It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(Not sure if you guys had this yet. Didn't see it on the search.)
-- SPECIAL REPORT --
Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater
By Wayne Madsen
Sept. 24, 2007
Author's website
WMR has learned from U.S. and foreign intelligence sources that the B-52 transporting six stealth AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles, each armed with a W-80-1 nuclear warhead, on August 30, were destined for the Middle East via Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.
However, elements of the Air Force, supported by U.S. intelligence agency personnel, successfully revealed the ultimate destination of the nuclear weapons and the mission was aborted due to internal opposition within the Air Force and U.S. Intelligence Community.
Yesterday, the /Washington Post/ attempted to explain away the fact that America's nuclear command and control system broke down in an unprecedented manner by reporting that it was the result of "security failures at multiple levels." It is now apparent that the command and control breakdown, reported as a BENT SPEAR incident to the Secretary of Defense and White House, was not the result of a command and control chain-of-command "failures" but the result of a revolt and push back by various echelons within the Air Force and intelligence agencies against a planned U.S. attack on Iran using nuclear and conventional
weapons.
earthboppin.net...
Originally posted by uberarcanist
I'm not buying it. One can lean back on "unnamed sources" and and spew whatever dribble he or she chooses to endorse.
SHOW ME THE PROOF!!!
Originally posted by hightowerx
I just sent you a U2U, but hell, I'll just as well post it here. I consider myself a witty person, I wanted to make sure we were on the same page. Apparently we were. Yes, the avatar is ironic. Didn't even think about till you mentioned it. No offense taken.
Originally posted by uberarcanist
I'm not buying it. One can lean back on "unnamed sources" and and spew whatever dribble he or she chooses to endorse.
SHOW ME THE PROOF!!!
Originally posted by uberarcanist
I'm not buying it. One can lean back on "unnamed sources" and and spew whatever dribble he or she chooses to endorse.
SHOW ME THE PROOF!!!
Originally posted by hightowerx
reply to post by uberarcanist
More info:
www.washingtonpost.com...
[edit on 26-9-2007 by hightowerx]