B-52 Nukes Were Headed for Iran: Airforce Refused

page: 1
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 06:47 PM
link   


-- SPECIAL REPORT --
Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater
By Wayne Madsen
Sept. 24, 2007
Author's website

WMR has learned from U.S. and foreign intelligence sources that the B-52 transporting six stealth AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles, each armed with a W-80-1 nuclear warhead, on August 30, were destined for the Middle East via Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.

However, elements of the Air Force, supported by U.S. intelligence agency personnel, successfully revealed the ultimate destination of the nuclear weapons and the mission was aborted due to internal opposition within the Air Force and U.S. Intelligence Community.

Yesterday, the /Washington Post/ attempted to explain away the fact that America's nuclear command and control system broke down in an unprecedented manner by reporting that it was the result of "security failures at multiple levels." It is now apparent that the command and control breakdown, reported as a BENT SPEAR incident to the Secretary of Defense and White House, was not the result of a command and control chain-of-command "failures" but the result of a revolt and push back by various echelons within the Air Force and intelligence agencies against a planned U.S. attack on Iran using nuclear and conventional
weapons.

earthboppin.net...
(Not sure if you guys had this yet. Didn't see it on the search.)

From: Rense.com

Report: earthboppin.net...

Looks like Project_silo was right...

[edit on 26-9-2007 by hightowerx]

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note (This Appears On Every New Thread/Post Reply Page): AboveTopSecret.com takes pride in making every post count. Please do not create minimal posts or simple "I agree" posts when replying to threads. If you feel inclined to make the board aware of news, current events, or important information from other sites that supports the thread; please post one or two paragraphs, a link to the entire story, AND your opinion, twist or take on the news item as it relates to the thread.

[edit on 26/9/2007 by Mirthful Me]




posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I would not doubt it for one second. There seems to be a lot of disgruntlement in the military these days. Look at all the generals that are starting to speak out now. Look at all the soldiers going to protests or giving back their metals.

Using nukes would only turn the world against us and they know it.



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Snap
 


This is a civilized Coup d'état of the current administration power. It follows the principles taught in the Nuremberg trials, the principle that an officer should not follow an illegal order.

If it is true of coarse....

It also explains the reprisals, I mean coincidental deaths of people some claim were associated with incident.

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 08:11 PM
link   
That would not have stopped it from happening when he could order a navy sub to do the same thing. B-2 stealths would be the ones dropping nukes anyway, It can carry those stealth cruise missiles in its belly on the rotating rack. The B-52 and the stealth have the same size and type of bomb bay. Anyone failing to carry out that order could have been shot on site. That would make for one hell of a story though.



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 08:16 PM
link   
You know,,, I'm just sitting here in disbelief. We theorize and theorize talking about subjects that seem to defy reality at times. Then stuff like this comes around and you think "maybe we/I'm not that far out-there." Our reality is changing right before our eyes and It still seems like the majority of people I see are still caught up in their daily grind. I can't fault them but, "we the people" need to come together, become empowered citizens, stand-up and not be afraid to voice his/hers opinion!


Please read source link. It's somewhat extensive but worth the time.



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by hightowerx
 


As a joke, your comment not only advocates what we should do, but the consequences of that action (see your avatar) OK that really is a joke, the consequences of doing nothing are far worse, as shown through history. No installing of fear is intended, I just saw it as ironic and opportunity for a funny.

Thinking about it, it might not be in good taste to joke about previous Genocide inflicted on Native Americans, this may be a character flaw and a mistake. I apologize if it offends. I personally side with the Native Americans unjust plight, yet understand how it happened.


[edit on 26-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 09:50 PM
link   
I just sent you a U2U, but hell, I'll just as well post it here. I consider myself a witty person, I wanted to make sure we were on the same page. Apparently we were. Yes, the avatar is ironic. Didn't even think about till you mentioned it. No offense taken.

[edit on 26-9-2007 by hightowerx]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Just speculation here but I bet it was the airforce that tipped off the media on this one. "Hey America, nukes are headed for Iran!"



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 09:57 PM
link   
I'm not buying it. One can lean back on "unnamed sources" and and spew whatever dribble he or she chooses to endorse.

SHOW ME THE PROOF!!!



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Perhaps a B-2 wing or submarine command was not an option for the PTB to issue an internal covert nuclear strike on Iran. It may have been that there were better odds of pulling this off through the chain of command of a B-52 squadron. It may have been the case that it was essential to use these cruise missiles armed with nuclear warheads simply because they are easier to procure. These cruise missiles can be armed with conventional warheads too I believe, so it could have been easier to slip these through.

[edit on 26-9-2007 by wingman77]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:21 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
I'm not buying it. One can lean back on "unnamed sources" and and spew whatever dribble he or she chooses to endorse.

SHOW ME THE PROOF!!!


Proof?

Some low grade militiary clerk cant just walk into a nuclear weapons silo, hand pick a few doozies then tow them out whistling and waving at the security guards you know?

People knew full well that nuclear weapons were being transported FROM storage, to the plane.

If you need proof then im worried for civilisiation.
What proof do you need?
A mushroom cloud over Tehran?... by then you'll already be on the
'' well it happened, so lets just deal with it '' bandwagon..
by then then hundereds of thousands of dead civilians cant be brought to life you know!



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


Believe me, I wish/hope/want this to be untrue. The fact that we are even discussing this scares the ish out of me. Did you read the link? Do any searches? There is a lot of substantive material out there. The story was referenced to the Washington Post, Times of London, Military Times. Not saying all media is reliable, but we have to start somewhere. Yes, unnamed sources. I would want to remain unnamed as well If I was to be Leaking information of this magnitude, nuclear war.

One point I want to make, this has been my feelings regarding most topics discussed here.

By the time the "proof" comes it will be too late.

More info:

www.washingtonpost.com...



[edit on 26-9-2007 by hightowerx]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by hightowerx
I just sent you a U2U, but hell, I'll just as well post it here. I consider myself a witty person, I wanted to make sure we were on the same page. Apparently we were. Yes, the avatar is ironic. Didn't even think about till you mentioned it. No offense taken.

I sent you U2U then saw post. So I will post reply here also. Nice thought by the way

The Irony was, guy says we should speak against those in power, guy has a picture of a group that stood against the goals of people in power in the US past. And failed.

I however believe people should stand for what they believe, in the wider sense I fall into that category, but in the narrow sense of how some use that word within their vernacular I do not fit the history the label requires.

Also note that the term Indian is applied to some of these people, so my quote is also 'Indian' in nature. There are some writings that this came from a person that supported India and its freedom movement under Gandhi

Your question of American Indian is good, for the Gandhi Indian situation was a successful push back to power. Put a home woven cloth on your avatar and the irony flips. Very witty indeed.



[edit on 26-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
I'm not buying it. One can lean back on "unnamed sources" and and spew whatever dribble he or she chooses to endorse.

SHOW ME THE PROOF!!!


If you require hard proof, you will only learn from history books, and the point of view of the writers of those books.

To explore new possibilities, and challenge ideas you must step into prepondence of evidence and patterns.

I refer you to the thread "What is proof".
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 26-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
I'm not buying it. One can lean back on "unnamed sources" and and spew whatever dribble he or she chooses to endorse.

SHOW ME THE PROOF!!!


im with you on this. do you people not realize what the military does to people that defy a direct order. by ucmj you face up to 27 years for some thing a simple as not shaveing or not being to formation on time.(most of the time that dosent happen), so think what would happen if they did some thing that big, oh by the way if the nukes were going there then they made it. im in utter disbelif on how you can buy such trash. think from time to time. i dont expect you to know ucmj unless you have served but i do expect you to think frim time to time..

i assure there enough people in the military that are faithful to their oath. no matter how much you sit here and think you have evidence of this and that. you will never sway anyone with common sense with trash..

[edit on 15pmu102007 by DaleGribble]



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:51 PM
link   
If it's possible for nuclear weapons to be misplaced by mistake then it may also be possible for the UCMJ to break down as well.



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by hightowerx
reply to post by uberarcanist
 



More info:

www.washingtonpost.com...



[edit on 26-9-2007 by hightowerx]


this link says nothing about nuclear war. it the same story we have been hearing about. give us something new. im open to anything but some things are just..well im not gonna argue with people that cant use some form of thought process



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by DaleGribble
 


Know what. Yes, they could have made it and if they want them to make it they will. I think I'm leaning towards the hope that they didn't make it. Hoping there is a sliver of truth in this report.



posted on Sep, 26 2007 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Wow this is interesting indeed.Think we will ever get any more confirmation?

Time to get busy checking around to see if I can find anything.

OK so every source I can find uses Wayne Madsen as their source.What are his motives,who does he work for,is he a nutball.These are the things we must find out.Also his site is a pay site, but you can read some articles here.

Wayne Madsen

[edit on 27-9-2007 by Project_Silo]





top topics
 
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join