US Nuclear Bases in Europe + Loose Nukes

How would you like to wake up to a headline saying that the US nuclear bases in your neighborhood are functioning below safety standards? [dirty little secret we ignore] Europeans are not quite as passive as Americans, however. Once upon a time the United States was welcome in Europe for its ability to secure borders and promote peace. That situation no longer exists, as we have seen escalating tensions in Italy, the Czech Republic, Poland, Ireland and other European states. It's long past time to reappraise the status of US bases outside our borders, whether they be in Iraq or Italy, Afghanistan or Albania. US Troops Home NOW!
FAS Strategic Security Blog
Federation of American Scientists http://www.fas.org/
USAF Report: “Most” Nuclear Weapon Sites In Europe Do Not Meet US Security Requirements
Hans Kristensen, NATO, Nuclear Weapons, United States
By Hans M. Kristensen
An internal U.S. Air Force investigation has determined that “most sites” currently used for deploying nuclear weapons in Europe do not meet Department of Defense security requirements.
A summary of the investigation report was released by the Pentagon in February 2008 but omitted the details. Now a partially declassified version of the full report, recently obtained by the Federation of American Scientists, reveals a much bigger nuclear security problem in Europe than previously known.
As a result of these security problems, according to other sources, the U.S. plans to withdraw its nuclear custodial unit from at least one base and consolidate the remaining nuclear mission in Europe at fewer bases.
European Nuclear Safety Deficiencies Detailed
The national nuclear bases in Europe, those where nuclear weapons are stored for use by the host nation’s own aircraft, are at the center of the findings of the Blue Ribbon Review (BRR), the investigation that was triggered by the notorious incident in August 2007 when the U.S. Air Force lost track of six nuclear warheads for 36 hours as they were flow across the United States without the knowledge of the military personnel in charge of safeguarding and operating the nuclear weapons.
The final report of the investigation – Air Force Blue Ribbon Review of Nuclear Weapons Policies and Procedures – found that “host nation security at overseas nuclear-capable units varies from country to country in terms of personnel, facilities, and equipment.” The report describes that “inconsistencies in personnel, facilities, and equipment provided to the security mission by the host nation were evident as the team traveled from site to site…. Examples of areas noted in need of repair at several of the sites include support buildings, fencing, lighting, and security systems.”
The situation is significant: “A consistently noted theme throughout the visits,” the BRR concluded, “was that most sites require significant additional resources to meet DOD security requirements.” Despite overall safety standards and close cooperation and teamwork between U.S. Air Force personnel and their host nation counterparts, the inspectors found that “each site presents unique security challenges.”
Specific examples of security issues discovered include conscripts with as little as nine months active duty experience being used protect nuclear weapons against theft.
Inspections can hypothetically detect deficiencies and inconsistencies, but the BRR team found that U.S. Air Force inspectors are hampered in performing “no notice inspections” because the host nations and NATO require advance notice before they can visit the bases. If crews know when the inspection will occur, their performance might not reflect the normal situation at the base.
Many of the safety issues discovered are precipitated by the fact that the primary mission of the squadrons and wings is not nuclear deterrence but real-world conventional operations in support of the war on terrorism and other campaigns. This dual-mission has created a situation where many nuclear positions are “one deep,” and where rotations, deployments, and illnesses can cause shortfalls.
The review recommended consolidating the bases to “minimize variances and reduce vulnerabilities at overseas locations.”
USAFE Commander Visits Nuclear Bases
In light of the findings about Air Force nuclear security, General Roger Brady, the USAFE Commander, on June 11 visited Kleine Brogel Air Base in Belgium and Volkel Air Base in Holland. Both bases store U.S. nuclear weapons for delivery by their national F-16 fighters.
A news story on a USAF web site notes that the weapons security issues found by the BRR investigation were “at other bases,” suggesting that Büchel Air Base in Germany or Ghedi Torre Air Base in Italy were the problem. Even so, the BRR found problems at “most sites,” visits to Kleine Brogel and Volkel were described in the context of these findings. Two commanders of the 52 Fighter Wing at Spangdahlem Air Base, which controls the 701st and 703rd Munitions Support Squadrons at the national bases, were also present “to witness both units for the first time.”
Withdrawal and Consolidation
The deficiencies at host nation bases apparently have triggered a U.S. decision to withdraw the Munition Support Squadron (MUNSS) from one of the national bases.
Four MUNSS are currently deployed a four national bases in Europe: the 701st MUNSS at Kleine Brogel Air Base in Belgium, the 702nd MUNSS at Büchel Air Base in Germany, the 703rd MUNSS at Volkel Air Base in Holland, and the 704th MUNSS at Ghedi Torre in Italy (see top image).
It is not yet known which base it is, but sources indicate that it might involve the 704th MUNSS at Ghedi Torre in Northern Italy.
Status of Nuclear Weapons Deployment
The number and location of nuclear weapons in Europe are secret. However, based in previous reports, official statements, declassified documents and leaks, a best estimate can be made that the current deployment consists of approximately 200-350 B61 nuclear bombs (see Table 1). The most recent public official statement was made by NATO Vice Secretary General Guy Roberts in an interview with the Italian RAINEWS in April 2007: “We do say that we’re down to a few hundred nuclear weapons.”
The U.S. weapons are stored in underground vaults, known as WS3 (Weapon Storage and Security System), at bases in Belgium, Germany, Holland, Italy, Turkey and the United Kingdom. Most of the weapons are at U.S. Air Force bases, but Belgium, Germany, Holland and Italy each have nuclear weapons at one of their national air bases.
The weapons at each of the national bases are under control of a U.S. Air Force MUNSS in peacetime but would, upon receipt of proper authority from the U.S. National Command Authority, be handed over to the national Air Force at the base in a war for delivery by the host nation’s own aircraft. This highly controversial arrangement contradicts both the Non-Proliferation Treaty and NATO’s international nonproliferation policy.
Implications and Observations
The main implication of the BRR report is that the nuclear weapons deployment in Europe is, and has been for the past decade, a security risk. But why it took an investigation triggered by the embarrassing Minot incident to discover the security problems in Europe is a puzzle.
Since the terrorist attacks in September 2001, billions of dollars have been poured into the Homeland Security chest to increase security at U.S. nuclear weapons sites, and a sudden urge to improve safety and use control of nuclear weapons has become a principle justification in the administration’s proposal to build a whole new generation of Reliable Replacement Warheads.
But, apparently, the nuclear deployment in Europe has been allowed to follow a less stringent requirement.
This contradicts NATO’s frequent public assurances about the safe conditions of the widespread deployment in Europe. Coinciding with the dramatic reduction of nuclear weapons in Europe after the Cold War 15 years ago, “a new, more survivable and secure weapon storage system has been installed,” a NATO fact sheet from January 2008 states. “Today, the remaining gravity bombs associated with DCA [Dual-Capable Aircraft] are stored safely in very few storage sites under highly secure conditions.”
Apparently they are not. Yet despite the BRR findings, the NATO Nuclear Planning Group meeting in Brussels last week did not issue a statement. But at the previous meeting in June 2007 the group reaffirmed the “great value” of continuing the deployment in Europe, “which provide an essential political and military link between the European and North American members of the Alliance.”
That NATO - nearly two decades after the Cold War ended - believes it needs U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in Europe to keep the alliance together is a troubling sign. NATO air forces are stretched thin to meet real-world operations in the war against terrorism and other campaigns, and tactical nuclear weapons are not a priority, no matter what nuclear bureaucrats might claim.
Even Republican presidential candidate John McCain [my bold] [and only until he changes his mind] apparently does not believe tactical nuclear weapons in Europe are essential for NATO. On May 27 he stated that, if elected, he would, “in close consultation with our allies…like to explore ways we and Russia can reduce – and hopefully eliminate – deployments of tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.”
Many European governments would support such a plan - even though some of the new eastern European NATO members see Russian resurgence as a reason to continue the deployment. But their security concerns can be met by other means, and Germany and Norway have already been pushing a proposal inside NATO for a review of the alliance’s nuclear policy, the Belgium parliament has called for a withdrawal, and there is overwhelming cross-political public support in Germany to end the deployment in Europe.
Perhaps the BRR findings will help empower these countries and convince NATO and the next U.S. administration that the time has come to finally complete the withdrawal of tactical nuclear weapons from Europe.
Additional Information: Blue Ribbon Review (2008 report) | United States Removes Nuclear Weapons From German Base, Documents Indicate (2007 report) | US Nuclear Weapons in Europe (2005 report) http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/06/usaf-report-%e2%80%9cmost%e2%80%9d-nuclear-weapon-sites-in-europe-do-not-meet-us-security-requirements.php
I apologize for the length of this post. The impact on future diplomatic relationships is too important to let this news item "disappear."

Obama Supports US Ability to Commit Mass Murder

If history can provide a lesson, it's that Democrats running for office who make bland noises about "researching' nuclear weaponry, the true message is we want the biggest guns, most awesome surveillance and ability to dominate and mold the planet to serve our needs. It'll be another election that requires I hold my nose when I vote.
Obama touts LANL's potential
Democratic presidential nominee also has praise for governor
Steve Terrell The New Mexican, 5/26/2008 - 5/27/08
Los Alamos National Laboratory would remain a weapons-research facility under a Barrack Obama administration, Obama said Monday. But if he's elected, LANL also would be at the forefront of research for technology to aide in nuclear nonproliferation.
Obama, who was in Las Cruces for a Memorial Day ceremony, was asked in a phone interview whether he would keep LANL as a weapons research facility. "Absolutely," he replied.
"Los Alamos has been one of our premier research facilities, and we need to do more research in this area, in part because we've got to deal with the critical issues of nonproliferation," the Democratic contender said.
Obama said he would put a priority on developing technology to detect "loose," unaccounted-for nuclear material. [sounds good?] He also said there needs to be a technology to ensure nuclear materials designed for civilian purposes in countries that don't currently have nuclear weapons are not turned into bombs."There's a whole host of areas that involve significant research and development, and Los Alamos needs to be at the forefront of that," Obama said. [that's the real deal, with money aplenty for war profiteers]
Democrats in recent years have advocated making nonproliferation research a higher priority.
[...] Obama in the interview had praise for Gov. Bill Richardson, who, several weeks after folding his own presidential campaign, endorsed Obama's White House bid. "I think Bill Richardson's one of the best public servants we have in American life."
[...] So why is Obama — who still faces primary contests with U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton in Puerto Rico, South Dakota and Montana — spending Memorial Day in New Mexico? Don't other states have veterans?"Well New Mexico obviously has some just outstanding veterans that I wanted to make sure to honor," Obama said.
[...] Obama lost the state's Democratic caucus to Clinton by a narrow margin. "Oh yeah, it was painful," he said.[...]
Contact Steve Terrell at 986-3037 or sterrell@sfnewmexican.com. http://www.santafenewmexican.com/SantaFeNorthernNM/Obama-touts-LANL-s-potential

Gates Applauds Dissent, Wants More Predators

Here's another recent story that might flesh out more on the loose nukes theme. It certainly is rare to hear the Secy of Defense criticizing his own forces AND praising dissent, but these are rare and strange times:
Gates: Air Force Lagging In War Effort Pentagon Chief Says Getting Air Force To Send Aircraft To War Zones "Like Pulling Teeth" WASHINGTON, April 21, 2008
(CBS/AP) Defense Secretary Robert Gates [...] said in a speech at Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., that getting the Air Force to send more surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft to Iraq and Afghanistan has been "like pulling teeth."
[...] He cited the example of drone aircraft that can watch, hunt and sometimes kill insurgents without risking the life of a pilot. He said the number of such aircraft has grown 25-fold since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. He said he has been trying for months to get the Air Force to send more surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft, like the Predator drone that provides real-time surveillance video, to the battlefield.
[...] Gates said he established last week a Pentagon-wide task force "to work this problem in the weeks to come, to find more innovative and bold ways to help those whose lives are on the line."
[...] "All this may require rethinking long-standing service assumptions and priorities about which missions require certified pilots and which do not," Gates said, referring to so-called unmanned aerial vehicles that are controlled by servicemembers at ground stations.
The military's reliance on unmanned surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft has soared to more than 500,000 hours in the air, [my bold] largely in Iraq, according to Pentagon data. The Air Force has taken pilots out of the air and shifted them to remote flying duty [my bold] to meet part of the demand.
"The secretary of defense is essentially saying, 'tough - we need these Predators over Iraq more than you need to keep training new pilots'," reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.
Gates, who served in the Air Force in the 1960s as a young officer before he joined the Central Intelligence Agency, urged the officers in his audience to dedicate themselves to thinking creatively.
[...] "Dissent is a sign of health in an organization, and particularly if it's done in the right way," Gates said. [Who's way? MY way! And my bold]
Gates made no direct mention of a series of mistakes and missteps involving the Air Force in recent months, beginning with an episode last August when a B-52 bomber flew from an Air Force base in North Dakota to another in Louisiana with the crew unaware that it was carrying nuclear weapons.
Last month Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne announced that four Air Force nose cone assemblies designed for use with nuclear missiles [previously described as ballistic missile fuses] were mistakenly shipped to Taiwan in 2006. The error was not verified until shortly before Wynne made the announcement, and the matter is under Pentagon investigation.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/21/national/main4030601.shtml
C'mon, gang, let's think creatively! Let's listen to Chairman Gates and put the pieces together re loose nukes, ballistic missile fuses, Syria, North Korea, etc. The first to solve the puzzle gets a full year's subscription to DANCE AWAY BLUES!

Bomb First, Investigate the Rubble Later

I haven't gotten any more news about the missing nukes, but my nose smells a connection here. See these posts for more: April 6, 2008 US, Israel, Syria, Korea and (maybe) Loose Nukes, November 6, 2007 Disappearing Nuclear Reactor!, November 3, 2007 Only the Traitors Know, Who's Bombing Who?
US rebuked over Syria nuclear case
The head of the UN nuclear monitoring agency has criticised the US for withholding intelligence information that it says showed the construction of a nuclear reactor in Syria.
Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), on Friday also hit out at Israel for bombing the site before inspectors could investigate.
[...] The White House said in a statement on Thursday that Syria "must come clean" over its alleged secret co-operation with North Korea on the reactor.
It also described the alleged assistance as a "dangerous manifestation'' of North Korea's nuclear proliferation activities, but said it would continue six-party talks to try to resolve the nuclear standoff with the isolated nation.
The claims follow a briefing of US congressional officials in Washington DC by intelligence chiefs, including William Hayden, the CIA director. [my bold]
However, some US legislators earlier warned that the claims could wreck vital six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear programme.
Later on Thursday, Syria's ambassador to the US dismissed claim as a "ridiculous story".
Imad Moustapha told Al Jazeera that his government maintained there was no evidence of any alleged secret nuclear activity.
Timothy Savage, an analyst from the Nautilus Institute, told Al Jazeera that the US claims could be treated with a degree of sceptism.
"The Bush administration doesn't have a great track record with intelligence, so it's natural that people will approach this with some scepticism," he said.
[...] The controversy began last September, when an Israeli air raid destroyed a target in Syrian territory which some reports later said was a nuclear facility being built with North Korean help.
Syria, a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), has maintained in the past that the site was an unused military facility.
It later razed the site and built a larger building in its place.
The target of Israel's raid has been veiled in secrecy, with US intelligence and government officials refusing to confirm for months that such a raid even took place.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E007835C-444C-47E4-AB72-3FBF4641384C.htm

US, Israel, Syria, Korea and (maybe) Loose Nukes

Is it sloppy journalism that the date of the attack doesn’t appear in the article, or a deliberate attempt to distance our “loose nukes” (Aug, 29) episode with the Sept. 8 event in Syria? The Israelis sure are worried about releasing details, despite some thinking it would “enhance” the Israeli government’s image as powerful and in control of things. But their power comes at our cost. Read on, citizens, courtesy of Haaretz...
Israel, U.S. plan to release details on Syria attack
By Barak Ravid and Amos Harel
Israel and the United States are coordinating the release of details on the air force strike in Syria last September, which foreign reports claim targeted a nuclear installation Syria was constructing with North Korean assistance. American officials may reveal details of the strike later this month during congressional hearings.
Even though the defense establishment in Israel is opposed to any publication of details of the attack, the Prime Minister's Bureau and U.S. President George W. Bush's administration are of the opinion that it is now possible to reveal details because there is little chance of a conflagration as a result of a Syrian decision to avenge the attack.
[...] Intelligence analysts in Israel maintain that any further release of the details on the strike will contribute to the already tense situation between Syria and Israel, which has been exacerbated in part because of Hezbollah's plans to avenge the assassination of the group's terrorist mastermind, Imad Mughniyah.
Any official release of the details of the attack and the nature of the installation may push Syria's Bashar Assad into a corner and put pressure him to respond, say intelligence officials.
[...] The hearings at the House Intelligence Committee may be held in the coming weeks. Congressmen have included in the bill on the intelligence budget that American intelligence agencies will not be given large portions of their budget unless they reveal in full the details of the strike in Syria and the nuclear cooperation between Pyongyang and Damascus.
This has led U.S. and Israeli officials to conclude that American officials will release details of the strike during the hearings.
Talks between the U.S. and North Korea are schedule to resume tomorrow in Singapore. One of the American conditions for lifting the sanctions on Pyongyang is for it to expose its nuclear collaboration with other countries, which North Korea maintains does not exist. According to South Korean media sources, Pyongyang has agreed to provide the U.S. with information on its nuclear cooperation with Syria, on condition that Washington will not make this public. The same sources stated that the U.S. has given North Korea a list of engineers that are suspected of involvement in the construction of the installation that was targeted in Syria. [...]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/971914.html

Chinese Gates and Loose Nuke, 7 Months Later

What’s the rush? Maybe because China’s Foreign Ministry demands it. So the next question, who’s running the show? AND WHY ISN’T THIS NEWSWORTHY? Thanks to myway.com for this report:
Gates Orders Inventory of US Nukes
Mar 27, 7:10 PM
By LOLITA C. BALDOR
WASHINGTON (AP) - Defense Secretary Robert Gates has ordered a full inventory of all nuclear weapons and related materials after the mistaken delivery of ballistic missile fuses to Taiwan, the Pentagon said Thursday.
Gates told officials with the Air Force, Navy and Defense Logistics Agency to assess inventory control procedures for the materials and to submit a report within 60 days.
Earlier this week, Gates directed Navy Adm. Kirkland H. Donald to take charge of a full investigation of the delivery mistake in which four cone-shaped electrical fuses used in intercontinental ballistic missile warheads were shipped to the Taiwanese instead of the helicopter batteries they had ordered. [my bold]
It was the second nuclear-related mistake involving the military that has been revealed in recent months. In August an Air Force B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and flown from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base, La. At the time, the pilot and crew were unaware they had nuclear arms aboard.
The electrical fuses were delivered in fall 2006, but the military did not fully realize the gravity of the blunder until last week. The revelation sparked sharp protests from China and forced President Bush to acknowledge the error in a phone call Wednesday with Chinese President Hu Jintao.
But China's Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said, in a statement posted on the agency's Web site, that China had sent a protest to Washington expressing "strong displeasure."
He said China demanded the U.S. investigate the matter and report back to China to "eliminate the negative effects and disastrous consequences created by this incident."[...] http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080327/D8VM2K400.html
This might explain the unbelievable use of violence against Tibetans demonstrating for self-determination in Greece, New York City, Chicago, Paris, anywhere outside of China. As left-wingers debate the "correctness" of showing support for the people of Tibet, China runs the show.

US Air Force: Above It All?

One of the exciting aspects of blogging breaking news comes when a topic you hit upon goes mainstream. Yesterday I was surprised to see a commercial on NBC, sandwiched between the talking heads, for the Air Force's new baby, the Cyber Command Center. Here's the link from my original blog coverage: February 14, 2008, Geek Warriers in Loose Nukes Country.
The commercial opens with an aerial view of the Pentagon as a man says something about this building being attached, oh, a billion times a day. Then after scaring the crap out of ya, they show the busy bees in the Barksdale Air Force Cyber Command HQ, toiling away for your liberty and freedom.
Here's the hype:

So, maybe I’m just nit picking, but what ever happened to the sixth nuke that left Minot, North Dakota on August 29 and just wasn’t there when they landed at Barksdale? Isn’t that newsworthy anymore? Are we so worn out that no one is able to pursue this story? I’m just saying, here they are advertising their unbelievably expensive new cyber tracking station AT THE VERY BASE WHERE THEY LOST A NUCLEAR WEAPON! Oh, I see. The dog ate it.

Geek Warriers in Loose Nukes Country

It is so interesting that Barksdale was the destination on Aug. 29 when six (6) nuclear warheads went on an unauthorized joy ride from Minot Airforce Base in North Dakota to this Barksdale base in Louisiana. Only five (5) arrived. What makes them think they can manage electromagnetic war any better? See previous posts for more links: November 1, 2007 Loose Nukes Cover Up , and October 21, 2007 Bent and Quivering Pinnacle
Welcome to Cyberwar Country, USA
BARKSDALE AIR FORCE BASE, Louisiana
[...] [William] Lord, boyish and enthusiastic, is a new kind of Air Force warrior -- the provisional chief of the service's first new major command since the early 1990s, the Cyber Command. With thousands of posts and enough bandwidth to choke a horse, the Cyber Command is dedicated to the proposition that the next war will be fought in the electromagnetic spectrum, and that computers are military weapons. In a windowless building across the base, Lord's cyber warriors are already perched 24 hours a day before banks of monitors, scanning Air Force networks for signs of hostile incursion.
[...] The Cyber Command was provisionally established on Barksdale's 22,000 acres in October, at the edge of a black lake stitched with swamp trees that narrow just above the water line. The placement was good news for Bossier, which took it as a sign that Louisiana would win the permanent command, too.
[...] To persuade the Air Force of Bossier's potential as a Deep South Silicon Valley, city officials broke ground last month on a "Cyber Innovation Center," a $100 million office complex abutting Barksdale. The consortium paid $4.7 million for a 64-acre parcel, and they've raised $50 million from state and local government and another $50 million from the federal government for a complex of buildings, starting with an $11 million, 120,000-square-foot cyberfortress. Renderings show a moat [to stop cyber wars?] and huge, silvery wedges of metal jutting outward from the building's base. There's a jet in the design, pointed toward the sky.
[...] Not everyone is enthusiastic about the reorganization. Defense expert John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, says the Cyber Command's mission is murky. "There's been so much gee-whiz flackery to this," Pike says. "They've got the whole thing tarted up, and it's hard to tell what they're actually doing."
Pike says the Cyber Command may be part of a secret Air Force plan to prepare for war against China, already suspected of trying to hack Department of Defense networks. He says the new command's defensive mission is muddled and duplicative: The NSA already defends military networks. As for civilian infrastructures like the internet and power grid, they're privately owned, and the Air Force has no jurisdiction over them.
[...] Inside the Air Force Network Operations Center at Barksdale, a tan, windowless building in the northwest corner of the base, the cyberwar is in full pitch. But the internet jihadists and Chinese hacker troops the Cyber Command is expecting so far haven't materialized. Spammers are the enemy today.
http://www.thought-criminal.org/article/node/1271

Previous posts on this subject appear here:
November 6, 2007: Disappearing Nuclear Reactor! ; November 3, 2007: Only the Traitors Know , Who's Bombing Who?; November 1, 2007: Loose Nukes Cover Up ; October 21, 2007: Bent and Quivering Pinnacle , Betty Crocker Blue Ribbon Panel to Tests Nukes; October 10, 2007: The Loose Nukes Story Has a New Wrinkle ; September 13, 2007: This was No Accident: Nuclear Weapons are Different

Disappearing Nuclear Reactor!

Gosh Gee Willickers, Batman! Where did it go? Here's an old report which lies dead in newsrooms across the globe:
Alleged Syrian atomic reactor 'vanishes'
By JPOST.COM STAFF, Updated Oct 26, 2007
New satellite images published by The New York Times overnight Thursday show that the installation allegedly attacked by Israel on September 6, and considered by experts to be a fledgling nuclear reactor, has disappeared without a trace.
…A senior intelligence official said the evacuation of debris was not a pre-planned clearing up, which usually lasts up to a year. It was "amazing" that the Syrians made such efforts to make evidence "vanish" so quickly, the official said.
…The White House spokesperson in Washington refused to respond to the report.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1192380657735&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Only the Traitors Know

BTW: The original post for the story below, USAF struck Syrian Nuclear Site, has been deleted from Jerusalem Post. Today’s search in the newspaper comes up with this story of how secretive the Syrians are that their own military didn’t know about the facility. Right!
Jerusalem Post, Nov 3, 2007 13:28 | Updated Nov 3, 2007 13:32
'Syrian politics helped IAF air strike'
The secrecy under which Syria kept its nuclear development may have contributed to the success of Israel's alleged air strike against a nuclear facility in September, Aviation Week reported on Saturday.
Quoting unnamed Israeli sources, the report stated that due to internal politics within Damascus, the site was so highly classified that even the Syrian military was unaware of its existence. Accordingly, proper air defenses were never erected, thereby leaving the area vulnerable to aerial attack.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380724188&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
So who bombed Syria? And what exactly did they bomb? And who’s government is so secretive that other branches don’t know what’s going on?
Only the traitors know.

Who's Bombing Who?

Is it's possible that the Aug. 29 "Loose Nukes from North Dakota" story was a diversion from our own strike on Syria, using Israel as cover?
USAF struck Syrian nuclear site'
JPost.com Staff , THE JERUSALEM POST
The September 6 raid over Syria was carried out by the US Air Force, the Al-Jazeera Web site reported Friday. The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab sources as saying that two US jets armed with tactical nuclear weapons carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear site under construction.
The sources were quoted as saying that Israeli F-15 and F-16 jets provided cover for the US planes.
The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear weapon and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed.
At the beginning of October, Israel's military censor began to allow the local media to report on the raid without attributing their report to foreign sources. Nevertheless, details of the strike have remained clouded in mystery. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380718519&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

Loose Nukes Cover Up

I can't let go of this story because from any angle, it's too scary. Call me a coward, but loose nukes, be they flying or grounded, freak me out:
Missing Nukes: Treason of the Highest Order
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, October 29, 2007
According to a wide range of reports, several nuclear bombs were “lost” for 36 hours after taking off August 29/30, 2007 on a “cross-country journey” across the U.S., from U.S.A.F Base Minot in North Dakota to U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale, near New Orleans, in Louisiana. [1] Reportedly, in total there were six W80-1 nuclear warheads armed on AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs) that were “lost.” [2] The story was first reported by the Military Times, after military servicemen leaked the story.
…In other words, unauthorized removal of nuclear weapons would be virtually impossible to accomplish unless the chain of command were bypassed, involving, in this case, the deliberate tampering of the paperwork and tracking procedures.
,,, Prior to the Missing Nukes Incident, Minot Airmen Meet with the President and the U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff
On June 15, 2007, George W. Bush Jr. met senior officers from U.S.A.F. Base Minot at U.S.A.F. Base McConnell in Wichita, Kansas during a visit to Boeing’s Integrated Defense Systems facility. Amongst them was Major Daniel Giacomazza of the 5th Operational Support Squadron.
…Citizens for Legitimate Government has pointed towards the involvement of the U.S. Air Force in a cover-up and has linked several deaths of U.S. servicemen to the incident. Lori Price has also stated for Citizens for a Legitimate Government that “you need about fourteen signatures to get an armed nuke on a B-52.
It gets uglier:
According to the Military Times, George W. Bush Jr. had been swiftly informed. This is a lockstep procedure. This illustrates the importance tied to the authorization needed for handling nuclear weapons. This is part of a two-way process in regards to authorization from the White House.
The commander of the 5th Munitions Squadron and the commander of the 5th Bomb Wing, Colonel Bruce Emig, have been replaced along with a series of other senior officers. This implies that the U.S. Air Force chain of command is directly involved in this event. None of these senior officers have been authorized to speak or make statements, according to U.S. military sources. Will any of these officers receive lucrative departure packages? Have they been reassigned?
This very detailed articled then shifts gears into serious conspiracy land. At least seven (7) deaths have occurred around the date of this fiasco, within months before or after. One is a suicide, almost all the rest are vehicular accidents.
Oh, by the way. Only FIVE nukes arrived at Barksdale.
… It is also worth noting that original reports from military sources talked about only five of the six nuclear warheads from Minot being accounted for in Barksdale.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7158

Here’s a report which attempts to sooth the public:
Nuclear warheads mistakenly flown on B-52, landing at Barksdale AFB
By Michael Hoffman
Military Times, September 4, 2007
http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070904/NEWS01/70904040
…Officials at Minot immediately conducted an inventory of its nuclear weapons after the oversight was discovered, and Thomas said he could confirm that all remaining nuclear weapons at Minot are accounted for.
I’m so glad they found the ones that were still there. In typically tortured military-speak, here Mr. Hoffman records the, sort of, explanation for the nuke that got lost from Minot to Barksdale:
Commander disciplined for nuclear mistake
By Michael Hoffman, Military Times
…It was originally reported that five nuclear warheads were transported, but officers who tipped Military Times to the incident who have asked to remain anonymous since they are not authorized to discuss the incident, have since updated that number to six.
Uh, okay. But wait! They're still trying to get to the bottom of it:
…Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has requested daily briefings from Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley on the progress of the investigation. Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., a member of the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee, requested a full-classified briefing, not just the preliminary information being provided to lawmakers, to explain how a mistake of this magnitude could have happened.
Ya think that’d be a good idea?
…"I just can't imagine how all of this happened," said Philip Coyle, a senior adviser on nuclear weapons at the Center for Defense Information. "The procedures are so rigid; this is the last thing that's supposed to happen."
Exactly!
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2007-09-05-b-52_N.htm
There WILL be more to come on this. Count on it. For past posts on this topic, see: too tired, tomorrow...

Bent and Quivering Pinnacle

It's a Google-ie kinda day to cut & paste away. So much to choose from. Read on, citizens.
B-52 Nukes Headed for Iran, Not For Decommissioning:
Airforce Refused
Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater
By Wayne Madsen, Sept. 24, 2007, Author's website, (subscription only)
Global Research, September 27, 2007
Wayne Madsen Report (WMR)
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.
The Washington Post story on BENT SPEAR may have actually been an effort in damage control by the Bush administration. WMR has been informed by a knowledgeable source that one of the six nuclear-armed cruise missiles was, and may still be, unaccounted for. In that case, the nuclear reporting incident would have gone far beyond BENT SPEAR to a National Command Authority alert known as EMPTY QUIVER, with the special classification of PINNACLE.
...WMR has learned from military sources on both sides of the Atlantic that there was a definite connection between Israel’s OPERATION ORCHARD and BENT SPEAR involving the B-52 that flew the six nuclear-armed cruise missiles from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota to Barksdale.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6909

Betty Crocker Blue Ribbon Panel to Tests Nukes

Wow! Is Barbara Starr related to Brenda Starr? Brenda (not Barbara), was my hero! If heroes never lie, then it must be true that a few stupid, clumsy pilots mistakenly flew nukes from North Dakota to Louisiana without clearance or ANY procedures, on a lark.

Air Force officers relieved of duty over loose nukes
updated 7:37 p.m. EDT, Fri October 19, 2007
From Barbara Starr, (CNN)
A six-week probe into the mistaken flight of nuclear warheads across the country uncovered a "lackadaisical" attention to detail in day-to-day operations at the air bases involved in the incident, an Air Force official said Friday.
… Wynne has convened a blue-ribbon panel to review all of the Air Force's security procedures and adherence to them. That panel is to report back on January 15.
What a relief they are "reviewing" this incident. We do have lots of time, citizens, not to worry. Just set those pies on the window sill, get a tall glass of lemonaide and wait until ...?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/19/loose.nukes/index.html

Previous posts on this story:
The Loose Nukes Story Has a New Wrinkle
October 14, Nuke transportation story has explosive implications
By ROBERT STORMER
and
Four Minutes to Midnight?
September 14, 2007, Nuclear Bombs Mistakenly Flown Over US
By PAULINE JELINEK

Loose Nukes Col. Bruce Emig

The Loose Nukes Story Has a New Wrinkle

I knew there was more to this story. Let's hope it gets reported.
Nuke transportation story has explosive implications
By ROBERT STORMER
Special to the Star-Telegram, Posted on Sun, Oct. 07, 2007
The procedure is to separate the warhead from the missile, encase the warhead and transport it by military cargo aircraft to a repository -- not an operational bomber base that just happens to be the staging area for Middle Eastern operations. [emphasis added]

http://www.star-telegram.com/245/story/259201.html

See past posts: September 13, 2007, This was No Accident: Nuclear Weapons are Different and September 7, 2007, Heads Up re Stand Down

This was No Accident: Nuclear Weapons are Different

This strange story might not ever get coverage, but should. Nuclear missiles flying from North Dakota to Louisiana without anyone knowing about it? Don't forget Friday's "stand-down." (See my Sept. 7th post "Heads Up re Stand Down" for a report on this decision by Air Combat Command.

Written by Dave Lindorff Monday, 10 September 2007

I would say that the chances that those Advanced Cruise Missiles and their W80-1 nuclear warheads were loaded accidentally on that B-52 are exactly zero. So the question is: who ordered this flight, and why?

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2366&Itemid=81

Heads Up re Stand Down

Maybe I’m overreacting, but I think it’s better to be prepared with TRUTH, JUST IN CASE we suffer another incident where our national defense goes AWOL, as it did on 9/11/01:
Langley jets grounded on Sept. 14
The stand down is scheduled so airmen can review safety procedures.
BY STEPHANIE HEINATZ | 757-247-7821, September 6, 2007

http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/hampton/dp-now-langley.0906,0,3833474.story

U P D A T E!!!

February 17, 2008

The Daily Press link is no longer available, and so I found an article from the Air Force Times which verifies that the Sept. 14th stand down was a reaction to the "missing nukes" story and questions around procedural , erh, problems:
ACC orders commandwide standdown Friday
By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer, Posted : Monday Sep 10, 2007
[...] Command boss Gen. Ronald Keys ordered the Sept. 14 safety standdown in the wake of the Aug. 30 nuclear incident at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., in which six cruise missiles armed with nuclear warheads were loaded onto a B-52H and then flown to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., without anyone on the ground or bomber realizing the nuclear weapons were on the plane. It was not until the B-52H was parked at Barksdale that ground crews discovered the cruise missiles were carrying real warheads.
[...] Just how serious Keys takes the lapse of regulations at Minot is reflected in the fact that the safety stand-down is the first commandwide safety day in recent memory. In the past, the command has singled out specific types of aircraft for safety days and in 1997 the Department of Defense held a departmentwide safety review day.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/09/airforce_aircombatcommand_standdown_070807/