B-52 Nukes Were Headed for Iran: Airforce Refused

Then perhaps we should focus our efforts on investigating this Wayne Madsen. We should all join together and demand where he receives his information and if he proves to be a fraud he should be reprimanded in some way. Agree?

Hehe Madsen

[edit on 27-9-2007 by wingman77]

reply to post by wingman77


Wholeheartedly. I don't expect a forthright answer from him, so I'm not even wasting the time with a email to him. However, I'm gonna start snooping around the internet, seeing what I can dig up on him; I'm gonna start a thread on him in the disinfo subforum.

Oh, and I had a spelling error in the previous post, it's Madsen, not Madison.

[edit on 27-9-2007 by uberarcanist]

reply to post by uberarcanist


Why would you think that?

reply to post by wingman77


Yes!!!

reply to post by hightowerx


What? About not expecting a forthright answer from Madsen? Well, I think it's quite simple-a liar will never admit he's lying.

reply to post by wingman77


Maybe not reprimanded... But think about the investigative power available on this site.

reply to post by hightowerx


Sorry, replying to the wrong post. I find it very fishy when someone charges you for supposedly inside information from sources they don't even name.

Wayne Madsen
Senior Fellow, Electronic Privacy Information Center

Mr. Madsen is a Senior Fellow of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), a non-partisan privacy public advocacy group in Washington, DC. He works with member of Congress and congressional committees on legislation and hearings of common interest.

He is also a freelance investigative journalist, and has written for The Village Voice, The Progressive, CAQ, Counterpunch, and the Intelligence Newsletter. Mr. Madsen is the author of The Handbook of Personal Data Protection (London: Macmillan, 1992), an acclaimed reference book on international data protection law.

Mr. Madsen has some twenty years experience in computer security and data privacy. As a U.S. Naval Officer he managed one of the first computer security programs for the U.S. Navy. He subsequently worked for the National Security Agency, the Naval Data Automation Command, Department of State, RCA Corporation, and Computer Sciences Corporation.

If that's a legit resume then he may be credible. I'll continue my search.

reply to post by wingman77


You must remember that Mr. Lear's resume is very impressive but he is not without credibility problems.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
OK, earlier in the thread someone mentioned that Wayne Madison posts his articles on a pay-for-access website that he runs.

I'm the guilty party but there was not much interest. The source is always the key is it not?

I've now spent about 4 hours reading what I can find. One site described him a "Muckraker" which is accurate.

He appears to be a Hit and Run type of reporter. He throws a story out with unnamed sources then moves on to the next. His stories always being sensational. The fact that this story would be earth-shattering in its significance if true makes me wonder why it does not seem to be followed up with more background and detail. Instead he moves on to the next sensational story.

I've also noted that this story on ATS would normally be swamped with people due to its nature. The Military refusing and order from The Commander and Chief is a huge thing. Not many bites on this thread though. That leads me to think that many on ATS see his name and walk away from the thread due to his lack of credibility.

No sense in repeating the links or what I said on another page, just go back a page or two.

I've also sent a link to the story to a well known Reporter I find credible to see if anything rings true to them. If this is true it will be in the History Books I assure you. Powerful Men will fall. At this moment I doubt the veracity of this story.

Thank you to the OP for the post. It has been interesting researching this fellow. Prior to this I only knew him from watching him evade questions on a OP/Ed show and I recall his admitting to the supposed check in the Florida elections as being fake and discounting him as a media/money hound. See my previous post for details on that. I think I put a link to a story there.

[edit on 9/27/2007 by Blaine91555]

reply to post by Blaine91555


I also brought up his credibility on the first page but everyone missed it i guess heh.Wonder who wrote the Wiki article about him though(probably him).It seems impressive...Also how many reports saying bad things about him did you see?A few would not be sufficent since everyone has agendas.

I am suprised this has not gotten more attention on other sites.Surely he couldn't be the only one that has a "insider".I think if the story was true someone else would have more information about it by now.I guess it's time to wait and see if anyone else gets any kind of info like this.

Also I have noticed poeple are shying away from the Iran,Russia, threads because there are just so many of them.Although it would seem like more should be coming,so those of you not posting,please post and tell us if you know this Madsen guy to be BS.

Originally posted by Project_Silo
I think if the story was true someone else would have more information about it by now.

Bingo! That is what is holding me back as well. That description of him appears all over the place in the same words and form. He does seem to check out though. The question is are his sources real or accurate. Is he just parroting Beltway Gossip or writing verified facts. If he does not confirm his facts through other sources this could easily be one more Political dig at the Republicans by an aggressive anti-Right Reporter.

As we all know if you repeat the same lie, half-truth, exaggeration enough times people will eventually accept it as truth. Stories like this will be all over the place a year from now.

If this is true though. This is a major occurrence for sure.

reply to post by Blaine91555


I just think he's writing stuff from his own imagination with just enough facts sprinkled in to be believable. If he happens to get a story right, I think it's purely by accident. The fact that he has the 'ole tin cup out speaks volumes as to his true motives, IMHO.

Originally posted by behindthescenes

And the "top brass" which own the media companies do not control the news flow. Even Rupert Murdoch will have a helluva time trying to influence the editorial content if he goes that route as his reputation indicates. I know a few Wall Street staffers who will absolutely drop their job in a minute if told what to print.

They don't have to tell them what to print, however they can tell them what to say as it scrolls down the teleprompter.

But this is my main point, you don't censor, you control. If you censor it and it is seen you have to deal with backlash. So you chill, basically let people know that if they discuss certain topics the bosses will not be pleased. This can be done with a look or a simple comment.

You also control by choosing who you put on air and hire to investigate. If you look back you will see when the consolidation of media happened Investigational journalist funding went way down.

You never put a guy out front and tell him to lie, if you do you have to deal with all the people that see through lies. You pick a person to put in the position that has your point of view, or is not smart enough to consider other points of view.

It is control, not censorship.

oh and run out the old guard that might object.

Murdoc is an exception, he targets a special group not able to see his methods, the other media pick up the rest of the population with less visible means as I mentioned above. You need an extreme case to make your other cases look OK to the group that sees through the first case, this is layering, control of far opposition can even be another layer.

reply to post by uberarcanist


Very hard to say. Everyone needs to earn a living. That's part of what makes it difficult to sort out the bad reporting.

The idea of a sprinkle of truth is at the heart of lots of bad reporting I think so I'd have to agree with that.

The problem of this story showing up nowhere else is still a larger than average thorn as well.

Guys. I keep bleating on about this for a reason.

Forget the semantics of the story, and picking holes in it, and look at the substance of the actual facts and how the airforce classified the event in a nuclear parlance.

There is something to it, I'm convinced.

Has any one considered that these nukes were meant for us? If there is info out there stating they were meant for Iran, most likely they were not!
Let’s think about this!
1. If they were meant for Iran, why would they need to smuggle the nukes out? If it was going to be a military engagement in Iran, there were number of ways they could have done it. Most likely a sub.
2. Nukes when launched, does not arm them selves until they are close to target. Never over our own airspace. As you all know these six nukes were armed while in flight.
3. I know a person who was in the air force who used to be station there and he tells me that even to move a box of crap from one room to another requires two or three forms and a gang of signatures on a nuclear base. Can you imagine the signatures you would need to move a nuke let alone fly them across the US illegally? Nukes are by law to be transported by ground for if there was an accident, by ground would cause less damage overall rather than by air.
4. Who armed them????????????????????
5. Everything that was done to move and arm these nukes took an effort and man power which means there was an order made and was followed down the chain of command.
I guess I could go on and on by my last point is this and listen up carefully people!
We are one event away from being a policed nation. What’s that you ask?
That is total control folks! No rights!! And guess what? We are going to be thankful for it because we are going to think it’s for our own good and safety. Isn't that what happened after 9/11! Isn't that what happened in Panama!
Imagine people if a nuke went off on our own soil here in the US. There would be no more reasons needed by our government to go # up or invade any country on this earth. It will all be in the name of "terrorism".
No one in this country would ever question again government motives and actions. We would be so angry like 9/11 except even more furious for the death tool would be much much greater and we would demand revenge and demand our safety!
Remember that everything they do is thier claim that its in our best interest and for our SAFETY!

Lord, I only read the first page of this thread, but am I the only one who realizes the possible implications of a thread like this? Do you really think the Iranians don't have people looking at and reading all these propaganda pages?

I don't know if this story has a single grain of truth, but even if it does not, it could start a helluva problem. If it is true, then it should not have come out because it will reflect badly on the resolve of our troops to carry out the orders of our goverment, and if it is not true it could also be the spark that ignites a nuclear war.

Either way, IMHO this thread is demoralizing to our troops and our goverment, and should not be here regardles of which side you are on. It doesn't help anybody. Say your thanks for the freedom of speech brothers and sisters, cuz no matter what side you are on in this debate we are all losing.

Originally posted by Coopdog
Lord, I only read the first page of this thread, but am I the only one who realizes the possible implications of a thread like this? Do you really think the Iranians don't have people looking at and reading all these propaganda pages?

Either way, IMHO this thread is demoralizing to our troops and our goverment, and should not be here regardles of which side you are on. It doesn't help anybody. Say your thanks for the freedom of speech brothers and sisters, cuz no matter what side you are on in this debate we are all losing.

Is it this thread and people that are talking about it that causes the problem or the events themselfs.

If the government had not lied so much they would have credibility in their arguments about what happened. Their lies is feeding propaganda against us.

If the government did not show a character that disregards human life then people would not believe the possibility of another 9/11

If the government answered questions about 9/11 people would not be talking and believing false flags.

If the government has not shown the level of secrecy they have shown people would not think they want to hide something.

Don't blame people exposing evil blame those doing it and hiding it, for they are hiding it to protect themselves from us. And even if you do not believe this instance, go over in your own mind all the examples that shredded our credibility. If it is propaganda it is only powerful if it has truth in it. Lets get rid of any actions that can tie the US to evil, torture, secrecy, death, greed, commercialism, etc..

If people that question the statements of the government are wrong, answer the questions they pose, if the government refuses to, it is them who is playing into the hands of the enemies.

Think about it.

[edit on 28-9-2007 by Redge777]

Originally posted by Coopdog
Lord, I only read the first page of this thread, but am I the only one who realizes the possible implications of a thread like this? Do you really think the Iranians don't have people looking at and reading all these propaganda pages?

So, have you found those weapons of mass destruction yet?

You are standing by a paranoid government who sees everybody in the world as a potential future enemy. They wont even allow Iran to have nuclear power as a energy source, because they feel it could be dangerous. Well, guess who dropped the first two atomic bombs in the world? Guess who probably was about to use the third on Iran?

Propaganda? In what way? This is the honest truth of what is going on. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran... whats next, North Korea? What have you accomplished with these wars?

Afghanistan: Fail
Iraq: Fail

These wars are not to spread democracy or helping to build societies ffs. Its bloody obvious.


[edit on 28-9-2007 by Copernicus]