EVIDENT NATIONAL AND WORLDWIDE EMERGENCY SITUATION:
Wed Sep 5, 2007 20:58
 

Supreme Law Firm paulandrewmitchell2004@yahoo.com

THIS IS A FAIR USE COPY
IN LIGHT OF AN EVIDENT NATIONAL
AND WORLDWIDE EMERGENCY SITUATION:

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/09/05/staging-nukes-for-iran/#more-817

54 Comments

Comment by rugger9 | 2007-09-05 21:01:11
Good post, Larry, and it is exactly my question.
There is no way the weapons would have moved without a top-level [in this case I would guess the Decider, since he has the football, but certainly no lower than SecDef] directive to do so, because of treaty obligations dating to the Cold War, because of the potential for really big problems in the wrong hands or if there’s a crash during transport. There are radiological reports needed because of the gamma activity inherent from the design of these things, dealing with where they went, who was exposed, how much dose, etc., which requires a monitored crew [not necessarily the next ones in the flight line]. As you probably already know, things like this are most vulnerable to interdiction in transit.
The “joy ride” or mistake scenarios would end the careers of every person even remotely attached to the weapons, because of the many layers of control and clearances even to remove them from storage. There are ways to ID these things IF you see them AND know what to look for. Hard to do as a casual observer hanging around inside a B-52 on either airbase, so this was what I’d call a “cry for help” leak (if it wasn’t orchestrated, see next para) like the GAO report was to highlight the WH “tweaking” to come.
This is at the least a shot across the Iranian bow to remind them we have the big boomers and will use them, saber rattling on steroids if you will. Or, W really means it. I don’t think either are very good options.
Reply to this comment

Comment by PrchrLady | 2007-09-05 21:01:52
Yes, Larry, you are right. Some very serious questions need to be asked and right now… I hope that you have contacted anyone in the media you might have an inside with, and put them on to this… How about CNN and Olbermann??? any chance of getting to one of their people?
Reply to this comment

Comment by Leslie | 2007-09-05 21:02:48
From FAS: “Beyond the safety issue of transporting nuclear weapons in the air, the most important implication of the Minot incident is the apparent break-down of nuclear command and control for the custody of the nuclear weapons. Pilots (or anyone else) are not supposed to just fly off with nuclear bombs, and base commanders are not supposed to tell them to do so unless so ordered by higher command. In the best of circumstances the system worked, and someone “upstairs” actually authorized the transport of nuclear cruise missiles on a B-52H bomber.”
Reply to this comment

Comment by Shirin | 2007-09-05 21:08:39
Sorry, but I have trouble seeing someone “upstairs” authorizing the movement of nuclear weapons to a Middle East staging base as “the best of circumstances”. I see it as deeply, deeply frightening.
These people are crazy, and someone or something has to stop them.
Reply to this comment
Comment by rugger9 | 2007-09-05 21:21:17
Sure enough, which is why the leak source could be important to know.
If it were orchestrated as part of the rollout Larry has on another thread, it would be one of those multitudes of SAOs that harrumph on deep background to send a message. It would be completely consistent with the way Cheney does things.
Or, it is some military-connected person who knows where these are intended to go, and it was leaked to create a climate making it harder to use them (nukes are political weapons as well as military ones), and I’m sure the Aussie public won’t be amused as more details emerge. I referred to the GAO report before, a more apt comparison might be the extension several months ago of combat tours that Bush wanted to blame on the D’s for not passing his supplemental. Except, somebody leaked the memo a couple days early.
This was no “accidental” movement. That much is for certain.
Reply to this comment


Comment by Leslie | 2007-09-05 21:24:58
I believe the story was originally reported in the Army Times here.
Nuclear Threat Initiative points out that the “US abandoned all nuclear-armed bomber flights in 1968,” due to the risk of radioactive fissile material being distributed in case of a crash. In 1991, Bushie Sr. ordered that nuclear weapons be removed from bombers and kept in storage facilities. [Armed bombers used to be kept on alert on the ground.]
So, this accident, flying live nuclear weapons across the US, violates multiple layers of command and control systems and also four decades of policy. What are the odds? How can the military say with a straight face that all nukes are accounted for? If these weapons were being decommissioned, why fly them to another air force base, which is getting rid of its ACMs?
Reply to this comment

Comment by Helen Rainier | 2007-09-05 21:33:19
Hard to believe this was just an “accident” considering the timing and this is the first time I can remember hearing about something like this happening “accidentally.”
I suspect these could end up in the Arabian Gulf.
Time for the tin-foil beanie.
Reply to this comment

Comment by JamesL | 2007-09-05 21:37:23
Mistake, nukes in the pipeline or what? Leaked info by someone to alert the public to a Bush Tonkin, or intentional manipulation/leak to make the public more nervous? It’s cuddling up right next to Germany’s swoop down on “massive bomb” making terrorists right now on Yahoo news. Wonderful agitprop placement. I’m stymied.
Reply to this comment

Comment by JDB | 2007-09-05 21:49:34
Not bunker-busters, right?
All the water-testing we’ve heard from the administration over the past few years has been aimed at judging public reaction to the use, specifically, of bunker-penetrating nukes, which I believe are air-dropped guided gravity bombs (exclusively?). These are air-launched cruise missiles. So if I’m not mistaken in my assumptions this indicates either that the theory is unlikely and these are not being staged, or that they are staging nukes to be used beyond the bunker-busting mission.
Reply to this comment
Comment by JDB | 2007-09-05 21:57:17
On further consideration, I guess the obvious possibility is, as others have stated, that the warheads were being stealthily shipped in the ACMs for removal and use in other weapons.
All the water-testing we’ve heard from the administration over the past few years has been aimed at judging public reaction to the use, specifically, of bunker-penetrating nukes, which I believe are air-dropped guided gravity bombs (exclusively?). These are air-launched cruise missiles. So if I’m not mistaken in my assumptions this indicates either that the theory is unlikely and these are not being staged, or that they are staging nukes to be used beyond the bunker-busting mission.
Reply to this comment


Comment by P J Evans | 2007-09-05 21:51:11
When I heard about this, I though the same thing. CNN was reporting it as ‘accidental’, that the missiles were going to Barksdale to be scrapped, and that it was an accident that the warheads were still on them. My reaction was ‘no way, they know d*mned well those are armed. They’re trying to sneak them out for an attack.’
I don’t know whether to be glad I’m agreeing with you or p*ssed that we’re going to be on the receiving end of a whole lot of really really bad stuff if these @#$%^&* actually attack Iran with nukes. Conventional weapons would be bad enough ….
Reply to this comment

Comment by jimbo | 2007-09-05 21:52:33
Note to Pelosi and Reid: Get off your behinds and give the idiots cheney and bush impeachment to think about, instead of Iran. You hold the fate of the world in your hands.
The possibility of unintendedly shipping nukes is ZERO. Can’t happen.
Reply to this comment

Pingback by People First Politics Blog Archive Saber-Rattling 101: | 2007-09-05 21:59:17
[…] UPDATE: Looks like ex-spy Larry Johnson had the same take as I did, just a few hours (and inside contacts) later. Check it out at Staging Nukes for Iran? […]
Reply to this comment

Comment by Shirin | 2007-09-05 22:01:43
It looks to me as if the only way to stop these lunatics is by beginning impeachment proceedings immediately. Whether the impeachment succeeds or not is irrelevant at this point. Whether they use nukes on Iran or just “ordinary” bombs, this is a very serious emergency.
Writing notes to Reid and Pelosi in the comment section of a blog is nice, but useless.
What can we do - actually do?
Reply to this comment

Comment by hoosierhoops | 2007-09-05 22:05:58
I worked on nuclear submarines for the Navy at Mare Island Naval shipyard for 20 years. As a Nuc worker I handled nuclear material and weapons for 15 of those years. The controls on weapons and nuclear fuel is insanely tight.. This story just CAN’T happen. The amount of people involved in logistics..Code 105 radcon, Engineers, Nuclear riggers, Code 1390 Engineers..Gawd the paperwork involved for anyone of the groups to sign off on.
This story is impossible.. Something else is afoot..
Who signed off and who told them too?
AND WHY do we need to be moving nuclear weapons unless a logistics operation is underway?
IT JUST DOESN’T HAPPEN…They don’t just move weapons from Minot for the hell of it..
Ring…
hello?
hey..we are a little low on thermonuclear tipped weapons this week..
OK, we’ll send you a few..
Make it 6
OK
_____________________________________
It doesn’t happen!!!!
Reply to this comment
Comment by SusanUnPC | 2007-09-06 00:21:00
Fascinating, Hoosierhoops. Why do you think the AF guys in Minot are getting nailed for this, and their careers ruined?
Reply to this comment


Comment by Phillip | 2007-09-05 22:10:16
Maybe the leak was by the Bush adminstration itself? Maybe they want to scare the Iranians. They want the Iranians to think that they are moving nukes over to the middle east. Use the threat as leverage. Could be part of a larger strategy, which also involves the position of those two carrier groups off Iran.
Or maybe they are really moving nukes over to the middle east to be prepared if they have to use them if there is ever another terrorist attack in the U.S. that can be traced to the region, although you would think they already have plenty of cruise missiles over there now, and, therefore why wouldn’t they also already have nuclear tipped ones also there now as well?
Reply to this comment

Comment by lester | 2007-09-05 22:22:02
This whole iran situation reminds me of Ismail kadares “the concert”. it’s awork of fiction but it talks about how Mao used to create situations where people were constantly guessing at what they meant, watching his gestures for signs that some sort of action was going to take place. interpretting alot of innoucous words. not that there is anything innocous about 5 nukes. more than bush is like mao. i’ve even taken to calling Gen. petraous’s 9/11 testimony “the concert”
Reply to this comment

Comment by PrchrLady | 2007-09-05 22:34:40
I have heard from several vets of this war that they are afraid of being in the last groups there… when asked why they say because they know that to gain control of the land, it will have to be with nukes. This, as many have said, was not an accident. never would have happened… the neocons have something up their sleves, and it stinks to high heaven. Needs LOTS of Media ATTENTION. IMPEACH NOW…
Reply to this comment

Comment by Fred C. Dobbs | 2007-09-05 22:37:36
I vote for a leak by a concerned Zoomie who has finally learned that he’s working for nutcases.
DoD doesn’t even move a pallet of 5.56mm round ball without eleven forms filled out in triplicate and endorsed by a Field Grade officer.
Not even the Air Force could screw this pooch…
Reply to this comment

Pingback by Suburban Guerrilla Blog Archive Feeling Safer Yet? | 2007-09-05 22:40:32
[…] from former CIA agent Larry Johnson over at his blog: Why the hubbub over a B-52 taking off from a B-52 base in Minot, North Dakota and […]
Reply to this comment

Comment by JerryB | 2007-09-05 22:47:24
As a former Airforce aircraft mechanic I was stunned when I heard the report that nukes had inadvertantly been loaded on a B-52 and flown across country. It would be a mistake of staggering porportions if this had happened by mistake. Anyone who is familiar with Airforce proceedures regarding even the simplist of proceedures where aircraft are concerned would know that it would be all but impossible to make this kind of mistake.
Those who work on the line are some of the most profesional men and women I have ever known. Every one of them understand the inherent risks that are involved in this kind of work and follow the proceedures accordingly. With the many layers of control that exist in this kind of work, there are too many individuals that have to sign off on anything that is done. Even more so when handling weapons of any kind.
Clearly someone on the inside wanted us to know this had happened
Reply to this comment

Comment by PrchrLady | 2007-09-05 22:57:54
yes, agree, not by any of the air force, or any other branch. couldn’t happen without direct plan and compliance of large numbers of people. I read that the people responsible for loading/handling have been detained, air crew ‘didn’t know so not involved’ yeah, right. 5 or 6 warheads loaded, and they didn’t know? what happened to the days of pre flight checks? what do we do with a CIC who is this sick, and no one seems able to stop him???
Reply to this comment

Comment by clif | 2007-09-05 23:05:12
As a former Army EOD officer, I remember NOBODY touches a nuke with out many levels of command double checking on things, and signing off on multiple forms, and with the requirement of asecond person to double check each moveit is incredulas to thnk this cold be accidental.
I don’treally know which is truly the scarier senario …
Bush and Cheney are intentionally planning a nuke strike on Iran…
Or they have screwed up the military so bad, that the military can LOSE five nukes and nobody knows about it until they are found in a different state, in an uauthorised place with NO control over who as custody of the nuclear weapons. (because the pilot and flight commander did not sign for live active nuclear weapons according to the “official story” put out at this moment )…
sleep well tonight thinking this is the military george bush commands…..
Reply to this comment

Comment by Shirin | 2007-09-05 23:15:44
“if they have to use them
If they have to use them?! If they HAVE to use them?!! IF THEY HAVE TO USE THEM?!!!!!
Are you out of your mind? NO ONE has to use them. No one ever has to use them.
And using nukes in case of a terrorist attack is like using a half ton bomb to swat a fly.
What an insane, insane thing to say.
Reply to this comment

Comment by eb | 2007-09-05 23:16:51
I agree with every statement, sickening trying to figure out the real reason for the leak. once again, this admin. makes whomever they are using take the fall, as if i’m to believe the AF are a bunch of baffoons. My husband is a former AF pilot and this whole thing stinks and we all know it. Flightline activity is very controlled and professional, I agree, so this is no accident. Once again, the American people are treated as idiots. What is it going to take to reign in these maniacs?
Reply to this comment

Comment by The Garret | 2007-09-05 23:17:19
When will there be a confirmed bomb count? Were there five aboard? Six? Eight or more?
Reply to this comment

Comment by Lisa | 2007-09-05 23:22:13
How come Louisiana? Is it closer to get to the ME from here?
And yeah, how exactly does a pilot not know he has nukes on board? They do inspections every time before they fly. Something smells.
Reply to this comment

Comment by sheerahkahn | 2007-09-05 23:22:57
Larry,
First off, I think this is part of the propaganda campaign. Nothing emphasizes testicle retracting fear than having Dad and junior watching “Freedom” flying overhead only to be told that that particular piece of hardware was carrying nukes.
Also, I

 

Main Page - Sunday  09/05/07

Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]

APFN MESSAGEBOARD ARCHIVES

messageboard.gif (4314 bytes)