-Caveat Lector-
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: September 19, 2007 8:48:08 PM PDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Minot AFB Nukes Mystery -- Arguing All Sides, Pro & Con
http://www.legitgov.org/minot_afb_nukes_oddities.html
Staging Nukes for Iran?
By Larry Johnson
05 Sep 2007
My buddy... reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a
plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the
weapons to a specific site... Barksdale Air Force Base is being
used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations... Why would
we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle
East operations? His final point was to observe that someone on the
inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying
nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing
with nukes. That is something else. Now maybe there is an innocent
explanation for this? I can’t think of one. What is certain is that
the pilots of this plane did not just make a last minute decision
to strap on some nukes and take them for a joy ride...
Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people
that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran?
'Opposing' view:
The following email was sent to CLG on 19 September, anonymously.
Hello there,
I’m a Staff Sergeant in the US Air Force. I do network security,
so, that’s why I’m emailing anonymously, even though I really don’t
feel it’s necessary. I’m just paranoid like that, which is why I’m
pretty good at my job. ;) Also, parts of what I’m putting in here
are probably classified, which is the primary reason I’m sending
this anonymously.
Anyway, I see a lot of people posting on Reddit about government
conspiracies about nukes and things like this. It’s frustrating for
me because it’s really very silly. Please, let me explain some
background, to help you all understand what’s going on in the
background for the Air Force:
Minot AFB is a dead-end base. It’s the abyss of the Air Force, the
saying goes “Why not Minot?” They have major retainability problems
there – people volunteer to go to Iraq, Korea, anywhere just to get
out of there. Beside its location (middle-of-nowhere North Dakota),
the base has very little real mission and spins its wheels forever
in drills that all result in the end of the world since it’s a nuke
base designed to fight the Cold War. But, there is no Cold War for
them to fight (at least not one that Minot’s golden piece of real
estate would be useful in fighting), so its people probably feel
pretty worthless and tired of fighting the now non-existent Soviet
Union. The base has already been re-aligned (more on that in a
moment) and it’s probably going to be BRACed into a regional
airport in a few decades. Ellison AFB in South Dakota has already
had its closure decided.
One of the biggest problems with killing off Minot is its core
mission – all of the nukes it has. Its weapons capability is moving
to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana as the AF further consolidates after
the Cold War and infrastructure budget cuts because of Iraq et al.
Moving weapons capability to Barksdale, in real world terms, means
moving the actual missiles that would deliver the nuclear warhead
to Barksdale. No big deal, conventional weapons move all the time.
Nuclear warheads, however, when transported for these reasons, are
moved by the Department of Energy – a very time consuming,
expensive, and burdensome process that someone else will have to
figure out much later once they finally decide to close the base.
So, the Air Force’s solution is to move the missiles, and leave the
warheads behind, to be dealt with one day when all of us are
retired and don't have to worry about it. That’s what SHOULD have
happened. So the mission itself was pretty normal otherwise. (It
may actually be intentional to leave things this way, to prevent
Congressional involvement, as whatever Senator is from ND is
probably desperate to keep Minot around as long as possible;
leaving the nukes, but operationally stripping the base serves both
sides purposes).
The mistake, and the reason everyone now knows about this, is that
the warheads weren’t removed from the missiles being moved to
Barksdale. I bet the guys on the ground in Barksdale were sure as
shit surprised when they cracked the payload open and saw a
warhead. ;)
I know as much as I do because I work with a cross-trainee whose
last base was Barksdale as a munitions specialist. He was involved
in this process there; along with the various other missions
Barksdale has (it’s a pretty critical base in the AF). Anyway, you
would think there would be a pretty clear checklist for all of
this, but apparently no one even bothered. Doing what they do day-
to-day, is pretty standard operating procedure. People get lazy
when they do the same thing day after day, and there’s no less than
a half dozen teams who would be transferring these weapons around
from storage until they’re loaded. The idea of someone dropping the
ball in the AF is not exactly unusual (quite common, actually,
heh), especially when 4:30 rolls around and everyone wants to go
home. If the next step is to hand it off to the guys who remove the
warhead, and it’s 1630 on a Friday, hell, let’s just leave it until
Monday, since the mission doesn’t fly until Tuesday anyway. Monday
rolls around, someone else takes over, and doesn’t know the job
wasn’t finished on Friday. There SHOULD be some paper trail for
that kind of thing, but then, like I said, people are lazy. Oh, and
Minot usually fails its nuclear operational readiness
inspections. ;) Sorry to kill your confidence in the military.
I’ve seen too much crazy stuff to believe in some massive
conspiracy, there’s too many people involved. You’d have to kill
like 50 people to “cover up” moving nukes to Barksdale. Plus, what
would it achieve? There’s already more than enough nukes at
Barksdale to blow the world up 3x over. Who needs 6 more?
Seriously? Plus, more accidents occur with conventional than nukes,
since nukes are computerized and designed to be super-duper safe.
Conventional weapons are built by the lowest bidder. [Yikes!] I’d
be more worried about a fully-loaded F16 flying around NYC after
9/11 sucking up a bird than a B52 with nukes flying around without
anyone knowing it was loaded with nukes. The pilots couldn’t
"secretly" be in on it and launch them, the interface wouldn’t be
installed, the COMSEC material wouldn’t be available, etc. You’d
have to kill half the base to hide the paper trail necessary to
give the pilots the ability to launch.
Several people dying from Minot is bad, of course, but then, crazy
stuff happens. Motorcycle accidents, mind you, are the #1 non-war
cause of dead in the Air Force. The Captain who died wasn’t a pilot
(he was Combat Weather, as evidenced by his pewter beret in the
photo linked from your site). Captains are a dime a dozen, just
like the Security Forces troop who died. Yes, a part of the
Security Forces Squadron mission there would be do defend the
nukes, but he’s not at all involved in any of the process. He
stands outside the door and checks IDs. Seriously, that’s it. I
have 5 cops (as they're generally called in the Air Force) I deal
with every day where I work because I do computer stuff, and they
have zero clue what’s happening behind the door. They spend most of
the day on the phone chit chatting with friends at other security
posts about the latest dorm gossip about who slept with whom.
So, to conclude, just chill out a bit about the conspiracy, it’s
kinda silly. Plus, again, what would be the point? It’s not a big
deal to authorize a nuke mission. After 9/11 the entire Barksdale
arsenal was loaded and on the flightline ready to fly. I wouldn’t
sweat 6 who someone forgot to unload.
Feel free to republish, maybe it'll educate a few people.
V/r
SSgt
Rebuttal to 'Opposing View'
The following email was sent to CLG on 19 September.
I’m NOT anonymous, and I take issue with the anonymous "ssgt"
statements.
I’m a cold war vet from the US Navy, one who worked as part of an
operation designed to exhaust and bankrupt the Soviet military, by
constantly testing their limitations. This SSgt is a defacto shill
for a propaganda machine.
1st.
Bullsheep. Plain and simple. IF this "SSgt" was actually just
debunking a load of Steaming Holstein, none of his command would
have much issue with any of his statements, especially publicly
available facts such as retention rates and base activities that
are noted on google.com, mil.gov, wikipedia, and many other
websites worldwide. There is no need to be anonymous when you’re
not releasing classified data, is there? Saying "there is not a
plot" is not contrary to secure data, even if there is not a plot.
2nd
6 people dying within days of a world-record nuclear screw-up is
decidedly newsworthy, and suspicious, in itself. The rate of
fatalities in the military isn’t that high even in war zones.
3rd
The "Decider" has already stated that he believes the USA has the
right to bomb Iran, and that he will not certify that he’d refuse
to use nukes. "No option is off the table" as he is fond of saying.
I think that’s pretty damn clear, being as it is coming from the
Commander In Chief.
4th
The military reporting of these incidents is itself contrary to
military secrecy, reason, and law. I suspect an altogether
different agenda. I believe that this high-level press coverage of
a screw up, carrying nukes on B52s, is designed to use the US Media
[gasp, they’ve never done that before!] to pressure Iran to meet US
demands.
a.
The US military would never release to the public any real
classified data, especially including data about moved or missing
nukes, without authority from the White House.
b.
The US media is NOT entitled to print or distribute classified
information, and is NEVER brought-in as it was in this case, so
rapidly or on such an elemental and critical faux paus.
c.
The only logical excuse for the sudden and detail-filled news
coverage of this event is that of an intentional release of data
for political purposes.
5th
Declaring that the US Military is lying in the media isn’t illegal
provided that one does not expose any actual events or secrets, or
violate the UCMJ by disobeying a direct order. All soldiers still
have their civil rights. These rights are merely waived as needed
for valid military purposes, as it is the job of a soldier to take
abnormal risks and bear state secrets.
If it was really a secret, the anonymous sergeant would now be a
traitor to the USA, just by talking about it. Thus, the implication
that the letter is legit, is ALSO an implication that the letter is
NOT legit. There is no need to be anonymous if it’s not a secret.
QED. This is an example of a circular argument.
Thus, "I" am not violating any UCMJ or Federal laws by stating that
it’s bunk. You can’t cite me for a double negative: I’m stating
that what doesn’t exist, doesn’t not exist. We call that the First
Amendment, and whether Dumbya likes it or not, it’s still in force.
I’m saying that there is no pink elephant.
The missiles were moved, without any doubts, intentionally; OR The
missiles were never moved and the press coverage is based on
propaganda to scare Iran; OR the missiles were moved and the press
coverage is based on propaganda to scare Iran. You can’t prove or
disprove what the US military has done without EXTERNAL data.
They’ll say whatever they want to suit themselves.
Sincerely,
Don Lee E3/EW
US Navy vet
ASWOC 574 Jacksonville FL
Top Secret and other clearances [inactive]
See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
