It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Air Force lost track of nuclear missiles

page: 3
35
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthWithin

Well it is all over the net, people are waking up and fighting back. How? i
won't tell you, cause you do not bring the real news, truth to the poeple in
your scammy USA today f..paper
I don't ever buy it
But they are trying to confuse things, so they can nuke the TWIN CITIES
as planned by the atrocious Illuminati gang. It is in plans to make this our
second TWIN atrocity
Just in case you did not know, here is a glimpse of the truth, it is fact, not
fiction, cause it is all documented, but God help us, if you ever some out
with honesty & tell the people. www.worldreports.org...




posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   
www.cnn.com...


The Air Force announced that all flights of fighters and bombers in the United States will be halted on September 14 to allow for a review of procedures.


Forget what happened on the 30th, what's going to happen on the 14th? Totally, totally unacceptable that the people who are supposed to be managing the nuclear stockpile of the US is letting this happen. The US is extremely anal about how responsible other nuclear capable countries are with their stuff, yet this happens???

Something is seriously amiss here.

U.S. bomber mistakenly flies with nuclear weapons
[edit on 5-9-2007 by Mekanic]

[edit on 5-9-2007 by Mekanic]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
here's something for everyone to ponder:

How'd the media catch wind of this if the plane flew from 1 base to another? The media doesn't just sit on the runway waiting for this kind of thing. And if my 4 years in the military have taught me anything, when something like this happens, there'd be no reason for the General's to run to the media and say "Hey, look how bad we messed up!"

I saw a few people say that this is "posturing". I think that's right on the head...I think the military WANTED this information to hit the media. Trust me, if the military wants to keep something a secret, they're pretty good at it.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:32 PM
link   
now i ask, what is the difference between arming a weapon and loading them?
if, as someone quoted, these missiles were not armed but locked and loaded.
this means for me those rockets were ready to go! (if i didn't misunderstood this).
i also dont think that losing the bombs happened by accident. this is impossible!

two possibilities what could have happened:

-- these rockets could have been removed while the bomber is making a "pitstop".
this way the crew could say "we didn't know anything about it and when we left the plane, there was nothing under the wing".
of course they would have known easily, because the plane is acting slower, more fuel is needed and so on.. BUT someone can say it. wouldn't be the first lie..
-- the rockets could easily be dropped without launching them. not even in water but at some appropriate ground the device could be re-used.
this way it would be harder to follow the route of the bomb.. but also the risk damaging the devices might be high. anyway, the code isn't needed to use the device.

i would prefer the first scenario - from a mlitary base there is enough place to ship it to after unloading it.
this way it looks like an accident and
by now, the bombs could be placed in NY..
and thats what i tell you - NY is going to be the next pearl harbor.

edit: grammar

[edit on 5/9/2007 by rxnnxs]

[edit on 5/9/2007 by rxnnxs]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Jaruseleh
 

That's a good point. Secrecy seems to be their strongest point at times. There's no way anybody can look up at a plane flying at what, 30,000 ft and tell the next guy what kind of missles are loaded onto it.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by made2order
reply to post by TruthWithin

Well it is all over the net, people are waking up and fighting back. How? i
won't tell you, cause you do not bring the real news, truth to the poeple in
your scammy USA today f..paper


Hey pal - Do me a favor? Don't attack the OP for bringing a story to the table. I din't sit there and say "WOW USA TODAY is an AMAZING publication. It REALLY BRINGS THE TRUTH!!"

Did I? NO.

What I DID do was bring an article to the forum so we could all discuss it and see what COULD BE behind it by scrutinizing the article with a collective discussion.

So please, keep your criticism to yourself and maybe...oh I dunno...ADD SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE for a change! You would be shocked to see how much more productive it is than what you consider to be the truth.

The "basket of facts" that you put up is just as biased and speculative as any major US media outlet.

Be careful where you go to find "the truth".

[edit on 5-9-2007 by TruthWithin]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   
The Opening post has been updated with an alternate source. Please stay on topic. Do not turn this into a personal argument.

Thanks.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   
I agree with others who have posted here that this is likely "muscle Flexing" given the timing.

The challenge to countries like Iran and North Korea in developing Nuclear weapons is not just the weapon itself, but delivery systems!

This could easily be a statement by the US that it is so easy for us to throw a half dozen nuclear warheads on a B2 Bomber that sometimes we don't even know when we do it


BTW - In January 2002, Bush made his famous "Axis of Evil" speech where he named 3 countries...Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

We were already in Afganistan and shortly after the speech we invaded Iraq. Now if you were North Korea or Iran your first thought would be that the US doesn't invade countries with Nuclear capabilities. The race has been on ever since. Iran was further encouraged to speed up it's nuclear program by the fact that the US compromises with North Korea when they appear to have some Nuclear capabilities as opposed to invading non-nuclear countries.

IMO the blame for nuclear proliferation with countries like Iran and N. Korea can be traced to the Axis of Evil Speech and the hubris of our president. He has made the world a more dangerous place.

Back on topic -
Delivery...that is the second and vitally important component of Nuclear Weapons Capability and that is the muscle we are seeing flexed here.


[edit on 5-9-2007 by maybereal11]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Ok , I found this manual the web

cryptome.org...

I guess is an old manual that describes the nuclear weapons transportation procedures. Is from 1998, so my best guess is that is still outdated, if you read it you can assume that either many things went wrong here or it was like many have said here a flexing muscle excersise.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:54 PM
link   
My idiot brother is stationed there. I'd ask him what happened, but I stopped speaking to him years ago. He owes me an apology ... (I'm not holding my breath .. like I said - he's an idiot).



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Bunch
 


Or a test to see how far a "mistake" like this could go?

You never know when the ability to transport nukes in TOTAL secrecy could come in handy, but then you'd need the president and other top officials on hand to arm them.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by rxnnxs
now i ask, what is the difference between arming a weapon and loading them?
if, as someone quoted, these missiles were not armed but locked and loaded.
this means for me those rockets were ready to go! (if i didn't misunderstood this).
i also dont think that losing the bombs happened by accident. this is impossible!


They didn't lose any...you don't misplace a nuke


What they are trying to say is the B-52 was loaded with nukes by mistake and when the B-52 took off which left the nuke dump with 6 nukes unaccounted for since they were mysteriously loaded on the B-52. Aircraft with nukes will normally do air refueling and not stop for a “pitstop”, and since the fight was 3 hours they didn’t need to refuel anyway. To arm a nuke you need to put in the code otherwise it is actually very safe.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 05:16 PM
link   
news.yahoo.com...;_ylt=Ar.ZZb47EanaR1jfxmuYz6cE1vAI

There is not a chance in hell that this was a mistake. I'll put good money on the fact that our military knows the exact whereabouts of every one of our nukes. These aren't firecrackers, we just don't "mistakenly" fly these things from one base to another.

Here's another idea...maybe there weren't nukes on that plane at all.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   
From CNN:



"Shepperd said the United States had agreed in a Cold War-era treaty not to fly nuclear weapons. "It appears that what happened was this treaty agreement was violated," he said."

www.cnn.com...

I understand this to say that NO nuclear weapons should even be loaded on a plane that is scheduled for departure, right?



Mod Edit: Proper sourcing of external material.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   
"I Was Only Following Orders"

Unless things have really changed, nothing involving nuclear weapons can be done without explicit orders, usually printed and always very clear regarding what is to be done.

You don't just walk up and say "Yo, Joe, some nukes to go!" and walk away with a pocket full of nukes.

Everything involving the storage, requisition, issuance, deployment and whereabouts of all nuclear weapons is (supposed to be) meticulously supervised and documented.

The chain of custody for all nukes is sacred and the armed personnel that guard them won't release them without proper authorization. :shk:

The circumstances surrounding this story seem suspicious to me, considering:

1. That this supposedly happened.

2. That this made it to the press. Any operations involving nuclear weapons are supposed to be classified.

3. That it's being played up for some reason (although granted nothing more than good old-fashioned press sensationalism could indeed explain that aspect of it).

I have a hard time believing the Personnel Reliability Program members handling these nukes "just screwed up", "winged it" and were able to requisition and deploy nuclear weapons without direct orders to do so.

If that actually happened, then the problem isn't just with the weapons crews at Minot, but more fundamental and systemic in nature, and their commanding officers are directly responsible for this lapse and the security breach accompanying it.

There does seem to be an ulterior motive in publicizing this incident (who are those "anonymous sources" speaking to the press about this?), but I suppose anything -- including classic human incompetence -- is possible.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


i can see it now, air force loses nuclear weapons...but somehow terrorists find those weapons and use them....wow we didnt see that coming, or am i missing something in this news report.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
I have a hard time believing the Personnel Reliability Program members handling these nukes "just screwed up", "winged it" and were able to requisition and deploy nuclear weapons without direct orders to do so.

If that actually happened, then the problem isn't just with the weapons crews at Minot, but more fundamental and systemic in nature, and their commanding officers are directly responsible for this lapse and the security breach accompanying it.


Movement is planned months in advance, and as you said the transfer of custody to the aircrew is no small thing in shipping them. Also these weapons do not move without a net of protection that covers the whole route. The movement classification is also secret as you said.

Reading it again I'm confused...

First why would they use a B-52 to ship missiles with or without the warhead? Without the warhead they would use just normal mode of shipping…not a bomber.

If the missiles were to be decommissioned why were the warheads not removed long ago? Since the warheads would go to a different storage place than where the missiles would need to go.


[edit on 5-9-2007 by Xtrozero]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 06:51 PM
link   
someone just found an article on yahoo....saying that a general was sacked for this.....

that may be how the press got a hold of it.....they saw someone so high ranking being dropped....and started the investigation.....i'll go get the article and bring it back this way.....


p.s. xtorreo.....if you have a plane already heading one way....that can carry something....it's much cheaper for the chairforce to ship it with it.... it happens with us alot....we arent meant for cargo....but occasionally we'll carry some stuff that'd otherwise have to wait for a cargo plain....(never anything large....but still stuff we normally dont fly wiht.....

[edit on 5-9-2007 by wenfieldsecret]


p.s.s....while doing regular searches i cant find any article.....

[edit on 5-9-2007 by wenfieldsecret]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:00 PM
link   
The pilot had to have seen the warheads in place on his weapon load screen.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I thought that the military pilots always checked there planes before they flew. Don't you think they would have seen them?

Everything that has happened in that time period all seems to be lies.

This and the fireball over Jersey..... things just aren't adding up.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join