tiny fragment of a second
It's where the heat and pressure from the fission detonation are strong enough to create a fusion reaction that will chain-react.

This all happens in nanoseconds. It's not a physical chamber, it's a, oh, maybe "region" describes it better. In this region there exists for a brief period of time (before the entire thing blows apart) where a fusion reaction can take place. And that fusion reaction takes place, with deuterium fusing into helium and releasing energy, which fuses more deuterium into helium, etc.

The fusion chain-reaction also takes place in a very brief period of time before the whole thing blows apart. Once the conditions are lost in the region the fusion reaction stops, and the radiation of all that released energy starts to spread out.

And you're absolutely right: the very atomic structure is in flux, protons, electrons and neutrons go flying, changing one element into another and creating new elements not found in nature.


The area around ground zero become a hotbed of strange radioactive particles. All kinds of normal, everyday objects become radioactive. For example, a hail of neutrons just made all the cobalt in the steel alloys of your car radioactive for the next week.

The chain reaction conditions are very narrow, though. And the chain reaction is what makes the KA-
BOOM.

In fact, in a fission bomb, most of the fissionable material (either uranium-235 or plutonium-239) is just blown apart into vapor.

The "Little Boy" uranium bomb dropped on Hiroshima, for example, had 64 kilograms of U235 in it. Only 1% of the U235 actually fissioned, the remaining 63-odd kilograms was spread out over Japan because the chain reaction blew the system apart before there was time for the chair reactio to progress further.

We've gotten better at that, of course, but it's a good example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #61
103. Dial a yield and the teller-ulam design
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 09:09 AM by Pavulon
are covered in "dark sun". A fusion bomb is a two stage weapon. A standard fission explosion is initiated by an implosion, energy from that reaction is used to initiate a fusion reaction. Its yield can be influenced by regulating the amount of "fuel" for it to burned. I would guess regulating deuterium and or tritium would have this effect. I do not know where the line is about guessing on this technology so I will leave it there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Teller-Ulam_device_3...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #103
104. A quick Wikipedia article for you
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_yield

Dial-a-yield can be achieved with fusion neutron boosting. This can be accomplished by injecting a few milliliters of deuterium-tritium (DT) gas into the vacuum of a hollow core pit inside of a fission-type nuclear weapon. When the dial is turned it may open a valve that will inject a little bit of DT gas into the core of the device. Then the atomic core is plugged, and the high-explosive trigger is assembled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUlover2909 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #45
143. I think the hydrogen isotope is used to increase neutron flux
not to become a fusion reaction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drm604 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #39
135. Dial-a-Yield
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DUlover2909 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #39
142. I can stab at a guess
It's possible that a boosted fission weapon could be the way it's yield is modulated. It depends on the amount of tritium that is injected into the implosion device at the moment of the detonation. It has a fixed amount of plutonium, but variying amounts of tritium. It's just a theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. Oh com'on there were a couple systems that were
ahem tactical that were also suicide pacts

After all who can forget the ever so popular (and never left the drawing board) hand grenade

There are times that you have to find the hilarity in these things
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. I especially liked the artillery shells that did get produced. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #36
81. Atomic Annie!!!
Wasn't that the name of the 'big dick' railroad gun???

Shades of Hitler there, right???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #81
132. It was tractor transportable...

Global security has a nice write up of it.


The fireball ascending at Frenchman's Flat, Nevada - Atomic Cannon Test - History's first atomic artillery shell fired from the Army's new 280-mm artillery gun. Hundreds of high ranking Armed Forces officers and members of Congress are present. 23 May 1953

Second photo from Olive Drab.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flabbergasted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. One theory is actually to raise suspicion. Iran's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. self delete
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 08:13 PM by nadinbrzezinski
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
24. uhm
This is obvious. Do you really think it is a good idea to launch an ICBM at a country in Iran's geographic location?

Wouldn't that sort of set Russia and maybe China into their highest state of Alert? The only weapons that would be used would be nuclear cruise missiles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jollyreaper2112 Donating Member (955 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
158. reason for bombers
My guess: the ruskies can detect missile launches from orbit, same as us. We both can also detect surface nuclear blasts via those same sats. It would be less worrisome for the russians to see the blast over the iranian targets than to see missiles rising from our ICBM fields with no guarantee of what their targets will be. Presumably Putin would be informed of the strikes a reasonable amount of time before the flashes would be detected, maybe a half hour or so. Soon enough they shouldn't panic, not soon enough to give the iranians much of a chance to react. But we all know how well tight planning on this sort of thing goes, remember the Japanese informing us we were at war hours after Pearl was attacked? It was supposed to be before the attack. Whoops. And given this being the Bush administration, I bet they wouldn't even think of warning anyone before the attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ancient_nomad Donating Member (474 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
2. Kick and Recommend!
I've been following your posts on this, and want to thank you.

This is so very scarey. WTH are they up to?! Honestly, I have not felt like this since being in Phila. during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. These neoconic devils are going to
destroy us all....W is a damn sadist who loves to inflict pain on others. As I was told by one of his supporters: "You don't understand. We need to bomb them and turn them into lambs like we did Japan and Germany." He gave me shivers. But that is how they think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
motocicleta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. Thanks for keeping on this.
These posts are a real service - K n R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kineneb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. do I need to "duck and cover"?
all humor aside (and this is definitely "not funny"), it is looking more and more suspicious. Hubby helped repair some of the nuke and diesel subs during Vietnam (@ Mare Island Shipyard), and said this incident was totally outside protocol when I asked him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. I can add my own tinfoil scenario to this
and I am not too happy about even thinking of it

That said, whit the current crew the old military adage applies

Hope for the best, and plan for the worst
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. This story is so 'Strangelove' it's hard to get your head around it
I don't want to speculate that this incident had anything to do with a move on Iran or anyone else. The fact that nukes were put aboard a combat aircraft without the crew's knowledge (as far as what has been reported), is THE BIG STORY of the year! I could go off on 2 or 3 'tin-foil' scenarios to disturbing to think about!

Maybe I'll gather all the 'tin-foil' scenarios in a single post next week some time. I'm trying to keep this as factual as possible.

I'm really interested in how (and if) the Pentagon attempts to explain this story. We know the 'decommissioning' story has gone the way of the wind...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. At this pont I don't even expect a public
and HIGHTLY sanitized report

This is how far off the reservation this has gone

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluescribbler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
159. I would love to see
a list of tinfoil hat scenarios. We could vote on which seems most plausible, and which seems most far fetched. :wtf: :nuke: :tinfoilhat:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #159
161. you would need to go to the dungeon for that
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 09:43 PM by seemslikeadream
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
14. Thanks for keeping us up to date
on this Rick, This is a top priority news item that is barely being mentioned on MSM. Something's going on and I am getting the feeling somebody's plans got seriously fucked up and now there is going to be hell to pay. Did chimpy give orders to move those nukes or is there a rogue agency inside the government?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
16. Which one required further research?
btw, thanks for doing this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. There are 2 theories worth investigating...
But I don't want to go off into 'tin-foil' land at this point. I'm trying to keep this as factual as possible. Details change, and I try to reflect that here. Adding conspiracy theories to the general discussion don't add to the Truth.

But, no one with any experience with handling nuclear weapons can imagine ANY scenario that got the wepons mounted, the flight crew unaware, and the plane being 'parked' without additional security.

It has been acknowledged that several aspects of this flight would have been handled differently, including flight path involving restricted airspace, communications with ATC and secuiry at BOTH bases.

We WILL learn what REALLY happened here, if it takes 10 years...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. Well, I wasn't sure whether you were aware of the hypothesis that I posted earlier
which has now been relocated to "tin-foil" land in the 9/11 forum. It's author's credentials are somewhat suspect, but the hypothesis (which he treats as more than hypothesis in his essay) seems quite plausible, but I appreciate you wanting to stick to confirmable factual information. Look forward to your next thread.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #29
84. Some of that info is really interesting.
And I would NEVER discount a story... I believe 9/11 needs a 500 million dollar investigation...

My take: There is kernel of truth in any crazy rant...

It's up to the Pentagon, and, this misAdministration to EXPLAIN :wtf:!!!

You've found some good info and I thank you so much for the assistance!

Rick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
19. Thanks buddy
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
20. Armeggedon baby!!!
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 08:50 PM by Rick Myers


"Ride 'em, cowboy!!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. That fits into one of the theories.
Nice photoshop, but it really should be Cheney not the shrub.

There was a caption this photo not too long ago (couple of weeks, tops) with dickhead and pussyboy walking and * looked scared! I mean like he saw a ghost scared. I'm wondering what his master was telling him? At the time I was thinking it was how screwn they were over everyone leaving and the DOJ situation. Now I'm wondering.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sce56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #20
111. Hey Rick did I point you at that picture?
From a previous post on this subject.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
27. For those who don't know, here's an AF fact sheet on this missile:
here


Mission
The AGM-129A advanced cruise missile is a stealth, nuclear-capable cruise missile used exclusively by B-52H bombers.

Features
The AGM-129A is a subsonic, turbofan-powered, air-launched cruise missile. It is harder to detect, and has greater range and accuracy than the AGM-86 air-launched cruise missile. The ACM achieves maximum range through its highly efficient engine, aerodynamics and fuel loading. B-52H bombers can carry up to six AGM-129A missiles on each of two external pylons for a total of 12 per aircraft. When the threat is deep and heavily defended, the AGM-129 delivers the proven effectiveness of a cruise missile enhanced by stealth technology. Launched in quantities against enemy targets, the ACM's difficulty to detect, flight characteristics and range result in high probability that enemy targets will be eliminated.

The AGM-129A's external shape is optimized for low observables characteristics and includes forward swept wings and control surfaces, a flush air intake and a flat exhaust. These, combined with radar-absorbing material and several other features, result in a missile that is virtually impossible to detect on radar.

The AGM-129A offers improved flexibility in target selection over other cruise missiles. 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. These, combined with small size, low-altitude flight capability and a highly efficient fuel control system, give the United States a lethal deterrent capability well into the 21st century.

Background
In 1982 the Air Force began studies for a new cruise missile with stealth characteristics after it became clear that the AGM-86B would soon be too easy to detect by future air defense systems. In 1983 General Dynamics was awarded a contract to develop the new AGM-129A ACM. The first test missile flew in 1985; the first missiles were delivered to the Air Force in mid-1990.

Plans called for an initial production of approximately 1,500 missiles. The end of the Cold War and subsequent budget cuts led the Air Force to cease production after 460 missiles, with the final delivery in 1993. Several corporate changes during production resulted in Raytheon Missile Systems as the final production firm. The ACM is anticipated to remain in service until 2030.

General Characteristics
Primary Function: Air-to-ground strategic cruise missile
Contractor: Raytheon Missile Systems
Power Plant: Williams International Corp. F-112-WR-100 turbofan engine
Thrust: More than 700 pounds
Length: 20 feet, 10 inches
Weight: More than 3,500 pounds
Diameter: 29 inches
Wingspan: 10 feet, 2 inches
Range: More than 2,000 miles
Guidance System: Inertial navigation with terrain contour matching and laser Doppler velocimeter updates
Warhead: Nuclear capable
Date Deployed: 1990
Inventory: Active force, approximately 460
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Is it kinda like this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. I've never seen one in flight.
I don't think so.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #32
49. These weapons would dig in before exploding, and...
...lower yield hits (5 to 10 kt.) might not even have much of a noticable cloud signature since the weapon can penetrate several dozen feet of concrete, rock and earth. O
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #32
112. What is this fascination with blowing up things -- ???!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
31. equipped to carry laser-guided conventional and nuclear weapons, is a giant crucifix
http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=5563&IssueNum=...


Theres over 100 of the largest evangelical organizations in Colorado Springs. Its like the Vatican. I saw the flyer for one of their brown-bag lunches. It said, Do not take this flyer down. This is an officially sponsored Air Force Academy activity in conjunction with the Christian Leadership Ministries. This was attended by scores of senior officers and senior civilian people. Todays luncheon topic, and I quote: Why we cannot let you have your God while we have ours.

When Focus on the Family opened up in 1993, right across the street from the academy, the Pentagon thought it would be a great idea to have the Air Force Academys heralded academy jump team, the Wings of Blue I cant make this shit up parachute down carrying the keys of heaven. They landed on the front lawn of Focus, marched in formation, and turned over to Dr. Dobson the keys of heaven. Hello James Madison! Hello Thomas Jefferson!



Well, the Air Forcess attack F-16 squadron, at Cannon Air Force Base in my home state of New Mexico, theyre called the Crusaders. Their official Air Force logo on their F-16s, which are equipped to carry laser-guided conventional and nuclear weapons, is a giant crucifix and a giant crusaders helmet from the year 1096, the year of the first of the nine crusades; the helmet is surrounded by three yellow stars in the shape of a crucifix to represent the trinity, and a giant crusaders broadsword. Is there anything that we could possibly be doing in this administration to act as a greater accelerant for already angry young Islamic men and women in Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, to want to join the cause to beat the fuckin shit out of us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #31
50. If I'm reading your posts correctly...
... I think you're making a case that these nukes were hijacked as part of an end-times fundie nut case plot, enabled by fundie nut cases at all stages of the flight line and nuclear security staffs, loaded onto a plane piloted by fundie nut cases who knew they were carrying nukes, which then landed in Louisiana and was intentionally left unsecured on the tarmac for more than 10 hours by complicit fundie nut cases, where a warhead could easily have been removed, converted to emulate a "suitcase" dirty nuke, which was supposed to be transported to a blue city like SF or Portland for use by black ops demolitions experts working for the ultimate fundie nut cases in the executive branch to fulfill their "prophesies" of a massive terrorist attack on US soil, leading to declaration of martial law and the installation of a de facto dictatorship and providing the excuse to use the other five nukes on Iran, who would be blamed for the false flag op.

And the only reason this whole plan has been uncovered is that somebody in Minot who remembers his or her oath to the Constitution and the republic -- and not to a regime or a fascist thug -- spilled the beans to a Gannett reporter who blew the cover off the whole operation.

The amazing thing is, I can actually believe everything I just wrote above. I have no idea how valid it is, nor if that's really the point you're making, but my experience over the past six and a half years tells me that BushCo is truly capable of anything that advances the PNAC agenda, which is both a front for further enriching weapons manufacturers and the petrochemical industry and an insane strategy for dealing with the consequences of ME oil reserves gradually running dry.

Either that or I've finally gone over the edge.


wp

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #50
53. Check out the Tikkun interview on the MRFF website.
Linked in post 51.

I'd say you have the jist and that's pretty much where my head is at.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #53
66. Jesus fucking christ, so to speak...
As Mikey Weinstein says, "We are facing a national security threat in this country that is every bit as significant in magnitude, width and breadth internally as that presented externally by the now-resurgent Taliban and Al Qaeda. And it is the destruction of the U.S. constitutionally mandated wall separating church and state, in the technologically most lethal organization every created by humankind, which is our honorable and noble military. Im here to report to you today that that wall is nothing but smoke and debris. We are facing an absolute fundamentalist Christianizationa Talibanizationof the U.S. Marine Corps, Army, Navy, and Air Force."

Between corporatists, fundie nut cases, neo-con nut cases and just plain old uber-patriot nut cases -- who seem generally to be at least two out of the other three -- I'm no longer certain which brand of ideologues pose the most dire threat. I suppose a corporatist fundie PNAC member with a huge flag decal on his Hummer would take the cake.

Thanks for the link, Hoot.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #66
69. I kinda like to call them the Talibornagain.
If you would like the back story on the movement, check out theocracywatch.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #50
57. We need to keep digging this stuff up
We need to find the names of Air Force at the top who are running the show, probably guys like Boylin? I think that is his name. It's not about oil, it's religion it's always been about religion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #57
71. Oh, why bother...?
I'm sure CNN and CBS are on the job and we'll get the whole story pretty soon.


:rofl:

wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #57
72. It's Boykin. He retired this summer.
Has a teaching position lined up at some obscure college.

Ultimately, it could very well be about religon,

but oil figures into the cosmology
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #72
87. This Boykin??
http://www.irregulartimes.com/holywarriorbush.html

<snip>
...He continued, "The enemy that has come against our nation is a spiritual enemy. His name is Satan. And if you do not believe that Satan is real, you are ignoring the same Bible that tells you about God."

To that same congregation, still in military uniform, General Boykin said of George W. Bush that, "He was appointed by God" to be leader of the United States.

To another religious group in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, General Boykin declared that the true enemy in George W. Bush's wars "is the principalities of darkness. It is a demonic presence in that city that God revealed to me as the enemy."

In a religious flyer, General Boykin is quoted as saying, "Bin Laden is not the enemy. No mortal is the enemy. It's the enemy you can't see. It's a war against the forces of darkness."

Comparing himself to a follower of Islam, General Boykin offers the taunt that "my God is bigger than his."

</snip>


http://www.irregulartimes.com/tortureboykin.html

<snip>
We have written about General Boykin before. In fact, it would be shocking if we had not made note of him before now, given Boykin's long history of extreme disregard for the core democratic values of American society. General Boykin has become infamous for making public appearances, in full military uniform, during which he declares that America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are part of a Christian Holy Crusade against Islam, a religion that Boykin suggests is aligned with Satan.

</snip>


I'm beginning to understand just exactly what kind of people can bomb civilians, laugh and mug for the camera while torturing other humans, blow away families on rooftops, create 4 million new refugees and still smile at themselves in the mirror. They're just doing the lord's good work.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dickbearton Donating Member (577 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #57
115. Not a matter of either/or...
It is "and". It is religion and oil, depending on
your flavor of right wing nut. That is the problem; so many
and so many different types. Oil, religion, power, money,
insanity; you name it. What is the motive for right wing
nuts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #50
76. Considering how automated the process seems, it could be true...
I have a list of 4 systems used to handle all nuclear systems, and it might be possible to generate 'electronic' orders to load said ordanance. But how did the crew chief and flight crew MISS that little detail???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kineneb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #31
88. check Yurica Report for good explaination of Dominionists
http://www.yuricareport.com /

She has collected all the articles on the subject at one site. Authors include Michael Weinstein, Chris Hedges, Bill Moyers and John Dean. There is some scary stuff there.

Be sure to read "The Despoiling of America" by Katherine Yurica herself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #88
91. Nuclear Armageddon?
http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/NuclearArmagedd...

Nuclear Armageddon?
There's lots of talk going on about nuclear armageddon- Israeli pilots are training to nuke Iran's nuclear facilities, Bush attacks the Iranian consulate in northern Iraq, Syria is being demonized again. Russia and China are allied with Iran, will they stand by, let Iran be nuked, and not retaliate with nuclear weapons against Israel or the USA?

Scary times. Bush is barreling ahead despite huge opposition, even from within his own party. Pat Robertson claims that God told him there would be a massive attack against America this year. It seems like a good time to re-publish a piece I wrote a while ago, looking at the Christofascist ideology which allows and encourages suicidal behavior on the part of the man with his finger on the button.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kineneb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #91
93. yup, nutcases galore
now, mind you, I have actually read the Synoptic Gospels, which are purported to contain the "actual" words of Jesus. No where in there is there anything about a final battle between good and evil...I think someone was cribbing from Zoroastrian tradition for that one; even putting Revelations in the NT was debated when the canon was being set. Not to mention, the Battle of "Har Meggido" already happened, and the Jews lost to the Romans. So someone, somewhere, was smoking some really weird dope to create the Dominionist interpretation.

Lots of interesting and scary stuff at the Yurica Report. Katherine Yurica is a "recovered" fundamentalist who knows how these people think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #31
163. Can't speak for anyone else, but that scares the shit out of me.
And you know that the average American knows NOTHING about stuff like what you just described.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
37. Crosshairs Iran
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062907J.shtml

Crosshairs Iran - an Illustration

A potent example of the influence of end-time Christians in the White House developed in early May 2007 when the president invited dominionist James Dobson and 12 or 13 other "family value" ministers for a special meeting. They were called in to discuss the "disturbing threats Iraq, Iran and international terrorism posed to US, Israel and other democracies around the world. Dobson is best known as the founder of Focus on the Family, an end-time lobby. Dobson opposes homosexual rights and abortion, and advocates the "submission of women." He has backed candidates who call for the execution of abortion providers, and works to establish an American theocracy. Dobson was careful not to quote the president in his radio address. He declined a Truthout interview request about his influential relationship with Bush, including what his radio broadcast said involved many meetings in the past with the president. Dobson told his listeners that Bush "appeared upbeat and determined and convinced that his mission is to protect this great nation from those who have threatened us." He said Bush wanted "to let history be his judge for the way he has dealt with this crisis in the Middle East.... He laid out the challenge before us."

The meeting with Bush, said Dobson, inspired an entire week of his radio discussions on radical Islam's impact on America. He said the "general tenor and tone" of his session with the president emphasized "how we are living in very perilous times, and the future generations of Americans depends upon how we rise to that challenge today." He continued: "Iran has promised to blow Israel off the face of the earth, and they have made no bones about that.... They fully intend to wage war with us. They will do it when they have the nuclear and biological weapons to do it."

On the same program, Dobson pointedly discussed the president and the Iranian "threat" with bestselling author and dispensationalist Joel Rosenberg. Rosenberg is an end-time "prophecy expert" who claims he makes frequent visits to the White House to help them "understand what will happen next in the Middle East." He informed Dobson's listeners that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - the latest in a long line of end-time anti-Christ candidates that recently included Saddam Hussein - is "telling people inside Iran that he believes that the end of the world is just two or three years away." Dobson, referring to Ahmadinejad, said: "We didn't take Hitler very seriously either. I just see the parallel. The president, it seems to me, does understand this."





From George Grant, a leading dominionist writer in The Changing of the Guard, Biblical Principles for Political Action:

Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ -- to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness.
But it is dominion we are after. Not just a voice.
It is dominion we are after. Not just influence.
It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time.
It is dominion we are after.
World conquest. That's what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less... Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land -- of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ. (pp. 50-51)"



Michael Ortiz Hill in Counterpunch (first link above) quotes Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward's book Bush at War: Woodward writes: "Most presidents have high hopes. Some have grandiose visions of what they will achieve, and he was firmly in that camp... 'To answer these attacks and rid the world of evil,'" says Bush. And again, '"'We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth in defense of this great nation.' Grandiose visions." Woodward comments, "The president was casting his mission and that of the country in the grand vision of God's Master Plan."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
38. Rick, just want to applaud and thank you for your vigilence
and persistence in this quest for more truth or ANY more light we can get on this shocking incident. I would not want to live in an America without intelligent, vigilent Americans just like you. Thank you for your courageous pursuit of more facts and for keeping the whole insane thing visible. We can't let this story get stuffed down the Memory Hole.

KnR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-08-07 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
40. Christian Embassy
Edited on Sat Sep-08-07 11:15 PM by seemslikeadream
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/Media_video/chr...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/3/125520/2516





A lawsuit filed by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (see this Dec. 13, 2006 Slate story, "Onward Christian Soldiers", for the full text of MRFF's legal complaint ) was dismissed for "lack of standing" but a just released 47 page report from the Department of Defense Inspector General concurs < see Truthout full PDF of report>, substantially, with MRFF's allegations that high ranking Pentagon officials improperly endorsed the "Christian Embassy" through their appearances in the Christian Embassy's promotional video.

Please keep the following in mind:

Individuals featured in the Christian Embassy promotional video are among the highest ranking members of the United States military, and as such they are supposed to be the ones setting the standards for military behavior.

The Pentagon Inspector General's report provides evidence for the following conclusion which I have been substantiating, along with other MRFF researchers :

The United States military is now heavily influenced by para-church ministries that promote politicized, right leaning, religious ideological views, and that influence extends from the upper levels of the Pentagon down to the level of the military rank and file.

A few months ago that would have been an unfounded assertion on my part, but since then I've been working as part of a team effort, under the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, to amass evidence to support that claim. I can't divulge specifics right now, but yesterday I wrote, in general terms, of what I have helped uncover, for MRFF, on the spread of Christian nationalist events, improperly endorsed by the US military, across the nation. Material from that research will be emerging over the course of the next few weeks and months.

For an example of some recent Military Religious Freedom Foundation research that is public, please see MRFF researcher Chris Rodda's excellent MRFF Investigates OCF Neighborhood Bible Study Program at Fort Leavenworth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #40
51. From the Tikkun interview:
And thats happening now. I am not on this call today as Al Gore talking about global warming at a tipping point. Oh no no, weve tipped. Weve tipped where all the nukes are.
The stories are legion that I can tell you about. Legion. I dont know if its too late.

Tikkun: So are you seeing strong parallels to Nazi Germany?

Weinstein: Its June 26, 2007. I can make an extraordinarily strong case that its really June 26, 1937.


Go read the whole thing! but you have to scroll down.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #51
54. We are facing an absolute fundamentalist Christianizationa Talibanizationof the U.S. Marine Corps,
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 12:22 AM by seemslikeadream
I can't stop reading this stuff!!!!!


Weinstein: Im saying that the Dominionist Christian its an imperious, fascistic contagion without a conscience. You know who General Wesley Clark is. He ran for President, he was the supreme NATO commander, hes a four-star general. He came to my house for a fundraiser a few months ago. He said, Mikey, you have a cause worth dying for. Let me assure you, the people you are fighting are the most wretched combination I have ever seen of two terrible human characteristics: heartlessness and zealousness. They have no conscience. So therefore passivity and a peaceful attitude is going to be as useful as a baseball bat in a football game or a cricket bat in a rugby game.

Weinstein: It appears as though everything changed in 1972. Thats when we ended the draft, mandatory conscription. When we had it, at least in theory, we were pulling uniformly from what we now refer to as blue and red states. But after the end of the draft, mostly the members of our military started coming from what we now know as red states, where they fuse this weaponized gospel with patriotism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #54
63. And he just made the case for the draft
incidentally, I also realized why Bush hasn't implemented it

No, it has nothing to do wiht kids in the streets

All that hard work to talibanize some factions of the military would be gone poof with short termers from them uggly blue states

Not that all the military is this crazy or right, but in key positions, and how the military works... nightmares
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #54
68. Yeah, I think I'll be picking up his book tomorrow. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #51
58. And we have seen this evolving
this scares me shitless
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. mega-evangelical church has opened up in our country every 48 hours.
Weinstein: Can I tell you something that completely backs it up? Im not sure if youre aware of this stat, but in 1970 in our country we only had ten mega-evangelical churches, that is a church of two thousand or more active members. But after 9/11, which Im sure didnt do much to help the spiritual crisis in this country, maybe just exacerbated it off the scale, after 9/11, with this complete idiot in the White House, a new mega-evangelical church has opened up in our country every 48 hours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #51
92. Oh God, I have been saying that for years now, and have advanced the years from '33-'37
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 02:25 AM by tom_paine
as the situation in Amerika has changed. Hell, I've been on DU all day saying it's 1937 (really all month), and this is the first time that I have seen Weinstein's comments.

And now Mikey Weinstein, who is in a far greater position than me to know, AGREES?!?

May God have mercy on us all for the horrors which are to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
55. 5 or 6?
There seems to be this discrepancy with regard to how many cruise missiles there were. There were 6 on the tarmac but only 5 on the plane? So officially there were only 5. In case someone asked?

If someone were planning on using the warhead from the 6th one to "briefcase bomb" one of our cities and blame it on bin Laden, I would imagine they are no longer to planning to do so. So whoever leaked the story did so to warn us. And are true heroes at a time where there are so few heroes at all.

And of course then the other 5 could be used to nuke Iranian targets. In retaliation for their participation with bin Laden in the attack on one of our cities. How long does it take for a B-52 to fly from Barksdale to Iran?

Impeach, impeach, impeach. Before it's too late. The next time we may not be warned.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #55
75. The current info says 6. Six from Minot to Barksdale.
Some tin-foil claim a missing weapon. As far as we know it's 6 out of 6.

The Air Force would notice the loss of a cruise missile in flight, no matter how crazy the story...

This is one of the tin-foil theories being floated. And some how they tie it into the Fossett search...

Two completely different stories.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #75
89. Where are they now?
Have any of your sources been able to confirm that they're still at Barksdale? Are they signed in to some nuke safe storage facility? If not, have they been shipped elsewhere? And even if we're told by the AF that they're now locked down and unreachable, how would be know if they're lying or not?

Thanks for all the work you and others on this thread have done. I agree this is a huge story which, of course, virtually guarantees that it'll never get a mention from our fine and diligent mass media.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #89
129. That's the question I've been mulling over for a couple of days now.
I have no clue but I'm assuming they're still at Barksdale.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #129
139. That's my assumption too, ...
...since it would open another round of inquiries into why they were moved in the first place, who ordered the move and who intentionally violated dozens of protocols to carry out those orders.

Plus Cheney would lose the strategic advantage he gained by moving them to the site of a major ME staging area. And with renewed scrutiny, it would be less convenient to turn the sixth nuke into a briefcase bomb for domestic social control use.

Or so my bullshit meter tells me...

And thanks for all the info you've contributed to this thread, Hoot. I really learned a lot from you and these other really smart, highly experienced people here.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:24 AM
Response to Original message
56. This was no accident
They were prepositioning those nukes and somebody leaked it.

You know how much we Air Force types are freethinkers and how much we love to bitch.

Nobody in uniform wants to attack Iran. We're pissed off at Bush for Iraq.

Expect a few retirements and whistleblowing over this

There are too many pissed off people in uniform over this whole shit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #56
59. The Dominionists must be outed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #56
73. Glad to have you aboard, my friend!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #73
83. I refuse to believe that this was a such a collosal fuck up
This shit just doesn't happen. It would expose the Air Force's PRP program as a joke. I've done PRP investigations, you don't do them hamhanded and half-assed.

It's the most important thing in the AF. Elint is a close second and I've dealt with that too.

Those nukes were supposed to be on that plane. And I'm sure it's not the first time.

The main reason that they're going to have this training day is to get everybody on the same page about keeping their mouths shut.

The big brass, and they're all Bush's boys, have egg on their faces ABOUT THE LEAK.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doublethink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
62. Ha ha ha I knew it .......
well I kinda suspected yesterday that there was a good possibility that the Flight CREW may not have known what kind of payload they were carrying. Did that make sense? .....

From yesterdays thread .... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
and ...... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Anyway my thoughts on your thread tonight Rick are .... 10 hours these nukes sat under the wings of this B-52 on the tarmac at Barksdale huh ...... hmmmmmm ...... 10 hours ...... in locked and loaded position from the airbase that ordinance leaves for the Middle East .... hmmmmmmmm ......... Maybe awaiting further flight orders? Was the B-52 re-fueled at Barksdale during those 10 hours? Shit to be a fly on the wall or tarmac out there in that time frame ... pure speculation but maybe it was a live mission (on Iranian targets?) that was scrubbed when someone blew the whistle? Who knows ..... I'd sure like to know the activity going on around that B-52 in those 10 hours.

Only a mad-man would use nuclear weapons ever again, tactical or otherwise. So why let the Crew in on it? Disturbing, very disturbing. Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #62
64. I will go and look but maybe you know about that time
It was August 30 right? and the time that plane was on the ground? What might have happened during those hours why didn't it take off for Iran?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doublethink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #64
78. Heck I have no idea of the time frame, few days ago ...... sorry ...
Anyway don't these B-52's have some sort of identification to distinguish one from another? Hey there was only one Enola Gay Right? .... And Aircraft Carriers .. Constellation, Enterprise etc etc... So ....... what B-52 was involved in this incident a few days ago? Even an freaking # .... on the side of the damn thing could get us somewhere.
Actually I'm better at asking questions then finding the answers .... ha ha !!! :) .... Okay I'll try and go looking for some too. Peace. Keep posting in these threads if ya find something. Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #64
79. Don't Forget that the "10 Hours" story is only the word of an AF press release.
It could be a total red herring
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doublethink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #79
82. Thanks Wiely50 ......
Didn't know that, will keep that in mind. I'm trying to find out the identification of the B-52 involved ....... and go from there. This story stinks to high heaven huh? Peace. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Venus Dog Donating Member (419 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #79
99. As well as the date Aug 30
all we know is what we are being told. We're flying blind here and this is a humongous jigsaw puzzle. At this point, I don't discount any theory - no matter how tinfoil. After all, we are dealing with the 4th Reich here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:45 AM
Response to Original message
67. UNBELIEVABLE. Im not sure where to begin.
http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/showthread.php?t=155...

UNBELIEVABLE. Im not sure where to begin. Im outraged and embarrassed! Back in 1979 we had to sign for nuclear weapons verifying serial numbers, the security folks posted two man guards at the aircraft, the cops enforced two man maintenance crews access to aircraft, the 781s are annotated, maintenance job control was informed, the wing command post was informed, weapons were moved in armed convoy, etc. How were the weapons removed from storage? Who was guarding the weapons military troopers or contractors? How were they transported to the aircraft? How were the aircraft forms updated? How was the chain of custody broken? Did the flight crew and munitions maintenance OICs verify weapons status? What the hell happened here? This is dereliction of duty, Wing CC, DCM, OMS/CC Munitions Sq/CC, Security Sq Commander and a lot of other folks should be going to jail, today !!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe we have too many fighter pilots as generals. Maybe we need to split Air Combat Command back to the cold war days of SAC and TAC.


Retired B-52 Crew Chief

#10 09-05-2007, 03:50 PM
Unregistered Posts: n/a

Re: B-52 mistakenly flies with nukes aboard

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Being a former cruise missile troop, I do not see how this could have happended. If the "missile shop" failed to download the heads before taking them to the flightline, the crew loading them on the plane has a checklist asking them to "verify no warheads installed", as do the pilots.... hmmmmm, maybe they thought they were dummy heads. That's the only way I can see that possibly happening. Wonder what happened to the guy signing off that inventory?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #67
74. This little fairy tale doesn't hold up to the slightest scrutiny.
http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/showthread.php?t=155...


I was a PACAF IG inspector in the 1970-1975 time frame. When we performed CIs, it was a very tough inspection covering all aspects of nuclear munitions. It didn't take much to take the keys, lock up the facility, and bring in the training guys to recertify the MMS handling of nukes. Is that still the procedure during this day and age? - I realize that AF manning has dropped significantly over the years and our people need to do more with less. As an example of how tough it was, I remember one time when a maintenance man changed a time phased part (rubber groument) with a non T.O. part - as we discussed the incident around the table, the boss let them off the hook. He noticed my dissatisfaction and I told him I did not approve of his decision - that weapon had a specific mission and follow up missions would be compromised if that weapon did not explode. Luckily, the next day, they violated the two man concept and we failure the unit. The Boss told me that he did not sleep the night because of our conversation - we had stringent rules, this is a serious incident and almost impossible to believe that it could have happened. This is bad news for the best Air Force in the world and a blot on many people's records. The only good that comes out of this situation is that it reminds Mr. Ahmadinejad to the fact that we are a very powerful country and will not take his actions lightly. He is now aware that one B-52, B-2, or whatever carries a lot of throwweight and "Mister, don't mess with us".


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was a navigator/radar nav of B-52s at Minot for 5 years, and there is only one person responsible for this incident, the radar navigator on the crew that flew the missiles down there. If he did his preflight correctly he would have known what he had on board, and that there was a problem. I suspect he blew it off because they were told they didn't have warheads in the missiles, and even before I left the jet in 2000 the units had become so focused on conventional warfare that the nuke mission was being neglected. Just goes to show that you NEVER take what the paperwork says or what anybody else tells you as being the truth. You ALWAYS preflight your weapons, even when you have weapons troops or some Colonel standing there tell you that you don't need to do it, because it is your job and your responsibility alone. The radar nav should have known that, and did his job. He didn't, and now they have a big mess on their hands. I suspect the radar nav will find himself up in front of an FEB explaining his mistake, and he should lose his wings. Had I been in his position I would have raised hell when I saw what I had, if for no other reason than to be a pain in the ass to the leadership for letting the weapons get to the plane in that state in the first place. That is the best part of being a radar nav on the B-52, you have a license to bitch!


I agree, the radar nav was the last line of defence when it came to making sure that the nukes stayed on the ground and the one in the best position to question what was going on. Shameful

But lets take a look at the other partys at fault

1) The munition Sq control room for not ensuring that the warheads were removed per schedule. Shameful
2) The missle/bomb shop for not removing the warheads per the schedule. Shameful
3) The munitions transport/handling shop for not questioning why they were driving a SAFED Nuke out the front gate of the storage area without security. Shameful
4) The security police for not being able to identify a Nuke as it goes out there front gate and not questioning it. Shameful
5) The load crew for not questioning why they were loading SAFED Weapons onboard an aircraft without security. Shameful.
6) and last the radar nav for not questioning his payload.

I also agree with an otherwriter. This would not have happened on a SAC base.

Sometimes the same things that makes a military unit effective. The ability to follow orders without question and to rely on your follow team members also makes us weak.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This little fairy tale doesn't hold up to the slightest scrutiny. In order to believe it you have to be willing to slander a whole parade of people who, by definition, are the very best at what they do. I'm not willing to do that. I've never flown with a crew of morons. Ordnance people, ground crews, and the maintenance chief with the aircraft log book are not a bunch of shambling zombies. The entire chain of custody for those special weapons did not include people prone to making the biggest screw up in the history of the Air Force. Many posters here have pointed out that the people in this story are all top-flight professionals. What if that is true? What if every single one of them did exactly what they are trained, and required, to do? What if everything went exactly according to plan, until somebody smelled a rat and called the press? As Sherlock Holmes would say, When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. The undeniable fact is that 6 special weapons were moved from Minot to Barksdale, or, 6 special weapons were moved from secure storage to a staging area for the ME. Let us not ignore the obvious- the administration is openly ramping up a conflict with Iran. They have been reported as having floated the idea of using nukes on deeply buried targets. They have already performed acts that caused an enormous, global, public outcry. I suspect that the officers who leaked this story feared that they were witness to the start of the greatest war crime in history, feared that their own chain of command was complicit in it, and did the only thing they could think of to do to stop it. That would m ake this story exactly what it sounds like- a coverup based on the first panicked lie the administration could think of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #74
80. Thank you so much for mining this information!!!
That's why I decided to pursue this story here at DU. Fact checking, critical review and exposure to every web mention of this story.

seemslikeadream, and other nameless DUers, retired and active duty folks, vets, you all contribute to this storyline as the days go by...

It's OBVIOUS we have been LIED to once again. And no one, ever, should use a nuclear weapon. NOT IN MY NAME!!!

NEVER AGAIN!!!

(and I will admit to a bit of tin-foil, this SMELLS like DICK!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #80
85. Dude, I took the same oath as you when I enlisted.
Unless you were an officer.

The point is that there was no expiration date that I recall.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:54 AM
Response to Reply #80
94. Military v. Cheney Strangelove
I suspect that the officers who leaked this story feared that they were witness to the start of the greatest war crime in history, feared that their own chain of command was complicit in it, and did the only thing they could think of to do to stop it. That would m ake this story exactly what it sounds like- a coverup based on the first panicked lie the administration could think of.

that bit bears repeating.

since leveymg posted about the military trying to do the job that congress will not (stop an insane administration from starting WWIII), the first thing I thought when I read about this was that someone in the military leaked the story to bust some black op. -- or this is part of some sort of psy-op to try to continue to destablize Iran, as leveymg also said.

thanks for keeping up with this story, Rick. I've been following your posts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #80
95. Thanks for all your information!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stalwart Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #74
144. Nuclear Security
There are active and retired AF personnel that know the exact rules for nuc weapon handling. Some wrote them, others taught them and still more practiced them.

I would be so proud of any service member that did the right thing in the face of something that they knew was wrong and had the courage to act on their convictions. Others acting on their convictions and belief in doing God's work may have been thwarted. Perhaps others were using people who believed they were doing God's work.

Extremely strange. More who know (or were involved in) the procedures may be on the verge of coming forward with the truth. Courage is not only confined to the battlefield.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:16 AM
Response to Original message
90. Dominionist Christianity which welcomes an Apocalyptic confrontation between the USA and Islam



http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/9/8/32210/85815


It is also big time unconstitutional.

To have only ONE religious point of view broadcast at taxpayer expense through the Armed Forces Network violates the 1st Amendment AND the spirit of Clause 3 of Article 6.

Obviously it is also very unfair to exclude other denominations such as traditional protestant denominations, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, agnostics and atheists.

Coral Ridge Ministries, with their radical Dominionist interpretation of the Bible are unrepresentative of the majority of Americans. This is wrong in yet another level because the official mission of the Armed Forces Network (a.k.a. American Forces Radio and Television Service) according to their website is;

Purpose/Mission

AFRTS is the American Forces Radio and Television Service. It is part of the Department of Defense, and is headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia. The AFRTS mission is to communicate Department of Defense policies, priorities, programs, goals and initiatives. AFRTS provides stateside radio and television programming, "a touch of home," to U.S. service men and women, DoD civilians, and their families serving outside the continental United States. AFRTS includes the Radio and Television Production Office (RTPO), The Pentagon Channel NewsCenter, and the Defense Media Center.

Our Vision

The AFRTS vision is to provide multi-channel broadcast quality radio and television services and expanded internal information products to all DoD members and their families stationed overseas, on contingency operations, and onboard Navy ships around the world. Today, AFRTS uses seven satellites along with digital compression technology to provide multiple television and stereo audio services to over 1,000 outlets in more than 175 countries and U.S. territories, and on board U.S. Navy ships.
Let's take a look at he Armed Forces Network Radio schedule.


If you look carefully, you will find no reference to the Coral Ridge Hour (more on why later) but you will find a "fair and balanced" mix of political views (riiiight!).

Such luminaries as David Horowitz, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, James Dobson (no sermons, just short commentaries) and Dr. Laura balanced on the other side by Alan Colmes and Ed Schultz (who does what he can and I appreciate it).

A MRFF member wrote the AFN for an explanation why on the schedule published on the MyAFN website there was no slot for Coral Ridge Hour and this was the exchange;
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
96. Does not this scenario just scream out for some of the dems on any of
the Armed Forces committees to be jumping in and asking questions? This is one of the biggest security breaches in history, nuclear weapons being flown around 'accidentally' (yeah, right) and then left unguarded on a tarmac on a base where anything could happen.

Not to minimize anything but this goes way beyond Plame and Gonzo. This is an attempt at a crime against humanity on a scale that we've never seen before in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #96
114. Are the press asking Repugs/Dems -- prez candidates about this "incident" -- ?????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
98. Could the target for these nukes be Eretrea?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #98
102. No Stealth Jets Dropping B61mod11
or other air dropped nukes on a target that has no idea it is coming is the modern way to start a nuclear war. That would be followed by slbm delivered warheads to complete whatever level of destruction is required.

Sounds like a standard fuckup, grand scale, that was not kept in the bag.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
100. Alcoa Loves you. Here is an alternate point
for years I worked as an armorer and had the fun job of documenting theft from national guard stores. People did not steal weapons or explosives (an engineering unit keeps demo around) but they did steal.

My point is that they system to catch and prevent this was weak.

I would assume that the air force trains with nuclear weapons minus the physics packages (the part that is armed, fused, and fired)

I would assume that like the NAG there are people in the air force who either do not always do their job correctly, or just don't care.

I would assume this will result of someone with stars on their shoulder loosing their command.

So my point is that there is no reason for the air force to intentionally place fully assembled weapons on an aircraft then turn around and disclose it.

It is concerning that the weapons were not tracked and handled properly. I do not believe this was done intentionally.

Primary reason! The b52 is not the preferred delivery system for air dropped weapons. If a blind first strike is required the b2 or f117 would be used to drop weapons onto targets with no notice. That is the primary purpose for that technology.

The warheads are not the type that would be used to destroy a underground bunker. That device is generally configured for air burst. The b61mod11 is designed to low yield ground detonation designed to kill a bunker.

My 2 cents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #100
126. Um check out the data sheet above.
This weapon only mounts to a B52.

It has a range of 2000+ NM taking the bomber out of theater during launch, as the plane could easily hit anywhere in Iran launched from the Med or the northern Indian ocean.

It was developed as a bunker penetrator as one of its modes, and is in the process of being replaced with newer tech like those you suggest, implying it is a highly tested platform.

It's entirely plausible this was intended for Iran use.
-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #126
153. B61mod11
and a stealth is the preferred way to do this. A b52 is not used for surprise attacks. The missile would be detected by radar, giving the target time to respond.

A stealth jet or dozens of them, does not give a target time to do anything.

Not plausible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Venus Dog Donating Member (419 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
101. Anybody figured out yet how long it would take a B-52 with this payload
to fly NON-STOP (which I'm assuming it did) from Minot to Barksdale? The official stories are showing it took the plane a little over 3 hours. Anybody figured this out yet as I may have missed it. This would be significant info though. Thanks as I don't know much about military planes and such.

Thanks for keeping this story alive. I believe it is very important. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonzotex Donating Member (740 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #101
105. pretty normal flight time.
That would have been a normal flight time for a B-52, regardless of load, flying the normal air route structure from Minot to Barksdale. B52s at cruise altitude are actually a little slower than modern airliners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rick Myers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #101
128. I checked the distance and flight time
3.5 hours would be a pretty normal time to make the flight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
106. One other aspect of this affair
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 10:53 AM by IDemo
One story I never hear about is that Iran may already have three nukes which were purchased in 1991 from Kazakhstan. Whether the story is true or not, I don't know. But I haven't seen a disagreement on it posted online. If this were believed to be true by our present leaders, you would think they would be dangling these nukes in front of the media and the public more so than nuclear facilities which haven't yet produced weapons grade material and possibly never will, if the Iranians are to be believed.

That is, unless they (CheneyCo) had a reason for utilizing the presence of these three renegade nukes as part of a false-flag attack plan, or for some other purpose...?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #106
108. Pretty sure
the us formulation of thermonuclear weapons with material from oak ridge leave a pretty unique signature. IE people can tell whose bomb it is by the leftover fallout.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #108
110. Thanks for pointing that out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonzotex Donating Member (740 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
107. Thanks for keeping this story alive
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 10:49 AM by bonzotex
I've been following this story as best I can. I haven't commented on DU because frankly there is just not enough good info right now to have a good feel for what went on here. You've pulled together a lot of factual info, but also be wary of the bizarre speculation.

As unlikely as it sounds, this can be explained by a series of egregious fuck-ups by the USAF. I think that's the real story here. People should be very concerned about how our military handles nukes. As other commenter's have pointed out, this would never have happened under SAC.

None of this, however; fits well into a conspiracy to "stage" stealthy nuke cruise missiles to Barksdale for some nefarious purpose. If that was the goal, we would have never heard about any of this.

Unfortunately, we aren't going to get a straight story on this from the USAF. Also, former and current officers and crew members are limited by some pretty draconian non-disclosure clauses that limit how much they can say publicly.

The best thing we can do is keep asking questions and digging for info -- Keep the story alive until a Patriotic Congress critter (or 10 or 20) pays enough attention to make this a political issue over America's nuclear surety program.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #107
124. I Think, Maybe, You Have Overlooked Something Important Here, Bonzotex
"None of this, however; fits well into a conspiracy to "stage" stealthy nuke cruise missiles to Barksdale for some nefarious purpose. If that was the goal, we would have never heard about any of this."

The only reason that this got out is because some heroic, whistleblowing officer

leaked the story to the press. Everything we've heard so far from the military

is all just covering ass.

I'm sure that cheney would have preferred that moving those nukes would go unnoticed,

but, no big matter, they are now where he wanted them to be, at Barksdale,

Staging point for middle east air operations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pavulon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #124
154. There are nukes there now
floating in ohio class subs. I would bet those subs run drills on delivering all 96 of their weapons in no time.

Diego Garcia is much closer and I would speculate, houses a nuclear arsenal.

The government can move the weapons by other modes of transit.

The reason this is a story os because the massive failure of the system. Not because a nuke gets a new home.

That is routine, I would think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonzotex Donating Member (740 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #124
155. not overlooking that part completely....
To clarify, despite what many speculators have said in this and the previous threads; The US moves it's munitions around, including nukes more than most people think or probably would be comfortable with. And yes, they do it with combat aircraft, not just airlifters and ground convoys.

Barksdale is not just a staging base, but the number one most active B-52 base in the US. They don't need to "stage" any weapons in. If any command authority was going to order B-52s into action, with whatever payload, for whatever mission, the assets are already in place at Barksdale.

The service members that blew the whistle on this could have a whole bunch of motivations besides stopping an illicit use of nukes. You are correct that they were heroic and that the USAF is scrambling for anything to cover their ass.

Something stinks here for sure. I don't trust this administration at all. Certainly anything they touch seems to get fucked up somehow, but I still say we should not attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
109. In an article regarding the Sept 14 stand-down, I found this
interesting as it relates, again, to how crucial this "incident" was:

snip

Just how serious Keys takes the lapse of regulations at Minot is reflected in the fact that the safety stand-down is the first command-wide safety day in recent memory. In the past, the command has singled out specific types of aircraft for safety days and in 1997 the Department of Defense held a department-wide safety review day.

End of snip

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/09/airforce_airc... /


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #109
123. Did Your Link Get Scrubbed, Or Moved ???
Check it out, got a 404 'Page Not Found' when I went to look.

Actually it says:

**********************************************************************************************

That page has gone AWOL!

404 Error: File not found
It appears that the page you requested cannot be located at this time.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/09/airforce_airc... has gone AWOL.

Please check to make sure that everything in the URL was spelled correctly. Otherwise, use the site search above to find the information you need.

**********************************************************************************************

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #123
162. Hmmm, very strange...
I put the article in my favorites and can bring it up from there but when I post the link it does come up AWOL.

http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/0-0&fp=46e3c...

Try that one, it seems to still work.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
113. I smell Cheney.
That crazy ratfucker just tried to nuke Iran. Meanwhile, the corporate media found nothing amiss, focusing instead on the missing English girl, or whatever. Somebody count the damn warheads, for chrissakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doublethink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #113
122. Did you catch this synopsis ....... ?
Was a Covert Attempt to Bomb Iran with Nuclear Weapons foiled by a Military Leak?

Michael E. Salla, M.A., Ph.D.


Critically exploring whether or not there was a covert attempt to instigate a catastrophic nuclear war against Iran is illuminated through an introduction using the recent B-52 Incident. 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, in the United States. 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 5 September after the nuclear armed aircraft was discovered by Airmen ..... -snip-


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.......... -snip-


rest here: http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2007/09... Peace.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
116. Thanks for sticking with the story, Rick-!! Can we be sure this is the first time this happened--??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freedomfries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
118. thanks for this thread
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
120. Question re Dominionist doctrine vs US support for Israel...
If it's true that, as Mikey Weinstein says: "There are four specific stenches that are attended to Dominionist Christians, particularly in the military... The first of the four stenches is virulent anti-Semitism. Virulent..."

See: http://tinyurl.com/2htac8


But then we have fundie nut case General Boykin saying, "...our roots are Judeo-Christian. Did I say Judeo-Christian? Yes. Judeo-Christian. That means we've got a commitment to Israel. That means it's a commitment we're never going to abandon.

"Ladies and gentlemen, we will never abandon Israel, we will never walk away from our commitment to Israel because our roots are there. Our religion came from Judaism, and therefore these radicals will hate us forever."

See: http://www.irregulartimes.com/holywarriorbush.html


We also have the political and military reality that Israel is the US' only pal and client state in the whole Middle East, and we give them about $3 billion annually, mostly for weapons systems.


So given the "virulent anti-Semitism" of the Dominionists; the support for Israel expressed by Dominionist nut case Boykin; and the realpolitik of needing a US ally in the region -- how do these differing agendas and points of view all sync up such that their adherents aren't constantly at each others' throats? Or maybe they are.

Anyway, another day, more weird thoughts about this whole situation.


And thanks again, Rick, and to other well-informed posters and researchers on this thread for shining a bright light on what could well have been the proximate cause of a nuclear confrontation in the Middle East, possibly escalating into world nuclear war. And all because, according to Boykin, who thinks he's comparing equipment at a high school urinal, "my god's bigger than his."


jesus fucking christ, indeed.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #120
133. Not that it makes sense, but...
Israel is holding the holy land, especially the Temple on the Mount, which must be rebuilt according to the end times doctrine. In the meantime, one task is to convert as many Jews as possible and coercion is simply one tactic. I don't think it's so much anti-semitism as it is a binary you're either part of the chosen or not. Sound familiar?

I do not think that Cheney or Bush are dominionists per se, but they are able and willing to exploit the extreme beliefs towards their own goals.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hotler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #133
134. So the neocons are just playing nice with the dominionist...
for time being? This thread has me wondering how the two are able to work together and get so much done and we here of no or get no sense of tension between the two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #134
138. They are not playing nice...
They are playing them like a fiddle. Thus, the lack of conflict. The dominionists see the path as leading to their goal: World domination. The neocons see their path to their goal: World domination. The fact they have different reasons for the goal is irrelevant because the goal is aligned.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
121. Repost -- lost in the threads above:
Any idea where the nukes are now?

Have any sources been able to confirm that they're still at Barksdale? Are they signed in to some nuke safe storage facility? If not, have they been shipped elsewhere? And even if we're told by the AF that they're now locked down and unreachable, how would be know if they're lying or not?

Thanks for all the work you and others on this thread have done. I agree this is a huge story which, of course, virtually guarantees that it'll never get a mention from our fine and diligent mass media.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #121
131. One question looms large and I
do not believe it has been answered properly as yet, and that is, ...how many missiles left Minot and how many missiles arrived at Barksdale? Has there been any official word?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #131
137. Drawing a possibly incorrect conclusion...
... from the mounds of information here and in various links provided here, I think six left Minot and six arrived at Barksdale. The initial report that five had gone missing was, I think, supposed to become the official story. And here's why.

In my fevered brain, I think this was a move signed off at the very highest levels of govt. -- which would be Cheney, unless some still think that imbecilic fruit cake front man is actually running the show -- to accomplish two related objectives. The first was removing a warhead, dialing it back to minimum kilo-tonnage (which Rick and others say is 5 KT), transporting it (probably by van or delivery truck) to the scene of the next 9/11 false flag op, placing it for maximum terror and minimum property destruction, and blowing up a relatively small area of a major west coast blue city.

My bet's on Portland because a) San Francisco, while deep blue, is home to several major banks, insurance companies and other GOP infrastructure favorites, tons of GOP supporting rich bastards live there and you don't want to murder your campaign "donors," b) Seattle and LA are too strategic to what's left of the economy, plus you don't want to screw things up too bad for Ahnold, and c) Portland's kind of disposable.

It's a very blue city in a blue state; politically left of just about any other major city; detests BushCo (and there's a riot to prove it every time one of those pricks tries to sneak into town for a fundraiser); no really serious corporations are headquartered here (Intel has a huge facility, but it's mostly engineers who could eventually be replaced by a new wave of H-1b visa holders; shipping is vital to this part of the northwest all the way down the Columbia towards Idaho, but who in BushCo really gives a fuck about that?; and finally, people don't seem to give much of a shit about things like Islamic radicals, phony wars on "terra," color-coded alerts, or the rumblings of Chertoff's gut as he predicts unending doom and gloom. They're more inclined to be concerned about BushCo, neo-Nazis, environmental abuse, the vanishing Constitution, and other stuff we're not supposed to notice.

Oh, and the second objective: Have the rest of the nukes -- and read that data sheet posted above on this particular type of missile, if you haven't already -- stored at one of the prime ME staging areas, pull another stealth loading job onto a B-52, send it to a base in, say, Israel (for lack of another friendly country in that part of the world -- or any other, for that matter), and start WW III by bombing the alleged Iranian underground nuclear materials enrichment facilities. The response by the Chinese, Russians, Indians and possibly Pakistan to the US starting a nuclear war in their part of the world would almost certainly generate a severe backlash. How severe is anybody's guess, but it could range from UN sanctions (the kind that killed about 2 million Iraqi civilians between about 1991 and 2003) to nuclear strikes on "the homeland." And anything in between.

So, I think the grand plan was sniffed out by a few heroic AF officers and patriots who couldn't stand by and let this happen, so they blew the whistle and the story got pickup in the Gannett military publications. I haven't looked for MSM coverage yet, but I suspect that, since it's a truly big story, it won't see the light of day in any conventional newspaper, radio talk show (except possibly AAR) or network TV pundit-pap shows and newsotainment broadcasts.

So that's my own personal interpretation of the events. There are simply too many people involved to avoid the concept of a conspiracy, there have too many rules broken in a single event to put it down to chance, and it serves the objectives of the fucking loon occupying the VP's office.

However, your view may well be completely different. I've been known to be full of shit on more than one occasion, and I'm hoping dearly that this is one of those times.


Best,

wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #137
140. Portland is my choice for a false flag nuke attack if one is in the works.
That's a big IF, but Portland is the city of choice as I see it. In addition to your reasons, don't forget that Portland didn't play nice with DHS integration into the police state.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #140
148. Playing nice with DHS...
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 04:01 PM by warren pease
Well, the local authorities and various federal intruders just wrapped up a week-long exercise called Operation Noble Resolve (you can't make this shit up) which was originally reported as a training exercise to simulate a terrorist attack on Portland (with similar exercises going on simultaneously in five or six other places, including Guam). The cooperation and camaraderie between locals and the various agencies was reported to be outstanding, so I guess they've all kissed and made up.

Local lefties weren't interested in playing nice, however -- and that's a large, very vocal and almost kinda politically powerful contingent -- and screamed bloody murder about the history of supposed training exercises going live, as was the case on 9/11/01 and 7/7/05 (UK train bombings). In the latter case, the simulation used the exact same train stations where the bombs went off, and even included a London bus going off course and being blown up -- and a real bus actually did leave its route and was duly blown up.

So there were soothing editorials in the Whoregonian about the feds having the best of intentions, just wanting to save lives in an emergency. Meanwhile, also reported in the Whoregonian, the exercise scenario changed from a terrorist attack to an earthquake. Less controversial, I'm sure.

Anyway, we survived the experience, but then we learned that Noble Resolve was just a warm-up for the really big show -- Vigilant Shield/TopOFF, starting Oct 15 and running about 5 days. This one simulates terrorist attacks and, according to a NORTHCOM news release:


<snip>
VS-08 will be conducted concurrent with Top Officials 4 (TOPOFF 4), the nations premier exercise of terrorism preparedness sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security, and several other linked exercises as part of the National Level Exercise 1-08. These linked exercises will take place October 15-20 and are being conducted throughout the United States and in conjunction with several partner nations including Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, as well as the Territory of Guam.

VS-08 and National Level Exercise 1-08 will provide local, state, tribal, interagency, Department of Defense, and non-governmental organizations and agencies involved in homeland security and homeland defense the opportunity to participate in a full range of exercise scenarios that will better prepare participants to prevent and respond to national crises. The participating organizations will conduct a multi-layered, civilian-led response to a national crisis.

USNORTHCOMs primary exercise venues for VS-08 include locations in Oregon, Arizona and a cooperative venue with USPACOM in the Territory of Guam. NORADs aerospace detection and defense events will take place across all the exercise venues, to exercise the ability to mobilize resources for aerospace defense, aerospace control, maritime warning, and coordination of air operations in a disaster area.
</snip>


Now, I'm naturally distrustful of any announcement whatsoever that tells me BushCo is running an exercise to protect me. Combine TopOFF with the missing nukes, PNAC's lust for Iranian blood, Cheney's obvious dementia, all the laws and executive orders that create the blueprint for a national security state lockdown, the overturn of Posse Comitatus by the Military Commissions Act (which means federal troops can participate in domestic police actions, i.e., kill us), the current list of more than 500,000 "persons of interest" on various TSA, NSA, DHS lists (and probably a lot more people and a lot more lists), my previous post about Portland being the most obvious choice for the next 9/11-style false flag op -- and I get a little nervous.

There's also a good case to be made that the Sept. 14 stand-down of all domestic AF flights, the Sept. 15 protest march on DC, the recent troop movements which placed a fresh battalion in the DC area -- all of which are a little too coincidental for my tastes -- will be when the nukes are launched at Iran, allowing DC cops and troops to arrest all protesters under our new version of the Sedition Act which prohibits protests in time of war.

Either way, it seems the end of the republic could be at hand. And Congress, with the power to stop this crap in its tracks by initiating immediate impeachment proceedings against Cheney and Bush, instead continues to haggle over how much to cave in to Bush's next demand for Iraq occupation blood money.

I swear to god, I'm in fucking Oz. This is so unreal that even thriller masters like Le Carre or Forsythe would balk at a plot this ridiculous. And yet...


wp


Here's a couple of links to articles on Noble Resolve and TopOFF by Eric May, a former Army intelligence officer:

http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/08/13/may.htm

http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/07/08/27/may.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #148
160. I See You've Been Reading My Stuff, Warren. i'm Flattered
We do think alike
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-10-07 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #160
165. Thinking like me can be hazardous to your mental stability...
Hey Wiley -- You're doing great research. I'm just connecting a few dots, some of which you put out there in public for the first time.

I didn't pay much attention to this story when it broke, partly because I had no understanding of the complex and "foolproof" procedures and protocols and redundancies in place to prevent just this kind of thing.

And the more I read from Rick and Hoot and Seemslikeadream and you and others, as well as those posts from active and retired AF flight line personnel and B-52 crew members, the scarier things got.

I'm at the point now that I'm convinced this was a black op conceived and ordered at the highest possible levels -- which would be the President of Vice himself, the skankiest Dick in the universe -- to accomplish two objectives:

First, swiping one of the warheads to build a suitcase nuke to use on a very blue US city in a blue state, which would scare the living shit out of this cowardly bunch of manipulated dipshits Americans seem to have become, while validating all the recent hogwash about heightened terror threats and satisfying the perverse desires of GOP nut cases and their pundit mouthpieces for another 9/11 to "save" the presidency and the party. The city should be a port to preserve the legend that all it would take is a motorboat and a briefcase to wreak massive havoc. It should also be disposable in that there are no strategic industries headquartered there and it contains a minimum of high-end GOP campaign contributors. Which brings me to my own city, Portland OR.

There's nothing on the east or gulf coasts that meet all those criteria (New Orleans being too devastated to bother with and Louisiana not blue enough). Seattle, SF and LA are too vital to what's left of the economy, and all host major corporate headquarters; San Diego has too many military who might come in useful in the ME soon; and you don't want to screw up Arnold's rep, since he could be prez one day when that irrelevant old piece of 1787-vintage paper is finally torn into neo-confetti. Portland, on the other hand, is about as non-strategic as it gets. Bluer than cobalt; no major corporate headquarters; not vital to the national economy; bunch of unapologetic lefties, and so forth.

So Portland is the obvious choice, unfortunately for me, my friends, family and cats.

And the second objective? Merely start WW III by nuking alleged Iranian uranium or plutonium enrichment sites, thereby pissing off all seven Muslims who were still apathetic, as well as the Russians, the Chinese, India and Pakistan -- all of which are serious nuclear powers and might get a little testy about the US fucking around with thermonuclear weapons in their various spheres of influence.

The only checks on this hideous plot were three whistle-blowing AF officers who knew this was so completely beyond the pale that it could only have come from very high up the food chain, most likely the white house fascists. And they remembered that when they took their military oaths, they were to the Constitution, not to a sleazy bunch of plundering, rapacious domestic terrorist wingnuts whose only allegiance is to money and power, and the application of both to inflict as much death and misery as possible.

These guys should get Medals of Honor; they'll probably get a court martial, hard time and dishonorable discharges instead.

My, my, that coffee after dinner seems to have been a mistake. I probably could have said all that in a couple of well-designed sentences if I weren't caffeined half way to the asteroid belt.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #137
156. One other recent addition
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 06:32 PM by PATRICK
was the story of Clinton's lost nukes, 3, same type, possibly recovered by the Iranians. Therefore the radioactive signature for even a dirty bomb could be blamed on that and as a bonus...Clinton!

On edit: If this was done by Cheney he bypassed the relatively weak Gates in the DOJ. This is where, if any sane Bush I influences remian, the plan could be most easily scotched.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #131
157. 12 missiles left 6 of them were nukes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
125. i agree it cannot be an accident. there are to many redundancies for it too happen. IMHO
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 12:37 PM by spanone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
127. Ya Gotta Love THIS:
By 'Unregistered' 09-05-2007, 04:24 PM

The three officers who leaked the story to the press should be punished just as harshly as those responsible for this snafu. This was a classified incident and it should've stayed that way. There was no serious danger to the public, nor any real need-to-know on the public's part. It is clearly a one-time incident and probably resulted from combination of factors. The Air Force, regardles of the publicity, will conduct a thorough investigation and implement certain procedures to ensure this never happens again. So all of this publicity is irrelevant and accomplishes nothing other than giving our enemies and peaceniks verbal ammunition to use against us politically.


And then the reply by 'Measure Man - Brass'

With all due respect...Horsedung!

If we lose track of 5 nukes and fly them unknowingly over the country...yeah, the public has a right to know that.

We don't need to keep secrets of our screwups...I'm sorry, but someone needs to be held accountable here. This is a major deal.


Link: http://www.militarytimes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15...

Nice to know there are some thoughtful folks telling the wingnuts to buzz off!

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #127
130. "Our enemies" and "peaceniks" are one and the same??
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 01:32 PM by IDemo
It appears the Commander in Chief's message remains clear and strong here...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Holly_Hobby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
136. Ok, try this one
Steve Fosset went missing and the freakin' MILITARY is looking for him. Why? He's just a very rich citizen, isn't he?

I saw the theory here, FWIW:

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=109...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jimshoes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #136
145. Things that make you go
hmmmm, and not a peep on MSM about the wayward nukes. If this kind of thing happened in the 60's or 70's it would be the top story on all the networks. BTW there were only 3 major networks at the time so they were all trying to scoop each other hence very complete coverage of stories.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #145
146. 40 years nothing like this has ever happened
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
141. New article from this AM:
In a thread by WillyT.

Pretty well aligned with the views here.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetheonlyway Donating Member (948 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
147. we appreciate these updates and come to depend on them..
please keep us all informed, you are doing a wonderful job.

those of us in the peace community will wratchet up the action activity to show we are serious about averting a nuclear disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
149. Christian Fascists - georgie is just not radical enough
Democracy Now: American Fascists Pt. 1

Democracy Now: American Fascists Pt. 2


Chris Hedges's new book examines how Christian dominionists are seeking absolute power and a Christian state. According to Hedges, the movement bears a strong resemblance to the young fascist movements in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and '30s. Hedges is the former New York Times Middle East bureau chief and author of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
150. Chris Hedges: Americas Holy Warriors
Edited on Sun Sep-09-07 04:31 PM by seemslikeadream
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20061231_chris_hedg... /

Chris Hedges: Americas Holy Warriors


Posted on Dec 31, 2006

From Salon.com
A bodyguard from Blackwater USA protects former Coalition Provisional Authority head Paul Bremer in Iraq in 2004. Blackwaters founder is a right-wing Christian whose paramilitary contractors may be operating outside constitutional restrictions imposed on the police and military.

By Chris Hedges

Editors note: The former New York Times Mideast Bureau chief warns that the radical Christian right is coming dangerously close to its goal of co-opting the countrys military and law enforcement.


The drive by the Christian right to take control of military chaplaincies, which now sees radical Christians holding roughly 50 percent of chaplaincy appointments in the armed services and service academies, is part of a much larger effort to politicize the military and law enforcement. This effort signals the final and perhaps most deadly stage in the long campaign by the radical Christian right to dismantle Americas open society and build a theocratic state. A successful politicization of the military would signal the end of our democracy.

During the past two years I traveled across the country to research and write the book American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America. I repeatedly listened to radical preachers attack as corrupt and godless most American institutions, from federal agencies that provide housing and social welfare to public schools and the media. But there were two institutions that never came under attackthe military and law enforcement. While these preachers had no interest in communicating with local leaders of other faiths, or those in the community who did not subscribe to their call for a radical Christian state, they assiduously courted and flattered the military and police. They held special services and appreciation days for all four branches of the armed services and for various law enforcement agencies. They encouraged their young men and women to enlist or to join the police or state troopers. They sought out sympathetic military and police officials to attend church events where these officials were lauded and feted for their Christian probity and patriotism. They painted the war in Iraq not as an occupation but as an apocalyptic battle by Christians against Islam, a religion they regularly branded as satanic. All this befits a movement whose final aesthetic is violence. It also befits a movement that, in the end, would need the military and police forces to seize power in American society.

One of the arguments used to assuage our fears that the mass movement being built by the Christian right is fascist at its core is that it has not yet created a Praetorian Guard, referring to the paramilitary force that defied legal constraints, made violence part of the political discourse and eventually plunged ancient Rome into tyranny and despotism. A paramilitary force that operates outside the law, one that sows fear among potential opponents and is capable of physically silencing those branded by their leaders as traitors, is a vital instrument in the hands of despotic movements. Communist and fascist movements during the last century each built paramilitary forces that operated beyond the reach of the law.

And yet we may be further down this road than we care to admit. Erik Prince, the secretive, mega-millionaire, right-wing Christian founder of Blackwater, the private security firm that has built a formidable mercenary force in Iraq, champions his company as a patriotic extension of the U.S. military. His employees, in an act as cynical as it is deceitful, take an oath of loyalty to the Constitution. These mercenary units in Iraq, including Blackwater, contain some 20,000 fighters. They unleash indiscriminate and wanton violence against unarmed Iraqis, have no accountability and are beyond the reach of legitimate authority. The appearance of these paramilitary fighters, heavily armed and wearing their trademark black uniforms, patrolling the streets of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, gave us a grim taste of the future. It was a stark reminder that the tyranny we impose on others we will one day impose on ourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-09-07 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
151. ANYONE HERE WANT TO GOOGLE BOMB THIS STORY?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Diclotican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-10-07 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
166. Rick Myers

Sir

As a forreigner, that as from the US perspective then. I findt this verry scary and trublesome. If you in America think that the demostrations, and maybee the anger to, that you was seeing before, under and after the iraqi war was trublesome, you wont know what wil happend if US was to use a nuclear bomb on another country... I am not sure what wil follow, but I am beliving it is not coming to be verry nice..


A nation who USE the nuclear bomb today wil be utter outcast of the rest of the world. Not just for a week or to, but for a verry long time... I fear that the rip who openend between US and Europa after this President GWB was hellbent to war in Iraq are nothing to compare if US really used a nuclear divaice against another country.. I fear that over 100 year of friendship, 60 year of alliance (NATO if someon still remember that alliance) wil go down the tube in the prosess.. I think that even the "special friendship" between UK and US are dead in the water then.. If you think that the scaling back of brittish troops in Basra was painfull, belive me, it wil be mutch more painfull when ALL british, and the rest of the world scale back theyr troops, and sending most or noe everyone home..

I belived we was living in a age where nuclear weapon was _not a option to be used_ I guess I was wrong then. Nuclear weapon is in its nature _not_ a weapon of shoice if I understand it correct.. And this President (I guess the Vice-President is the "darth Vader who deside what the "boy king" are doing, and think that Nucks is a great thing) are seriusy completating that they want to USE this type of weapon.. Then hi and his cabinet have to be arrestet, and stoped before they desided to use it.
America maybee be a POWERFULL nation, but they are not THAT powerfull, if all the rest of the world cut off all trade, and innformtion with US. US wil stop in weeks, maybee mounths... Maybee a half year..

I cant do a thing where I am sitting in the nort europe, but YOU in US have to do someting, not just sitting there and let this Administration doing this black deeds.. You have to send a clear message to alle the peopole in command, that they have to stop this maniac before it is to late.. If US are really using the nuclear weapon, it wil not be the last bomb to hit its target... It 8 country who own their own Nuclear bombs.. Russia wil _NOT_ stand down and let US blow Iran to pieces.. They wil retaliate, the same vil China, even then they have a lot less nuclear bombs.. Pakistans military ruler wil be dead in the water, and the extremist take over. And THEY DO HAVE THE BOMB, AND THE MEANS TO DELIVERED IT. Its a scary scenario, but if US do send this "missing bomb" to a base where they are sending this to the theatere in the Middle East, to "blow" up som hard target.. God have mercaly on US soul, they wel need it. All the old "doomedays-movies and books" who was so populare in the 1970-1980s, maybee bee true. If they are really doing this..

I hope US stop short of use nuclear bombs agains Iran, or other nations in the world. But IF they do.. God help us all, we wil need it desperately..

Diclotican

Sorry my bad engelish not my native language
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-10-07 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
167. Kick nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Jul 27th 2014, 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC