ATTENTION: US AIRFORCE POTENTIAL PEARL HARBOUR ATTACK

The past few weeks various unusual events have occured that should raise questions by both civilian and military personnel in regards to national security. Questions regarding the five or six mounted nuclear missiles on a B-52H bomber that “mistakenly” flew across the US should be a big clue that something is not normal. All normal protocol was ignored. The moving of such weapons has had a complicated series of rules andd regulations following together with military personnel accompanying every step.

This unusual occurance took place near a time when many in the alternative noncorporate media community were investigating the possible rumours and speculations that some within the US were plotting a self-inflicted wound on America by targetting such places as Portland Oregon during a military drill called Operation Noble Resolve. The fear and speculation was based on the fact that during the tragedy of September 11th 2001 air force excersises strangly similar to the tragedy of that day were occuring. Hence confusing the appropriate responders to react appropriate that day. Portland Oregon has another drill or mock scenerio in October called Operation Top Off 4 with a plan to have drills as if Portland is under martial law due to a “dirty nuke”.

The response of the US Air Force has been to announce that the US Air Force would have “StandDown” on September 14th (over a week when the incodent was to happen). The US Air Force has had one noteable “StandDown” in its history before and that was on September 11th 2001. On the 18th of September the US Air Force will be celebrating the 60th anniverary of its founding. On September 11th 2001, the Pentagon was to celebrate its 60th anniverary of its groundbreaking on the day of the attacks.

The “mistake” of moving armed nuclear missiles on the B-52H interal governmental shifts that question the safety and security of this constitutional democratic republic. On May 9th 2007, George W Bush issued the National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51 in which during any crises that the president determines to be a "Catastrophic Emergency” would gain dictatorial powers. To add to this is the fact that Dick Cheney has covertly told his mouthpieces associated with the corporate media that he wants to step up the drumbeat to war against Iran. Many believe that an “Gulf of Tonkin Incident” maybe planned against the US military by fasistic elements within the US government and corporate sector. The “Gulf of Tonkin Incident” was a situation where some in the US government faked an incident so that the US Congress could pass Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. The concern is that a New Pearl Harbour attack against the US Air Force or a city like Portland Oregon would give George W Bush dictatorial powers as decreed in the NSPD 51 and Dick Cheney could blame the Iranians so as to declare war on Iran. To add to this dreadful potential global war crime is that the worlds largest military is a private contractor firm called Blackwater USA. Blackwater USA has in the passed and currently are the mercenary company the the US has been using in Iraq and other conflict zones as well as used to patrol the streets of New Orleans during the Katrina Huricane tragedy. Blackwater USA is now buying military aircraft for the creation of a Blackwater Air Force. If the US Air Force is attacked in a Pearl Harbour like attack then Blackwater USA could gain to win contracts to sublimit or replace a deminished US Air Force.

If you have friends or family or you are yourself in the US Air Force or other branches of the military it would be recommnded that instead of “Standing Down” on these days of strange orders and questionable actions that you “Stand Up and Stand Out” by reporting to the public of any unusual or disturbing orders or occurances. It is our Constitutional Democratic Republic that maybe in danger of being lost to anti democratic forces now possing as in the name of democracy. Contact any independant media with such information.



The following are news articles recently in the news specifically about what was written above:


NORTHCOM Plans 5 Day Martial Law Exercise
Wednesday, September 05, 2007.


By Lee Rogers - Intel Strike Contributing Writer

The United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) has just announced plans for an anti-terrorism exercise called Vigilant Shield 08. The exercise which is slated to run from October 15th to October 20th is described as a way to prepare, prevent and respond to any number of national crises. The exercise is simply a test case scenario for the implementation of martial law. Although the description of the exercise is disturbing, USNORTHCOM also announced that they are more prepared for a natural disaster and a terrorist attack after they used their response to Hurricane Katrina as a test laboratory. During Hurricane Katrina, authorities violated the constitutional rights of citizens by stealing people’s firearms and even relocating people against their will. These announcements are incredibly disturbing on a number of levels as the nature of Vigilant Shield 08 and the admission that Hurricane Katrina was used as a test laboratory shows that the government is actively preparing the military and government institutions for martial law.
Below is the full press release from USNORTHCOM describing Vigilant Shield 08. Also check out the Vigilant Shield 08 fact sheet by clicking here.
North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command along with U.S. Pacific Command, the Department of Homeland Security as well as local, state and other federal responders will exercise their response abilities against a variety of potential threats during Exercise Vigilant Shield ‘08, a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff-designated, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM)-sponsored, and U.S. Joint Forces Command-supported Department of Defense exercise for homeland defense and defense support of civil authorities missions.
VS-08 will be conducted concurrent with Top Officials 4 (TOPOFF 4), the nation’s premier exercise of terrorism preparedness sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security, and several other linked exercises as part of the National Level Exercise 1-08. These linked exercises will take place Ocober 15-20 and are being conducted throughout the United States and in conjunction with several partner nations including Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, as well as the Territory of Guam.
VS-08 and National Level Exercise 1-08 will provide local, state, tribal, interagency, Department of Defense, and non-governmental organizations and agencies involved in homeland security and homeland defense the opportunity to participate in a full range of exercise scenarios that will better prepare participants to prevent and respond to national crises. The participating organizations will conduct a multi-layered, civilian-led response to a national crisis.
USNORTHCOM’s primary exercise venues for VS-08 include locations in Oregon, Arizona and a cooperative venue with USPACOM in the Territory of Guam. NORAD’s aerospace detection and defense events will take place across all the exercise venues, to exercise the ability to mobilize resources for aerospace defense, aerospace control, maritime warning, and coordination of air operations in a disaster area.

This exercise is clearly a way to prepare government to respond to a national crisis with martial law. This announcement also follows a number of other news stories that indicate the government is becoming more actively prepared for the implementation of martial law.
These stories include the following:
George W. Bush issuing a presidential directive declaring that he is a dictator during the case of a national emergency be it a natural disaster, a terror attack or any number of crises.
KSLA reporting that members of clergy will be used to convince people to submit to government in the case of declare martial law. See the video below.
The U.S. Department of Treasury conducting a disaster drill to prepare for a potential economic crisis.
In addition to the announcement of Vigilant Shield 08, USNORTHCOM also announced that they have been using the lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina to better respond to crises. The response to Hurricane Katrina was essentially used as a test laboratory to implement martial law in a city. People were forced to relocate against their will and authorities stole people’s firearms in the name of safety despite these actions being entirely unconstitutional.
From USNORTHCOM:
“Hurricane Katrina’s impact on this country was unprecedented. There are still many of our fellow Americans whose lives still haven’t returned to normal,” said Gen. Gene Renuart, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and USNORTHCOM. “It will take many years for the Gulf Coast to fully recover.
“The United States military was deeply involved in the response to the hurricane and subsequent flooding,” Renuart said. “While our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines helped thousands of people, we also learned many lessons.”
According to Renuart, USNORTHCOM has been using the lessons learned from Katrina to modify plans to respond to both natural disasters and potential terrorist actions.

Northern Command also admits in the same article that they have pre-scripted mission assignments coordinated with FEMA to implement martial law under the pretext of disaster response.
From USNORTHCOM:
USNORTHCOM is ready to help federal, state and local officials to be prepared for a major hurricane and to be successful at conducting response operations, if necessary and requested by the primary responding agency. Some of the ways these objectives are being achieved are:
Through State Engagement programs, USNORTHCOM provides planning support to help states prepare for emergencies.
USNORTHCOM and its subordinates, as well as local, state and federal partners conduct major disaster exercises to refine processes and apply lessons learned.
Working with FEMA, USNORTHCOM has prepared pre-scripted mission assignments to accelerate the disaster response process.
USNORTHCOM conducted a major exercise with the National Guard in May to refine the interface between the National Guard and DoD.

There is no question that Vigilant Shield 08 is either government preparation for the implementation of martial law or a way for criminal elements within the government to distract emergency responders in order to conduct a false flag terror attack as a pretext to actually implement martial law and engage in foreign war. On September 11th, 2001 there were drills run by NORAD including Vigilant Guardian which served as a way to ensure that there was no adequate military response to the hi-jacked planes. A similar scenario unfolding with Vigilant Shield is not out of the question.
www.blacklistednews.com/view.asp
__

Was a Covert Attempt to Bomb Iran with Nuclear Weapons foiled by a Military Leak?

Michael E. Salla, M.A., Ph.D.

Critically exploring whether or not there was a covert attempt to instigate a catastrophic nuclear war against Iran is illuminated through an introduction using the recent B-52 Incident. On August 30, a B-52 bomber armed with five nuclear-tipped Advanced Cruise missiles travelled from Minot Air Force base, North Dakota, to Barksdale Air Force base, Louisiana, in the United States. Each missile had an adjustable yield between five and 150 kilotons of TNT which is at the lower end of the destructive capacities of U.S. nuclear weapons. For example, the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of 13 kilotons, while the Bravo Hydrogen bomb test of 1954 had a yield of 15,000 kilotons. The B-52 story was first covered in the Army Times on 5 September after the nuclear armed aircraft was discovered by Airmen. LINK

What made this a very significant event was that it was a violation of U.S. Air Force regulations concerning the transportation of nuclear weapons by air. Nuclear weapons are normally transported by air in specially constructed planes designed to prevent radioactive pollution in case of a crash. Such transport planes are not equipped to launch the nuclear weapons they routinely carry around the U.S. and the world for servicing or positioning.

The discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert at the Federation of American Scientists, the first time in 40 years that a nuclear armed plane had been allowed to fly in the U.S. LINK. Since 1968, after a SAC bomber crashed in Greenland, all nuclear armed aircraft have been grounded but were kept on a constant state of alert. After the end of the Cold War, President George H. Bush ordered in 1991 that nuclear weapons were to be removed from all aircraft and stored in nearby facilities.

Recently, the Air Force began decommissioning its stockpile of Advanced Cruise missiles. The five nuclear weapons on the B-52 were to be decommissioned, and were to be taken to another Air Force base. An Air Force press statement issued on 6 September 2007, claimed that there "was an error which occurred during a regularly scheduled transfer of weapons between two bases."

Furthermore, the statement declared: "The Air Force maintains the highest standards of safety and precision so any deviation from these well established munitions procedures is considered very serious." The issue concerning how a nuclear armed B-52 bomber was allowed to take off and fly in U.S. air space after an 'error' in a routine transfer process, is now subject to an official Air Force inquiry which is due to be completed by September 14.

Three key questions emerge over the B-52 incident. First, did Air Force personnel at Minot AFB not spot the 'error' earlier given the elaborate security procedures in place to prevent such mistakes from occurring? Many military analysts have commented on the stringent security procedures in place to prevent this sort of mistake from occurring. Multiple officers are routinely involved in the transportation and loading of nuclear weapons to prevent the kind of 'error' that allegedly occurred in the B-52 incident.

According to the U.S. Air Force statement, the commanding officer in charge of military munitions personnel and additional munitions airmen were relieved of duties pending the completion of the investigation. According to Kristensen, the error could not have come from confusing the Advanced Cruise Missile with a conventional weapons since no conventional form exists. So the munitions Airmen should have been easily able to spot the mistake. Other routine procedures were violated which suggests a rather obvious explanation for the error. The military munitions personnel were acting under direct orders, though not through the regular chain of military command. This takes me to the second question

Who was in Charge of the B-52 Incident?

Who ordered the loading of Advanced Cruise missiles on to a B-52 in violation of Air Force regulations? The quick reaction of the Air Force and the issuing of a public statement describing the seriousness of the issue and the launch of an immediate investigation, suggests that whatever occurred, was outside the regular chain of military command. If the regular chain of command was violated, then we have to inquire as to whether the B-52 incident was part of a covert project whose classification level exceeded that held by officers in charge of nuclear weapons at Minot AFB.

The most obvious governmental entity that may have ordered the nuclear arming of the B-52 outside the regular chain of military command is the last remaining bastion of neo-conservative activism in the Bush administration.

Vice President Cheney has taken a very prominent role in covert military operations and training exercises designed for the "seamless integration" of different national security and military authorities to possible terrorist attacks. On May 8, 2001, President Bush placed Mr. Cheney in charge of "[A]ll federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction, consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other federal agencies". LINK. Mr. Cheney subsequently played a direct role in supervising training exercises that simultaneously occurred during the 911 attacks.

According to former Los Angeles Police Officer Michael Ruppelt, Mr. Cheney had a parallel chain of command that he used to override Air Force objections to stand down orders that grounded the USAF during the 911 attacks, LINK.

Mr. Ruppelt learned that the Secret Service had the authority to directly communicate presidential and vice presidential orders to fighter pilots in the air thereby circumventing the normal chain of command. (Crossing the Rubicon, pp. 428 - 429). Furthermore: "It is the Secret Service who has the legal mandate to take supreme command in case of a scheduled major event - or an unplanned major emergency - on American soil; these are designated "National Special Security Events".LINK.

Mr. Ruppelt and others have subsequently claimed that 911 was an "inside job;" and alleges Mr. Cheney through the Secret Service, played a direct leadership role in what occurred over 911. Consequently, it is very possible that Mr. Cheney could have played a similar role in circumventing the regular chain of military command in ordering the B-52 incident. The B-52 incident could be part of a contrived "National Special Security Event" directly controlled by Cheney by virtue of the alleged authority granted to him by President Bush, and through the Secret Service which at least theoretically, has the technological means to by pass the regular chain of military command. I now move to my third key question.

Why was the nuclear armed B-52 sent to Barksdale AFB?

If initial reports that the weapons were being decommissioned, but were mistakenly transported by a B-52 bomber, then the weapons should have been taken to Kirtland Air Force Base. According to Kristensen, this is "where the warheads are separated from the rest of the weapon and shipped to the Energy Department's Pantex dismantlement facility near Amarillo, Texas". LINK.

However, it has been revealed that Barksdale AFB is used as a staging base for operations in the Middle East, LINK.

This is circumstantial evidence that the weapons were being deployed for possible use in the Middle East.

There has been recent speculation concerning a possible attack against Iran given reports that the Pentagon has completed plans for a three day bombing blitz of Iran according to a Sunday Times report, LINK. The Report claims that 1200 targets have been selected and this will destroy much of Iran's military infrastructure. Such an attack will devastate Iran's economy, create greater political instability in the region, and stop the oil supply. A disruption of the oil supply from the Persian Gulf could trigger a global economic recession and lead to the collapse of financial markets.

In a rather disturbing synchronistic development, there have been reports of billion dollar investments in high risk stock options in both Europe and the U.S. that would only be profitable if a dramatic collapse of the stock market were to occur before September 21. Similar stock options were purchased weeks before the 911 attack in 2001, and investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for possible insider trading. The combination of the Sunday Times report and the Stock market option purchases is circumstantial evidence that plans for a concerted military attack against Iran have been secretly approved and covert operations have begun, LINK.

Seymour Hersh in May 2006 reported the opposition of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.

In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran's uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. .. "Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning," the former senior intelligence official told me. "And Pace stood up to them.

Then the world came back: 'O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.' LINK.

Given earlier opposition by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, it is likely that the present attack plans for Iraq drawn up by the Pentagon don't involve the use of nuclear weapons. In order to circumvent the regular chain of command, opposed to a nuclear attack, it is very likely that Vice President Cheney contrived a "National Special Security Event" that involved a nuclear armed B-52. This would have given him the legal authority to place orders directly through the Secret Service to the Air Force officers responsible for the B-52 incident.

Conclusion: Exposing those Responsible for the B-52 Incident

Consequently, there is considerable circumstantial evidence to argue that the nuclear armed B-52 was part of an apparent covert operation, outside the regular chain of constitutional military command. The alleged authority responsible for this was Vice President Cheney. He very likely used the Secret Service to take charge of a contrived National Special Security Event involving a nuclear armed B-52 that would be flown from Minot AFB. The B-52 was directed to Barksdale Air Force base where it would have conducted a covert mission to the Middle East involving the detonation of one or more nuclear weapons most likely in or in the vicinity of Iran. This could either have occurred during a conventional military strike against Iran, or a False Flag operation in the Persian Gulf region.

Apparently, the leaking and discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 at Barksdale was not part of the script. According to a confidential source of Larry Johnson, a former counter-terrorism official from the State Department and CIA, the discovery of the nuclear armed B-52 was leaked. Johnson concludes: "Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran? I don't know, but it is a question worth asking." LINK.

While the general public is likely to be given a watered down declassified report by the Air Force over the B-52 incident on September 14, the real investigation will reveal that it was part of a covert operation that intended to bypass the regular chain of command in using nuclear weapons in the Middle East. This will likely result in a furious backlash by key figures in the regular military chain of Command such as Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, and the Commander of Central Command, Admiral William Fallon, who have direct responsibility for the conduct of military operations in the Middle East. The US. Air Force, the Secretary of Defense and Commander of Central Command, is now aware of what was likely going to be the true use of the B-52 and the responsibility of the Office of the Vice President.

It is very likely that the exposure of the B-52 incident will lead to an indefinite hold on plans to attack Iran given uncertainty whether other nuclear weapons have been covertly positioned for use in the Middle East. Significantly, public officials briefed about the true circumstances of the B-52 incident will almost certainly place enormous pressure on Vice President Cheney to immediately resign if it is found that he played the role identified above. It is therefore anticipated that in a very short time, the public will learn that Cheney has resigned for health resigns.

The forthcoming September 14 U.S. Air Force report will likely describe the B-52 incident as an "error" and an "isolated incident" as foreshadowed in the September 6 Press Statement. This will create some difficulty in exposing the actual role played by Cheney and any other government figures that supported him. There will be a need for continued public awareness of the true events behind the B-52 incident in order to expose the actual role of Mr. Cheney. Only in that way can Cheney be held accountable for his actions, and other government figures that supported his neo-conservative agenda be exposed. Regardless of whether Cheney's role as the prime architect of the B-52 incident is exposed to the public, the official backlash against his covert operation should force his resignation. In either case, a very dangerous public official would be removed from a powerful position of influence. More importantly, the world has been spared a devastating nuclear war by courageous American airmen who revealed the true contents of an otherwise routine B-52 landing at Barksdale, AFB headed for a covert nuclear mission to the Middle East.

About the author:

Michael E. Salla, M.A. Ph.D., is a former Assistant Professor in the School of International Service, American University, Washington D.C. He is the author of five books and founder of the Exopolitics Institute, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization based in Kona, Hawaii.

Click to make a donation-pledge herein

Further Reading

Michael Kane, "Simplifying the case against Dick Cheney," LINK

Larry Johnson, "Staging Nuke for Iran?", LINK

Michael Hoffman, "B-52 mistakenly flies with nukes aboard," LINK

Michael Salla, Ph.D. "Will the U.S. Attack Iran Before September 21? - Are CIA Front Companies Investing $4.5 Billion to Profit from attacking Iran?", LINK

Edward Thomas, Lt. Col., "U.S. Air Force Statement on B-52 Nuclear Incident at Minot," PDF LINK

Michael Ruppelt, Crossing the Rubicon (New Society Publishers, 2004).

Greg Webb, "US Bomber Mistakenly Flies with Nuclear Weapons", LINK

Become a member of The Canadian, with your donation-pledge. Help support independent, progressive, and not-for-profit journalism.

from www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/...1.html

__

The Barksdale Nukes

B-52s and Bush’s War Plans

By SCOTT VEST

former Air Force Captain at Minot AFB

There has been a great deal of speculation in recent days about the Air Force incident on August 30 in which six cruise missiles were transported from Minot AFB in North Dakota to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana with nuclear warheads still attached. There are those who believe that the shipment, revealed to the Military Times by two unnamed Air Force officers, represents part of some nefarious plot by the Bush Administration to stage weapons for a nuclear attack on Iran.

Another article goes so far as to extend the scope of the plot to postulate stock market manipulation by rich administration insiders who are predicting huge near term stock market upheavals in the expected wake of such an attack and are poised to cash in.
In several articles, the authors state that there is no way that the shipment could have been an accident.

However, as much as I can relate to the mind set that the Bush Administration is up to no good, I have to say that it almost certainly had to be an accident, or if not an accident it was not a prelude to nuclear war with Iran or anyone else. The fact is that if a nuclear strike was planned out of Barksdale AFB using the B-52H aircraft stationed there, it could be accomplished without needing to ferry live weapons from North Dakota against long-standing policy on a combat aircraft.

I'm a former Air Force Captain and I was a munitions specialist in the very unit that erroneously shipped the weapons out of Minot AFB from '87 to '90. I am no Republican mouthpiece trying to cover for the administration. I'm a social liberal and fiscal conservative (basically the opposite philosophy of the administration), and I think Bush and especially Cheney are war criminals along with being the normal variety of criminals on a grand scale. I believed in our mission during the Cold War to make the cost of a Soviet nuclear strike too high to consider. After I left the service in 1992, I saw the military increasingly used for actions that had less and less to do with the defense of our nation When we invaded Kosovo in 1999, I resigned my commission in the reserves. Now that I see the horrible misuse of military power that this administration has perpetrated I am so glad that I can no longer get called up to serve in a war of aggression, yet so angry that so many people of honor are being misused.

The key to the matter here is that Barksdale AFB and Minot AFB are both hosts to strategic bomb wings flying B-52H aircraft. The B-52H is designed as a primarily nuclear bomber yet still capable of delivering conventional explosives as has been seen in our imperial adventures in recent years. The two former Strategic Air Command bases both support the same mission when it comes to their nuclear capabilities. Although I can neither confirm nor deny the definite presence of nuclear weapons at any given location (I do value what freedom I still retain under this government), doesn't it stand to reason that if Minot has nukes, as they allegedly do to be able to fly them to Louisiana, then Barksdale is likely to have an inventory of its own?

The fact that warheads were flown between Air Force locations is not unusual. Only the fact that they were flown on a B-52 is. Warheads are routinely transported by air as it's much more secure than traveling over the roads or rail. They are typically flown on transport aircraft inside of drums that are designed to survive a crash. Obviously, the security and secrecy of these missions is higher than what occurred on the B-52 flight in question and this is what caused the unnamed officers to speak out. Breaches of safety, security, or reliability on nuclear weapons is a big deal to anyone who works with them, and this was a major screw-up.

The six advanced cruise missiles (ACMs) were being sent to Barksdale to get decommissioned (destroyed). The fact is that the 5th Munitions Squadron at Minot AFB (my old unit) in North Dakota should have scheduled the six warheads to get 'demated' from the missiles prior to loading them on the jet. They failed to do this, and it was inexcusable. The squadron commander (generally a Lt Col) was fired. There are three levels of nuclear incident reporting that you may have heard of. The most severe is a 'Broken Arrow' where a weapon is lost, stolen, or detonated. The next level is 'Bent Spear' and covers serious breaches of nuclear surety (safety, security, reliability). The last is 'Dull Sword' which covers minor issues or infractions. This incident most likely would have fallen into the 'Bent Spear' category. These are very rare. For 10 hours, Minot didn't know where six of their warheads were. This is shocking to the Air Force, and they've been on it like white on rice.

It's not terribly obvious when looking at a cruise missile whether it carries a warhead or not because these missiles are like small unmanned aircraft and the warhead is enclosed within. However, there are supposed to be red indicators on live missiles that apparently went unnoticed by the transportation and load crews. They have been decertified. There are several steps in the normal processes where this infraction should have been caught, but it wasn't. This indicates poor training and attention to detail, and this was never tolerated when I worked with these weapons, and has not been tolerated now. There may be some contributing factors pertaining to personnel turnover, short handedness, or fatigue related to the ongoing war effort, but I have no such knowledge. Regardless of any of that the incident was still absolutely inexcusable.

Do I think that the administration is drawing up serious plans to attack Iran? I do. Do I think that neocon whack jobs and particularly Dick Cheney are considering the use of nuclear weapons? I do. But the facts are scarier than the conspiracy theories swirling around this B-52 incident. If a decision is made to launch nuclear strikes from US bases using B-52s, it can be done without any telltale unusual movements of assets. A single B-52H can put over 6 megatons of nuclear power on target anywhere on the planet within 30 hours from the time the order is received.



Scott Vest can be reached at vestsa@comcast.net

from www.counterpunch.org/vest09132007.html
__

Nuclear Insanity Ordered from the Top

by Tim Riley

www.opednews.com

Tell A Friend

Nuclear tipped cruise missiles were moved flown by B-52 from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota to Barksdale AFB, Lousiana, last Friday August 30.

I have reviewed at least two dozen news reports trying to make sense of the source material and I would like to share my cut and paste summary with you.

Original source:
The Military Times is the original source for the story. (Here's a link to the same story copied in the Navy Times because the source for the original aritcle is already gone: www.navytimes.com/news/2007..._070904w/) The journalist, Michael Hoffman, bases the story on "three officers who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the incident."
Nuclear armed B-52 flights are not common:

According to the Global Security Newswire:

The risk of flying accidents, however, led the United States to abandon all nuclear-armed bomber flights in 1968, according to Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons expert with the Federation of American Scientists.

Further (source):

In 1991, President George H.W. Bush reduced the bomber alert status further by ordering nuclear weapons to be removed from the aircraft and kept in nearby storage facilities.

In a follow up article from Michael Hoffman of the Military Times:

As a gesture to Russia and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, the first Bush administration took it one step farther in 1991 by ordering all bombers to halt nuclear ground alerts, which allowed bomber crews to practice loading a nuclear warhead, but never taking off with one.

The Defense Department does transport nuclear warheads by air, but instead of bombers it uses C-17 or C-130 cargo aircraft.

The Chain of Custody, paperwork, and Command Control are exhaustive for verifiably secure handling of nuclear weapons.

Many credible comments on various news blogs state that the paperwork required to move nuclear munitions is redundant, exhaustive, taken very seriously, and so stringent that it is "idiot proof."

Comment from Democratic Underground.com:
I worked on nuclear submarines for the Navy at Mare Island Naval shipyard for 20 years. As a Nuc worker I handled nuclear material and weapons for 15 of those years. The controls on weapons and nuclear fuel is insanely tight.. This story just CAN'T happen. The amount of people involved in logistics..Code 105 radcon, Engineers, Nuclear riggers, Code 1390 Engineers..Gawd the paperwork involved for anyone of the groups to sign off on.
This story is impossible.. Something else is afoot..
Who signed off and who told them too?
AND WHY do we need to be moving nuclear weapons unless a logistics operation is underway?
IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN... They don't just move weapons from Minot for the hell of it..
Ring...
hello?
hey..we are a little low on thermonuclear tipped weapons this week..
OK, we'll send you a few..
Make it 6
OK
www.opednews.com/articles/...ty_ord.htm
__

Langley planes to be grounded

The Air Force has ordered a stand-down for all jet fighters and bombers for Sept. 14.
BY STEPHANIE HEINATZ | 247-7821
September 7, 2007
LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE - Planes at Langley Air Force Base will be grounded Sept. 14 in response to an incident last week when a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear warheads and flown for three hours across several states.

The stand-down was ordered by Air Combat Command and includes all jet fighters and bombers in the Air Force. The command, headquartered at Langley, oversees all of the service's fighters and bombers.

Planes in Iraq and Afghanistan and planes participating in air shows this weekend are not affected by the stand-down.
While airmen haven't been given specific instructions for the stand-down, they've been ordered to take the non-flying time to review safety procedures and protocol, an Air Combat Command spokesman said.

To mistakenly load nuclear weapons on a bomber, military officials told the Associated Press, safety protocols likely would have been ignored.

On Aug. 30, a B-52 with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles flew from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., a military official told The Associated Press.

The missiles, which are being decommissioned, were mounted onto pylons on the bomber's wings.

It is unclear why the nuclear warheads had not been removed beforehand.

The plane's crew, according to news reports, did not know they were carrying nuclear weapons.

The weapons are designed with safety features that ensure the warheads don't detonate accidentally or upon impact during a crash.

Arming the weapons requires stringent protocols and authentication codes, according to the AP.

The munitions squadron commander was relieved of duty, and crews involved with the load have been temporarily decertified for handling munitions, an official told the AP.

Citing Defense Department policy forbidding the release of any information about nuclear weapons, Pentagon officials have not confirmed that nuclear weapons were involved in the incident.

However, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and President Bush were immediately notified of the incident, a Pentagon spokesman said.

Gates has asked to be briefed daily on the Air Force investigation, which is being led by Air Force Maj. Gen. Douglas Raaberg, director of Air and Space Operations for Air Combat Command at Langley.

Raaberg was not available for comment Thursday.

His full report is expected to be delivered to Gates as early as next week.
www.dailypress.com/news/loc...434.story


ACC orders command-wide stand-down on Sept. 14

By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Sep 7, 2007 19:12:24 EDT
On Sept. 14, flight lines will be very quiet at Air Combat Command bases.
The entire command — about 100,000 active-duty airmen — is standing down training flights and many other operations as part of a command-wide safety day.
Command boss Gen. Ronald Keys ordered the Sept. 14 safety stand-down 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.
Command spokesman Maj. Tom Crosson said wing commanders would determine how their units review operations and safety procedures and checklists.
Just how serious Keys takes the lapse of regulations at Minot is reflected in the fact that the safety stand-down is the first command-wide 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 department-wide safety review day.
www.airforcetimes.com/news/20..._070807/

_

Who Commanded our Air Force to 'Stand Down' on 911
by Victor Thorn

Of all the peculiarities, unanswered questions, and things that simply don't add up about the 9-11 terrorist attacks, the one aspect that keeps nagging at me revolves around our military's incredible lack of response to the hijacking of four airliners.

Anyone who investigates this matter will soon find that the United States Air Force and the FAA both have established procedures that have been in place for at least 25 years regarding planes that veer abnormally off course. Specifically, federal law MANDATES that the Air Force must dispatch a plane to investigate why a certain craft has strayed from its predestined route. These interceptors are only allowed to shoot an airliner from the sky under orders from the President, but that doesn't negate that they are still required to investigate the situation in a timely manner.

Yet, on 9-11, NO ONE FOLLOWED ORDERS! Why? Who gave these orders? Plus, Washington, D.C. has the most restricted air space in the country, yet from 9:03 a.m., when the second tower was hit, to 9:47 a.m. when the Pentagon came under attack ... when the Air Force KNEW that a jet was headed toward the Capitol, no planes were dispatched to intercept it. Who gave the orders for these planes to 'stand down,' and, God forbid, were some even called back after they had taken off?

To begin understanding how appalling this situation is, we first need to know that there are at least twelve or more National Guard and Air Force installations in close proximity to the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Plus, Andrews Air Force Base is only ten miles from the heart of Washington, D.C. Why wasn't something done to avert this catastrophe, and why isn't the mainstream media asking some very hard questions regarding this deliberately ordered "crime"?

Yes, I said crime, and once you get a load of the following timeline, you'll concur with this strong terminology. Between 7:59 a.m. - 8:10 a.m., the airliners that would ultimately crash into the WTC and Pentagon were hijacked. By 8:15 a.m., air traffic controllers knew that these planes were in trouble. At this point, the Air Force should have dispatched, per standard operating procedures, fighters that would determine why these jets veered from their normal route. By 8:15 a.m.!

At 8:45 a.m. - a half-hour later - American Airlines flight 11 struck the WTC's North Tower. (This flight took off at exactly 7:59 a.m., thus controllers knew it was in trouble for at least 35 minutes, if not more.)

At 9:03 a.m., United Airlines flight 175 crashed into the South Tower. (It took off at exactly 8:10 a.m.)

At 9:05 a.m. (supposedly), Andrew Card told President Bush of the unfolding catastrophe. At the same time, American Airlines Flight 77 veered off course near Chicago and headed toward D.C. for an impending attack.

At 9:06 a.m., the New York Daily News reported that on the morning of the attack, the NYPD dispatched a message declaring, "This was a terrorist attack - notify the Pentagon."

Still, NO Air Force jets had yet been scrambled! None! Why?

At 9:35 a.m., American Airlines flight 77, which had been tracked by radar all the way from Chicago, circled the Pentagon, yet this military installation was not evacuated! Plus, the Air Force had still not sent out any jets! How completely incredible is this scenario?

A few minutes later, with the utmost precision, American Airlines flight 77 drops 7,000 feet in 2 ½ minutes. Do you realize what a truly difficult maneuver this is? It is flying so low at this point that the plane is taking out utility poles and clipping trees en route to its target. The jumbo jet finally zeroes in EXACTLY on the Pentagon while traveling at 460 knots (approx 529 mph). Are we really to believe that this precision "Top Gun" style flying was executed by a group of desert-trained Afghani's who had only flown Cessna and Piper prop-planes at a flight school in Florida for six months, many of them reportedly unable to even take off or land them adequately? Come on! This is the most inept cock-n-bull story since the 'surprise attack' on Pearl Harbor.

Finally, at 9:40 a.m., a full hour and 31 minutes after the FAA knew that the first airliner had been hijacked ... guess what happened. The Air Force dispatched their jets!

The Pentagon was aware of these hijackings since at least 8:45 a.m. when the first tower was struck (and more likely before then), yet it took them 55 minutes to take action. 55 minutes! By 8:15 a.m., when the FAA learned of the hijackings, federal law required that the military dispatch planes to either divert the plane's course, or determine the need to shoot them down. This is normal procedure! But the Pentagon waited until 9:40 a.m. after all the damage was already done.

Who commanded the Air Force to stand down, and why is the media still feeding us the "incompetence" line? The Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk could have had a plane up in the air in that much time!

Barry Zwicker, a Canadian media analyst, wrote on January 21, 2002: "That morning no interceptors responded in a timely fashion to the highest alert situation. That includes the Andrews squadron which are 12 miles from the White House. Whatever the explanation for the huge failure, there have been no reports, to my knowledge, of reprimands. This further weakens the incompetence theory! Incompetence usually earns reprimands. This causes me to ask whether there were 'stand down' orders."

To add more weight to the peculiarity of this situation, consider the flight capacity of the four hijacked airliners. These routes were extremely popular ones, most of them filled to 100% capacity during weekdays. In fact, oftentimes, fliers were asked if they wanted to give up their seats to another traveler. Yet on 9-11, the four flights in question were uncharacteristically empty.

American Airlines 11 - filled to only 39% of capacity
American Airlines 77 - filled to only 27% of capacity
United Airlines 175 - filled to only 26% of capacity
United Airlines 93 - filled to only 16% of capacity

In an industry that takes extremely close notice of such matters, why didn't anyone see the red flags that were being waved? Did someone tell them to neglect these glaring inconsistencies to lessen the collateral damage (or the insurance payouts)?

Since I mentioned United Airlines flight 93, consider this odd bit of information. The Reuters news agency reported on 9-13-2001 in an article entitled, "Troubling Questions in Troubling Times": "Pennsylvania State Police officials said on Thursday debris from the plan had been found up to EIGHT MILES AWAY from the crash site." Do you realize how immense an eight-mile stretch of land is? Do you also realize that when a plane drops from the sky, the impact does not cause the wreckage to scatter for eight miles? Think about it. Eight miles is the length of 140 football fields laid end-to-end! Obviously, something else happened to bring Flight 93 out of the sky. Strong evidence points to the Air Force shooting it down, then the plane disintegrated during its eight-mile descent into a rural Pennsylvania field. Yet the powers-that-be lied once again to the American people. Now do you know why President Bush personally asked Tom Daschle to limit their Congressional inquiry?

Another aspect of this case that makes me scratch my head is this: why won't the FAA release the entire records of the pilot conversations with their air-traffic controllers?

Another pertinent question revolves around the pilot's curious reactions during these hijackings. Once they got the first inkling that they were being overtaken, why didn't they simply perform a "rollover" to incapacitate or disable the hijackers? The "barrel roll" is an easily-performed procedure for veteran pilots, especially when one considers the backgrounds of the four men who manned these flights. As Colonel Donn de Grand Pre reports:

John Ogonowski - Vietnam Air Force fighter pilot
Leroy Homer - Former Air Force pilot
Victor Saracini - Former fighter pilot
Chic Burlingame - Naval Academy graduate who flew F-4's in Vietnam

All of these pilots were described as being strong, agile, healthy, in excellent physical condition, and certainly capable of performing a simple rollover. Now I'm not blaming these men by any means ... it just seems like, if given the opportunity, these pilots would have disoriented the "hijackers" enough to gain control of the situation and avert disaster. Rather, we're being led to believe that these three jumbo jets were flown into buildings by Middle Eastern hijackers brandishing nothing more than box cutters, and all of them had only six months flying experience. I don't know about you, but if everything were on the up-and-up, I'd put my faith in these pilots being able to nullify the hijackers any day of the week. But again, we're not being given the entire story because something doesn't add up.

I could continue with dozens of other inconsistencies, but instead I'll close on this note.

1) Who in the mainstream media is asking these, and other, pertinent questions? No one!
2) Who in the Pentagon is answering these questions? No one!
3) Finally, who in the Pentagon has been made accountable for the Air Force stand-down? Again, no one!

Do you think it's time that we FORCE our government and the media to start addressing these issues? I do.


www.wanttoknow.info/911standdown
_____
Air Force 60th anniversary celebration set for Sept. 18

By Christine Harrison
Dispatch editor


-- Air Force graphic

Related news from the Web
Latest headlines by topic:
• US Air Force
• US News

Powered by Topix.net

In 1947, the proceedings of Congress were first televised, Jackie Robinson became the first African American to play professional baseball and the Army Air Corps became the Air Force.

In honor of the Air Force's 60th anniversary this year, the Maxwell-Gunter community will come together Sept. 18 to pay homage to Air Force warriors past and present, as well as Air Force families.

The celebration revolves around two, large-scale events: an Air Force heritage relay race beginning at 6 a.m. will pit large unit teams against one another; and a 60th birthday festival in Air Park that will run from 3 to 7 p.m.

The relay race will utilize a one-mile course on Maxwell. Runners will begin in the shadow of the static B-52 display next to Air Park, turn left onto the academic circle road, trace along the boundaries of the Squadron Officer College lodging complex, before heading back to the B-52 start/finish line.

Each race team will be responsible for advancing a colored vest around the course a total of 60 times, thereby achieving 60 miles of running in recognition of the anniversary.

For the past several weeks, unit coordinators have been assembling large teams - in some cases 40 to 50 people - that will share the running load together. According to relay race organizers, the response for far has been outstanding, with as many as 18 relay teams expected to compete. The winning team will receive a large trophy from the Air University commander at the birthday festival, and team members will be allocated a one day pass at the discretion of their unit commander.

According to Air University's event organizer, the run is significant for several reasons.

"It's a competition and we expect that unit pride will be on display," Maj. David Stringer said. "But the run is also about getting as many people to participate as possible so we can send a message about how important Air Force heritage is to us, and how much we value those who make sacrifices along the way."

The entire community becomes involved in the program when the 60th Birthday Festival kicks off at 3 p.m. in Air Park, the open area just north of the cadet pool. Vendors and a kids' fun zone, including a bouncy castle and rock wall, will be set up.

Live music by a local cover band will entertain the crowd from 4:30 p.m. until the fireworks show at the end of the night. The Sweet Young 'Uns cover dozens of contemporary rock bands. Organizers invite everyone to bring lawn chairs, blankets and coolers to make themselves comfortable.

Part of the festival is an award presentation and retreat ceremony that will begin at 4 p.m. The Commander of Air University Lt. Gen. Stephen Lorenz and the 42nd Air Base Wing Commander Col. Paul McGillicuddy will address the crowd and recognize the victorious relay team.

Air Force warriors past and present will then be honored with a rendition of Amazing Grace performed by an Air Force Reserve bagpiper. Next, a formation from the Officer Training School will conduct a retreat ceremony as the Sweet Adelines quartet will sing the National Anthem. A fly over will cap the ceremony, and birthday cake will be served.

From there, festival activities will continue, including prize give-a-ways for those in attendance. Finally, at 7 p.m., a professional fireworks display will light up the sky behind the static B-52.

During the event, a shuttle service will be available from the north parking lot of Bldg. 804.

Due to the relay run, there will a number of lane closures around Air Park and the SOC lodging complex Sept. 18. The northbound lane of 2nd Street, from the main gym to Sycamore Street, will be closed until 4 p.m. Therefore, any traffic destined for the north side of base (Officer Training School, lodging, academic circle) will need to take Poplar Street (alongside Air Park) northbound to the circle road in order to get there. Because Poplar Street will be northbound only, any traffic originating from the north side to leave will need to exit via the southbound lane of 2nd Street.

Additional traffic advisories will be published in the Base Bulletin beginning next week.

Lanes around the SOC lodging complex and along 2nd Street will reopen by 4 p.m.

At that time, however, addition barricades will go up around Air Park, completely blocking off Washington Ferry Road, Poplar Street, and the circle road along the northern edge of the park.

www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/app...icle
____
Coming To A State Near You: Blackwater Air Force


As if having them run around Iraq like loose cannons wasn't bad enough, Blackwater is building an Air Force. Via Scholars & Rogues:

Security company Blackwater U.S.A. is buying Super Tucano light combat aircraft from the Brazilian manufacturer Embraer. These five ton, single engine, single seat aircraft are built for pilot training, but also perform quite well for counter-insurgency work.... The bubble canopy provides excellent visibility. This, coupled with its slow speed (versus jets), makes it an excellent ground attack aircraft.

Now why would the good patriots at Blackwater need airplanes that "can carry up to 1.5 tons of weapons, including 12.7mm machine-guns, bombs and missiles"? For their missions in Iraq, of course. Because, you know, the world's largest military merely owning everything that flies over a third-world country isn't enough in the way of air superiority.

My first thought was that this had to do with the Administration's almost promised plans to invade Iran. (Please please please please please please please PLEASE don't do that! I can hope, can't I?) How else are we supposed to keep Iraq's friendly skies safe while we're shocking and aweing the mullahs? But there's an even more awful prospect for these "excellent ground attack aircrafts." Here's Jeremy Scahill, Blackwater expert and biographer:

Blackwater's been in negotiations with several state governments in the United States. Blackwater met recently with California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger about doing disaster response in California. They're opening up a new private military base in San Diego. Another one is in Mount Carroll, Illinois. They have applied for operating licenses in every coastal U.S. state.

That's right, folks: the U.S. military whose expenditures are almost half of the total military spending worldwide needs private military bases in the United States for some reason.

What might that reason be? Perhaps it has something to do with National Security Presidential Directive NSPD-51, which lays out exactly how the Executive Branch would run the entire government in the event of a "Catastrophic Emergency," which could be anything from a terrorist attack to the next Katrina, as far as the ambiguous wording of the directive is concerned:

"Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions

Meanwhile, the clergy is being enlisted to keep citizens in line in the event of a declaration of martial law. Is it really a coincidence that a private company with close ties to the GOP is arming itself with attack planes just at the moment when the President is laying the groundwork for extraordinary wartime powers? The calmer side of me says, "hold judgment." I just can't help but see a mercenary force of palace guards looming in the not-too-distant future.

Should it come to that, I hope Machiavelli's thoughts on mercenaries will prove valid:

Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and if one holds his state based on these arms, he will stand neither firm nor safe; for they are disunited, ambitious and without discipline, unfaithful, valiant before friends, cowardly before enemies; they have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is; for in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy.

Aw, but who am I kidding? If we've learned anything from the Iraq War it's that we can be robbed by mercenaries in war as well.
UPDATE: I've clarified my position re: conspiracy theories. Yes, this probably means I'll get some angry responses and self-righteous condemnations, but it seems that it had to be done.

www.declineandfall.net/2007/0...ir.html

__

More on Mercenaries; and Moron Conspiracies
Gee, publish one item indicating the possibility that the powers-that-be are comin' to getcha, and you wouldn't believe who comes out of the woodwork. Prior to publishing my piece on Blackwater's Air Force and some other things that scare me, I had gotten maybe 1500 or so hits during the entire life of this blog, many of which were me, chacking how many hits I've had. I'm now pushing 10,000.

Most of them seem to have come here via the website of Jeff Rense, who is apparently fond of accusing the Jews of training chupacabras to implant radio sensors in the brains of neocons so that they won't leak the truth about Roswell, which is the site of ancient Atlantis. Or something like that. So let this be a lesson to you newbie bloggers: if you want to be read, publish a conspiracy theory.

I've received a few comments on the Blackwater story, most of which either accuse Blackwater of pushing the zionist agenda or the christianist agenda. One favorite ties Allah with the god of ancient Atlantis, which is just so amazingly far out there (read the Timaeus and the Critias some time: Socrates made up the city of Atlantis for the sake of argument) that I had to read it a few times to trace the mental leaps. I've seen what happens when you engage cranks (if you don't know what that is or how to spot one, check out the denialism blog and their Denialists' Deck of Cards for a humorous look at the phenomenon) so I'll avoid that here.

But there was a comment worth responding to at length, from a "Canadian Looking Dispassionately At The American Experience":
The problem with this article is it shows EXCESSIVE bias towards paramilitary groups which is what Blackwater is. Bias is good becuase it is an opinion, but excessive bias is fanaticism in its own right.

The author should also know that they are NOT generally disunited, unambitious and lacking discipline, unfaithful, unvaliant before friends, nor are they cowardly before enemies since the majority of Blackwater Associates have already been in service as Navy Seals, Army Rangers, Ex-Delta Forces, British SAS, etc. They're neither stupid nor untrained and in many cases DO IN FACT do their JOBS with professionalism and tact!

It does help to focus one's mind that 100 Grand A year + bonus is yours if you just DO YOUR DAMN JOB but many join Blackwater because they LIKE being professional soldiers and like the lifestyle. So you don't always have to rail against Blackwater since they do provide a useful service in uncivil times and being paid much more than regular forces can be sent to do the "Dirty Jobs" no one else wants to do!

Well yes, of course my piece is biased. It's my opinion, which is subject to change. Whether my bias is "excessive" or not is another story. I've spent nearly two years of my life in Iraq, and I have encountered many an employee of Blackwater and the other security firms who have security contracts here. (Technically speaking I'm a mercenary, even though I'm not even authorized to carry a weapon.)

Have I found that they are disunited, unambitious, lacking discipline, unfaithful, etc.? That's really an individual thing. They often, as my Canadian interlocutor asserts with a bit too many capital letters, "in many cases DO IN FACT do their JOBS with professionalism and tact." I'll admit, they do tend to be patriotic Americans, but that can take many forms. One form is the one that many on the Right take, which asserts that patriotism means following the President no matter what. They accuse those who protest the current state of American society of anti-Americanism. Many Blackwater contractors share this opinion. Actually, it's been my experience that this opinion is the default one among many sectors in Iraq, as this post indicates. I don't doubt that these people are patriots, but I'm really disturbed by the prospect of them flying around our country in military aircraft designed for close ground support.

I'm disturbed by the prospect of anyone doing that, though.

For most of the Blackwater types I've met, this definitely describes them: "they LIKE being professional soldiers and like the lifestyle." Sure they do--that's why they took a high-paying job to come over here. I do take issue with the "they're all former SEALs and Green Berets line, though: a good rule of thumb is that when someone claims to have been in Special Forces and starts telling stories about it, they're lying. The actual SOF guys I've known have tended to not brag much at all. The Blackwater guys I've known can't shut up about how awesome they are. A close friend who once worked for Blackwater told me that they all claim to have had some sort of high speed career, but most of them turn out to have been garden-variety infantrymen who served, it should be noted, in the 80's and 90's, when there wasn't much combat to be had.

Returning to my point, Blackwater is the closest thing we have to a Foreign Legion, and that should worry anyone who is concerned about civil liberties, if for no other reason that foreign legions, if they must exist at all, ought to be limited in their scope to foreign countries. I think my commenter hits the nail on the head when he says that they "can be sent to do the "Dirty Jobs" no one else wants to do." That's what scares me about them. Sure, right now they're all fighting the fight that our elected officials have sent Americans to fight. No matter how much deceit went into getting us into this war, Congress did, in fact, declare this war, and the President is our Commander in Chief. But what happens when that mission changes? Will our legislative branch have any say whatsoever in any domestic missions a Blackwater would conduct during peacetime? There's no reason to suspect that they would. In that case, they would be an armed wing of whoever paid them, in this case the Executive Branch of the United States government. Need I remind my readers that there is no provision in the constitution for such a thing?

Those "dirty jobs" are dirty not just because no one wants to do them, but also because they are in many cases illegal and the military can't do them. I'm one of those people who likes the fact that there are defined limits to the scope of what the military of a Constitutional Republic can do. That's why I find the Blackwater phenomenon dangerous, and that is why I think my short discussion of NSPD-51 is germane.

And for the record, I suspect that many Blackwater Paramilitary Troops would go AWOL rather than provide close air support to the suppression of, say, an anti-WTO demonstration. But do we really want to trust the individual consciences of these people to protect us should they ever be given that order?

www.declineandfall.net/index.htm

__

Hessians at the Gate
One feature that I neglected to address in my recent posts on Blackwater was brought up by some of the commenters to those posts, for instance this one:
The scariest thing about some entity like Blackwater turning America into a police state is the fact that they hire foriegn soldiers of fortune. These Hessians could one day be marching down our streets and commanding American citizens at the point of a gun barrel. Just like they are doing in Iraq. And you see the results there. A lot of dead people.

Although I am hesitant to declare the police state nearly here, I am mindful of the dangers of allowing the seeds for it to be planted while we all assure ourselves that it could never come to that.

As for those foreign soldiers of fortune, I see them all the time. The most visible to me are the guys guarding our mess halls. All of the ones at my local facility seem to be from Uganda, as far as I can tell (I've had brief conversations with some of them). To a man, they seem like nice people, but then again so did Eichmann. The fact of the matter, however, is that they are standing outside (and sometimes inside) our dining facilities with loaded weapons. I've never asked if they have rounds chambered, but the magazines are in their M-16s, which means they could be firing three-round bursts withing seconds if the situation called for it.

While I don't live in fear of them staging an armed takeover of the salad bar, I do wonder what kind of status they might be afforded if their employer, EOD Technology, were called upon to provide homeland security. Doubtless there would be cries of protestation from all corners of the political spectrum shoudl they ever arrive stateside (the Dems would cry "civil liberties" while the GOP would play the xenophobia card, I suspect) but I'm not at all convinced that our Unitary Executive would pay them any heed. The legal aspect of this is something I am utterly unqualified to expound upon, so I won't.

We need to understand this very clearly: the United States is arming private armies of foreign nationals to provide security for its own military on installations in Iraq. This isn't a "coalition of the willing" here, because they aren't operating under their nation's flag. They are employees of American companies, beholden primarily to those companies, and they're paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. And it's not like they're only guarding the mess halls. Foreign security contractors go outside the wire just like Americans.

This would be distressing even if the ones I referred to weren't from a country that is one of the biggest offenders in the horrific production of child soldiers in the world. Were some of the guys guarding me while I eat abducted at a tender age by the Lord's Resistance Army? Somehow, I doubt their employer keeps statistics on these things.

But the point is not that they are foreign, but that they are there at all, and largely unaccountable for their actions.

www.declineandfall.net/index.htm

__

Blackwater-Embraer connection stories:

Blackwater Buys Brazilian Bombers
August 27, 2007: Security company Blackwater U.S.A. is buying Super Tucano light combat aircraft from the Brazilian manufacturer Embraer. These five ton, single engine, single seat aircraft are built for pilot training, but also perform quite well for counter-insurgency work. Brazil. The Super Tucano is basically a prop driven trainer that is equipped for combat missions. The aircraft can carry up to 1.5 tons of weapons, including 12.7mm machine-guns, bombs and missiles. The aircraft cruises at about 500 kilometers an hour and can stay in the air for about 6.5 hours per sortie. One of the options is a FLIR (infrared radar that produces a photo realistic video image in any weather) and a fire control system for bombing. Colombia is using the Super Tucanos for counter-insurgency work (there are over 20,000 armed rebels and drug gang gunmen in the country). The aircraft is also used for border patrol. The U.S. Air Force is watching that quite closely. The Super Tucano costs $9 million each, and come in one or two seat versions. The bubble canopy provides excellent visibility. This, coupled with its slow speed (versus jets), makes it an excellent ground attack aircraft.



Blackwater already has a force of armed helicopters in Iraq, and apparently wants something a little faster, and more heavily armed, to fulfill its security contracts overseas. Initially, Blackwater is getting one two-seater, for pilot training in the United States.

www.strategypage.com/htmw/ht...827.aspx

____

Blackwater seeks Super Tucano acquisition for trainer role
By Stephen Trimble

Security and training company Blackwater USA confirmed that it has applied for a license to acquire one Embraer Super Tucano light attack trainer.


The acquisition is on hold pending licensing approval by the US government, a Blackwater spokeswoman said.



The aircraft would launch a new pilot training programme for Blackwater, which provides a broad range of training and operational services for military and law enforcement clients.



The Super Tucano programme would be limited to providing for US personnel only, the spokeswoman adds, and the aircraft would not be allowed to leave the country.



The pending license also mandates that all weapons, including the 12.7mm, wing-mounted guns and provisions for smart bomb stores, are not used as part of the training mission.



The pending deal for the two-seat Super Tucano would launch Blackwater’s first training programme dedicated towards a light attack jet. Brazil and Columbia both employ the Super Tucano to battle drug smugglers and insurgents.



The US Air Force, meanwhile, is soliciting for bids to acquire a new fleet of counter-insurgency aircraft on behalf of the Iraqi Air Force.

www.flightglobal.com/article...ole.html
______

Blackwater Buying Counter-Insurgency Aircraft (Updated)
By Sharon Weinberger EmailAugust 27, 2007 | 9:14:03 AMCategories: Mercs, Planes

Uh, oh. Blackwater, the merc outfit private security contractor that some people seem to love to hate, is in the market for an attack aircraft, a likely prelude to offering foreign air forces training in counter-insurgency operations. Jane's Defence Weekly reporter Nathan Hodge (and husband of DANGER ROOM contributor) has an exclusive story (sorry, subscription only) on Blackwater's plans to purchase an Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano trainer/light attack aircraft:

Tucano Blackwater President Gary Jackson confirmed to Jane's at the Force Protection Equipment Demonstration in Stafford, Virginia, in mid-August that the company is in the process of acquiring the Super Tucano for a new training programme. Transfer of the aircraft to the US is still subject to US government approval and Blackwater would offer no further comment on the transaction or the planned training programme.

If the deal goes through, it will give the company a significant boost in a growing international market for fixed-wing tactical flight instruction, as well as a potential platform for counter-insurgency-style training.

The Super Tucano is in service with the Brazilian Air Force, which operates the aircraft as a primary aircraft trainer and in border-patrol missions under its SIVAM (Sistema de Vigilância da Amazônia) programme. Colombia finalised a contract for 25 Super Tucanos in December 2005; the aircraft has also been marketed to Singapore and the Dominican Republic. Fully equipped, the aircraft features five weapon hardpoints and a night-vision goggle (NVG)-compatible 'glass cockpit'. In military service, it is used for basic and advanced pilot training as well as for precision weapons delivery.

It's not a surprise that Blackwater is getting into this game, given that counter-insurgency aircraft are making a big comeback. But it's still a rather significant precedent to have a private company in the U.S. buy (let alone import) offer training services on an attack aircraft.

Update:

Cirby and Kle correctly note that there are plenty of examples of private purchase and/or import of fighters, and Demophilus notes that even private training on attack aircraft isn't precedent setting either. Ah well, let's leave it at: an interesting move for Blackwater.

blog.wired.com/defense/20...r-buys.html

_____

The Private Praetorians

Saturday, 01 September 2007

Scholars endorse "The Kennebunkport Warning":
Report ominous signs of a privatized takeover of the nation
by Jim Fetzer

A warning about the prospect of an imminent but staged “9/11” attack followed by a strike on Iran and imposition of martial law in the US has been issued by Cynthia McKinney, Webster Tarpley and others. Known as “The Kennebunkport Warning” (August 26, 2007), it has drawn support from Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

According to its founder, James H. Fetzer, not only are there multiple indications the United States is about to attack Iran, but a series of rather odd events suggest that martial law may be near at hand.

“The threat is not from our own military, the strength of which is being depleted by the ongoing occupation of Iraq, but from privatized armies, such as Blackwater USA, which appear to be growing stronger as the US Army is growing weaker.”



According to The Kennebunkport Warning, extensive evidence suggests that those allied with the neo-con faction headed by Vice President Cheney “are determined to orchestrate and manufacture a new 9/11 terror incident . . . (to) be used as a pretext for launching an aggressive war against Iran and for imposing a regime of martial law here in the United States. . . . We solemnly warn the people of the world that any terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction taking place inside the United States or elsewhere in the immediate future must be considered the prima facie responsibility of the Cheney faction.”

Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, observes that the privatization of military force has created a new problem for the citizens of this nation. “In the past, we have had confidence that the US military, our national guard, our local police and armed citizens had the combined ability to withstand threats to our liberty from our own government. But our military is broken, the National Guard has been placed under the President’s control, and our access to ammunition now appears to be being cut off, which compromises our capacity to resist tyranny.”

That our level of engagement in Iraq cannot be continued has been conveyed by many sources. Associated Press reporter Lolita C. Baldor (August 19, 2007) has written that our level of engagement in Iraq cannot be sustained. “Sapped by nearly six years of war, the Army has nearly exhausted its fighting force and its options if the Bush administration decides to extend the Iraq buildup beyond next year.” Many general officers and National Guard commanders have said similar things, but the effects of a depleted military may have unexpected ramifications.

The control of the National Guard has been placed directly at the disposal of the President of the United States over the opposition of all fifty governors. “I can’t imagine a more blatant violation of states' rights than this,” Fetzer said. “It used to be the case that the Republican Party stood for states' rights. But then it also stood for balanced budgets, Constitutional government, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and keeping the government out of our personal lives. I simply do not understand why any principled Republican would support this administration. Maybe there aren’t any left.”

An article by Reuters (August 26, 2007) confirms that the US is the most heavily armed nation in the world, with 90 guns per 100 people. According a Small Arms Survey conducted by the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, each year about 4.5 million of some 8 million new rifles, shotguns and hardguns are sold to US citizens, who own about 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms. “Ordinarily, I would consider this to be a source of security,” Fetzer observed, “but the Second Amendment is meaningless if our access to ammunition is cut off.”

Fetzer was recently startled to read in The Capital Times (August 28, 2007) that police departments across the country are so starved for ammunition that they are resorting to target practice with paint-ball guns. “This is quite shocking,” he said. “Most police ammunition is .38 and 9mm caliber, not the kind that our military requires. The profit margin on the sale and manufacture of bullets is so great and the demand is so strong that it is difficult to imagine how this could happen absent a deliberate policy to curtail access to ammo. Without bullets, those vast stocks of weapons are useless. This appears to be a very clever, insidious plan.”

Other developments raise Fetzer’s concern, including a report (wesh.com, August 22, 2007) that members of the 1st Battalion, 265th Air Defense Artillery are being deployed from Florida to the nation’s capital for a year’s duty, “where they will operate high-tech weapons systems against any potential air threat.” He finds that strange. “I am not aware of any threat from the sky to the White House,” Fetzer said. “Is this to protect Bush and Cheney from foreign terrorists or are they concerned that US citizens may rise up in opposition to their suspension of the Constitution?”

And a disturbing report has just appeared on the internet (nworeport.com/blackwater.htm) that Blackwater, USA, the private security contractor that has assembled a large mercenary force in Iraq (as part of a governmental privatization scheme to keep the official count of American forces involved artificially low) is now building its own air force in the United States, including the purchase of Super Tucano light combat aircraft from Embraer, a Brazilian company. According to the article, it has one new private military base in San Diego, another in Mount Carroll, IL, and has applied for operating licenses in every coastal U.S. state.

“If you believe in coincidence,” Fetzer said, “then perhaps you consider it to be a remarkable improbability that, just as the American military is being weakened in Iraq, the National Guard is being placed under the President’s direct control, and that ammunition is being cut off from police departments and armed citizens, while air defense units are being deployed to Washington, D.C., and mercenaries are developing their own air force. I’m not so sure. If we have the most capable air force in the world, then why is this one needed? To do things our own air force would not do? All of these developments are troubling and lead me to think that the Kennebunkport Warning may be even better founded than its signers realize.”

www.pacificfreepress.com/conte...14/81/

¬¬¬__

THE KENNEBUNKPORT WARNING
To the American people, and to peace loving individuals everywhere:
Massive evidence has come to our attention which shows that the backers, controllers, and allies of Vice President Dick Cheney are determined to orchestrate and manufacture a new 9/11 terror incident, and/or a new Gulf of Tonkin war provocation over the coming weeks and months. Such events would be used by the Bush administration as a pretext for launching an aggressive war against Iran, quite possibly with nuclear weapons, and for imposing a regime of martial law here in the United States. We call on the House of Representatives to proceed immediately to the impeachment of Cheney, as an urgent measure for avoiding a wider and more catastrophic war. Once impeachment has begun, it will be easier for loyal and patriotic military officers to refuse illegal orders coming from the Cheney faction. We solemnly warn the people of the world that any terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction taking place inside the United States or elsewhere in the immediate future must be considered the prima facie responsibility of the Cheney faction. We urge responsible political leaders everywhere to begin at once to inoculate the public opinion of their countries against such a threatened false flag terror operation.
(Signed) A Group of US Opposition Political Leaders Gathered in Protest at the Bush Compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, August 24-25, 2007
CYNTHIA MCKINNEY, FORMER U.S. CONGRESSWOMAN, GEORGIA
CINDY SHEEHAN, CANDIDATE FOR U.S. CONGRESS, CALIFORNIA*
ANN WRIGHT, COLONEL US ARMY RESERVE, FORMER US DIPLOMAT*
JAMILLA EL-SHAFEI, ORGANIZER OF KENNEBUNKPORT PEACE DEMONSTRATION , KENNEBUNK PEACE DEPARTMENT*
DAHLIA WASFI, M.D. WWW.LIBERATETHIS.COM*
GEORGE PAZ MARTIN
JOHN KAMINSKI, MAINE LAWYER, IMPEACHMENT ADVOCATE **
WEBSTER G. TARPLEY, AUTHOR, 'UNAUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY OF GEORGE H.W. BUSH' & '9/11 SYNTHETIC TERROR: MADE IN THE USA'
CRAIG HILL, GREEN PARTY OF VERMONT, CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE
BRUCE MARSHALL, ORGANIZER OF PHILADELPHIA EMERGENCY ANTIWAR CONVENTION, PHILADELPHIA PLATFORM, WWW.ACTINDEPENDENT.ORG, GREEN PARTY OF VERMONT

------------------------------------
* These four signatories have released a statement indicating that the Kennebunkport Warning was "altered" after they signed it. Bruce Marshall, who gathered the signatures, remains adamant that the signatures are authentic, the document has not been altered, and has offered photographic evidence to substantiate his claims.
** (This is not John Kaminski, author of "America's Autopsy Report", etc. Here is some of the Lawyer, John Kaminski's work: Impeachment: We’ve Got a Job to Do).

www.911blogger.com/node/10905

Also look at online resources like:

ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/Po...r-Inquest

www.911blogger.com