It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
I didn't see the whole thing but there was no new information it what I did see.
Originally posted by antar
This goes to show that the ET are not interested in humanity, their only concern is for the well being of our living planet which man has yet to discover the significance of in the bigger picture.
I think the good ones are here to help birth our planets evolutionary process, like midwives, they are here to help her to raise her vibrational frequency.
Obama and Gates are "at loggerheads on this," says Michael O'Hanlon, a military expert at the Brookings Institution who has specialized in nuclear issues. A senior Pentagon official says talk of a resolution is "premature" because he doesn't believe Gates and Obama have discussed the matter.
The plutonium "pit" of a nuclear weapon — the heart of its extraordinary power — suffers radioactive decay, losing power and building up impurities, over time. There is concern that aging pits may fail to detonate properly, or perhaps at all.
O'Hanlon and other nuclear thinkers have suggested retooling existing weapons to improve reliability as an option. But the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration, which develops America's nuclear weapons, has said it cannot meet the goals set for RRW by modifying existing weapons. Obama's position has backing in Congress, which has repeatedly refused to fund the program.
More power to the aliens if they are here to stop the destruction of the planet!
I just wish they would do something to help the human race out, so we can go beyond our petty wars for religions and land.
Isn't that what people truely want when it comes to aliens/ufo's and full disclosure?
Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
Even if they had anything concrete to present (they don't), it wouldn't matter. The current climate that we as a community have allowed to foster (such as letting the nut-jobs do our talking) means anything even remotely significant will be short lived in the press. Change the climate, change the world. Until then your pissing in the wind.
According to the pair, witness testimony from more than 120 former or retired military personnel points to an ongoing and alarming intervention by unidentified aerial objects at nuclear weapons sites, as recently as 2003. In some cases, several nuclear missiles simultaneously and inexplicably malfunctioned while a disc-shaped object silently hovered nearby.
Since 2001, the Air Force’s Air Combat Command has suffered 237 different “safety deficiencies” known in the nuclear community as Dull Swords while maintaining its nuclear stockpile, according to safety records.
The service defines a Dull Sword as a “safety deficiency not included in the accident or incident categories.”
Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, issued a Freedom of Information Act request for all ACC Bent Spear and Dull Sword incidents from June 1992 — when the ACC took over the nuclear mission from Strategic Air Command — to Sept. 27, 2007, when he made the request.
The response he received went only as far back as June 2001 because the ACC Safety database no longer has any records of Dull Sword incidents from 1992 to 2001, said Maj. Thomas Crosson, an ACC spokesman. Air Force officials could not explain why those incidents got deleted from the database.
Dull Sword is an Air Force reporting term that marks reports of minor incidents involving nuclear weapons, components or systems, or which could impair their deployment. This could include actions involving vehicles capable of carrying nuclear weapons but with no nuclear weapons on board at the time of the accident. This also is used to report damage or deficiencies with equipment, tools, or diagnostic testers that are designed for use on nuclear weapons or the nuclear weapon release systems of nuclear-capable aircraft.
Since the Minot and Barksdale mishap, top Air Force leaders have had a fix-it-now attitude, but back in 2003, an Air Force inspector general report warned that pass rates for nuclear surety inspections — which nuclear units receive every 18 months — had “hit an all-time low.”
Historically, Air Force units had a 79 percent pass rate on NSIs, but that year, it dipped to 50 percent. Five of 10 units tested that year failed, with only one unit test left, the report stated.
“The poor performance can be rationalized many ways: the NSI sample size is dramatically smaller in recent years, ... conventional operations tempo is higher than ever before ... or the failures are attributable to complex regulatory guidance,” wrote Lt. Col. Lynn Scott, deputy director of inspections for the IG in 2003.
“While there is some shred of truth to [these rationalizations], the bottom line is that each one offers a convenient excuse to avoid accepting responsibility for failure — and failure is not something that is acceptable when it comes to the safety, security and reliability of our nuclear weapons.”
Ten years before, nuclear units in Europe faced a similar nuclear surety failure rate. U.S. Air Forces in Europe tested 12 units in 1993, and only seven passed, according to a partially declassified Air Force report, “History of United States Air Forces in Europe, Calendar Year 1993.”
But the inspection issue goes beyond pass-fail rates