IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Missing Nukes: Treason Of The Highest Order, Keep this topic alive

Devilsadvocate
post Dec 15 2007, 07:23 PM
Post #21





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,370
Joined: 3-February 07
From: Ireland
Member No.: 551



QUOTE (Swordfish350 @ Dec 15 2007, 07:54 AM)
Thanks.  I read the article.  It's hard to tie motorcycle and car accidents to the nuke issue.  I've always thought that motorcycles are a deathtrap.  However, the one about Todd Blue who committed suicide and handled the nukes at Minot seems to stand out like a sore thumb and should be investigated.  I used to work at Eglin AFB and nearby Hurlburt Field seemed like a dark place to me.  Was he on some team to work with nukes maybe?  What is the connection of the guy from Hurlbert field to Minot and Barksdale?

I'll try and go over this somewhat systematically, if I may.
It's still unclear how many weapons that aircraft actually carried.
The initial reports spoke of five; this seems to have been revised to six shortly after the initial report on the 'Army Times'-website.
Wether this is due to a typo, or any kind of clerical error, or else if the initial figure came from perhaps Barksdale ('Plane with five missiles just landed here') and was then updated after another report from Minot ('Hey, hang on a moment- the damn thing took off from here with six missiles') is something I would dearly like to know up to this day.
The website of Minot AFB is the only one of any of the AFB's attached to CONUS Air Combat Command carrying any pictures of airmen who died in traffic accidents; there are only a very few displayed at any of the other AFB's.
If that's anything to go by, Minot AFB holds the absolute record in road traffic accidents for the entire US.
As I said further up in this thread, John Frueh is an interesting case:
He was attached to the Headquarters of the Airforce Special operations Command, and was not directly tied to either Minot or Barksdale;
But he had one special qualification which makes him rather interesting-
He was trained for Parachute rescue missions. That not only includes missing pilots, but also astronauts or spacecraft.
If one of the missiles is still missing, it stands to reason that the B-52 in question must have 'lost' it along the way- presumably by dropping it by parachute.
As far as I'm aware, John Frueh was in possession of a GPS-system when his body was discovered.
That may not mean all that much- there may be some other explanation than 'They bumped him off after he recovered their nuke for them'.
I just wish someone could clarify exactly how the story of 'five' - 'no,wait-make that six'- nukes came to be in the first place, and hope that it really just was a typo or something like that.
As for that report- it's sand in the gears of those guys. It will slow them down somewhat, but it does not mean that this whole thing is over by a long shot.
These guys are not that easily defeated...

This post has been edited by Devilsadvocate: Dec 15 2007, 07:24 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Dec 15 2007, 11:00 PM
Post #22





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,920
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Good synopsis DA. I was not aware of that parachute the weapon scenario.

Have we learned anything more about the high number of court martials in this case? I read somewhere around 50 guys, which seems awful high to me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mo fiya
post Dec 15 2007, 11:47 PM
Post #23





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 806
Joined: 17-October 06
Member No.: 104



You guys just need to understand, that if they really did hijack one of those nukes, if they use it anywhere, there WILL be leftover material that can and WOULD be able to completely identify it.

Imagine the contingencies that would have to be in place before they could even attempt to pull off that type of false flag. Imagine how many people they would either need already in their pockets, or be willing to silence anyway possible.

All WMD's, especially nuclear weapons, have signatures that before AND after detonation, will identify them SPECIFICALLY.

Now I know they must have been pretty brazen to pull off the anthrax scare with their own material, but that truth came out (even if not reportd properly). It wouldn't be a very good idea to try it with your own nuclear weapon. It just wouldn't.

There's way too much of it floating around on the international black market that could be obtained and smuggled in a lot easier, then using our own. Our ports security is horrendous, and so is our border security. Why bother attempting something with our own sh*t?

What's REALLY weird, is why bother trying to take these weapons AT ALL? It's not like if Bush and Cheney secretly nuked Iran, they wouldn't have a "little" explaining to do.

I still maintain that these 'missing nukes' were ordered out on purpose, and it wasn't benign. Somewhere along the way, the plan was botched by someone with an incredibly hardened metallic pair of balls.

I guess what I'm getting at, is don't go expecting to anymore come out of this. Whatever the purpose of this was, has been ruined. Iran hasn't SUPPOSEDLY been working on nuke weapons since '03, so blaming THEM at this point for any type of nuclear attack would not be credible.

STILL though...why attempt to secretly steal your own nukes...?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Swordfish350
post Dec 16 2007, 03:39 AM
Post #24





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 15
Joined: 9-December 07
Member No.: 2,562



Here's an interesting take on things. He's saying since our own report says that there is no evidence of nuclear activity other countries like China and Russia will refuse embargos and therefore make air strikes more likely.

Jpost Article[I]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
albertchampion
post Dec 16 2007, 04:07 AM
Post #25





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 1,843
Joined: 1-March 07
Member No.: 710



IS THIS A NONSEQUITUR?

HELLO, ROBIN,

you are the reviewer i think.....

as you know, i have subscribed to your little journal[LOBSTER] for many years. for other perspectives on "spookdom".

over most of these years, i have had no reason to question your intelligence, your insights. now i have such a reason.

i received 54 today. and tonight i was reading it and encountered your review of he Henshall book. I don't know that book. But I know something about DNA and lots about AA 77.

Perhaps i read your review inaccurately. you tell me where i am mistaken, please.

the most interesting aspect of AA77[and all the other collisions with terrain that day] is how there was no routine investigation of the crash site. it was never secured as a crime scene. this was exceptional.

even more exceptional was the fact that there is/was a pretty extensive photographic record of that crash site. i have been flying for years. and for years, one of my hobbies was musing on aircraft accidents. what has always been of interest about this pentagon "collision with terrain" site was the virtual absence of aircraft debris[this is similar to the other sites of that day, by the way].

let us consider the disapericido debris: engines, wings, elevons, rudder, fuselage, to enumerate just a bit of the missing debris. luggage was missing. so were seats and other interior upholstery. so were the landing gear components.

you know, in the history of commercial aircraft "collisions with terrain" this is the first accident where all the probative evidence seems to have disappeared.

the "official" explanation is that the aircraft "vaporized" after its impact. let's understand this, AA77 didn't melt, it vaporized. aluminum vaporized. titanium vaporized. hastelloys vaporized. THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF COMMERCIAL AVIATION.

and you want to promote the notion that in light of that extraordinary, unique high-temperature event that there was any human debris suitable for a DNA analysis.

i shall tell you this, if titanium was vaporized, if aluminum was vaporized, as the USG claims, then there were no human remains available for DNA analysis. quod erat demonstrandum - the "official" statements that any passengers were identified by DNA analysis are fraudulent.

there are many anomalies concerning AA77 on that day[just as there are concerning all the other flights and their purported "collisions with terrain" that day].

one that goes undiscussed is how it was that the SAM batteries ringing DC[and those located in the vicinity of camp david - which this aircraft purportedly overflew] failed to launch.

another interesting aspect of this aircraft is how no saudis appeared on the "official" flight manifest[all the aircraft that day have a similar discrepancy]. by the way, flight manifests are a gold standard for the identification of passengers. commercial airliners do not pull away from a gate, let alone launch, unless the physical count corresponds with the manifest print-out.

another interesting aspect of this flight is how it is the only flight where "arabs" were identified as being "hijackers". and how were they identified? by barbara olson in a telecon to her fascist husband ted. the initial story was that she identified the"hijackers" in a cell phone call to ted. as it became known that cell phone conversations could not have occurred from an aircraft in linear flight exceeding 200kph, ted's story changed to she communicated via an "airphone". then ted changed this story several more times. but the fact of the matter is, cell phones could not have been made. and AA77 was not equipped with airphones.

suffice it to say, every bit of the "offficial" story concerning the events of that day is fraudulent.

oh, i know, you think that such a vast conspiracy could not be kept secret. well, let us think about conspiracies for a moment...

my favorite is the identity of DEEP THROAT. let us think about how many knew that individual's identity and kept the secret. for over 30 years. here is the short list of the keepers of the secret: woodstein, ben and tony and sally bradlee, kate, donny and his wife, bo and his wife, andy beyer, lally and her significant others, etc. i figure that at least 20 knew of the identity of DT. and all kept their silence for decades. in fact, they are all still laughing. felt wasn't DT. and they all know it. and have continued to keep silent.

i have had a theory for many years that commercial aircraft catastrophes are assassination events: where many are killed so as to camouflage the murder of one or two[a few].

i was at turnberry in the days prior to the demise of PA103. it was out of season. what was astonishing was that the hotel was filled with US FBI. if you will recall the Ayrshire debris site, you might remember that the site was virtually immediately secured by THESE SAME US FBI PERSONNEL....who were at the site before the scottish constabulary. prior knowledge of where and when? i sure think so. Gaddafi had nothing to do with that catastrophe.

that event caused me to consider another catastrophe: the arrow air charter at gander , nf. study on how that catastrophe was handled and i think you would have to conclude that so many aspects of the investigation stink that it had to be a USG SHOOT DOWN...killing 3 and hiding it in the deaths of scores.

these two accidents revitalized my old interest in the analysis of aircraft accidents.

eventually, i learned enough to inform me that many were catastrophes intended to hide the murder of a few "enemies" of the state. TWA800, AA587, SR111, EA990, AS261 to name but a few. for me, the salient aspects of all these catastrophes was how so much of the accidents was "hidden"[UNINVESTIGATED].

the most interesting "hit" was the blowing up of jfk, jr. every aspect of the press[from the NYT to Flying] covered up his real route of flight. every aspect of the press covered up his flying expertise.

i conclude this way...you think you know things. and perhaps you do know some things. but when it involves aircraft "accidents", you don't know jack sh*t.

but, i could be wrong.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Devilsadvocate
post Dec 16 2007, 09:04 AM
Post #26





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,370
Joined: 3-February 07
From: Ireland
Member No.: 551



QUOTE (mo fiya @ Dec 15 2007, 10:47 PM)
STILL though...why attempt to secretly steal your own nukes...?

It's a theoretical possibility.
That doesn't make it a reality- which must be remembered at all times.
Unfortunately it would be incredibly foolhardy to ignore a possibility like that.

A false flag-incident involving nuclear weapons would make sense insofar as Bush has introduced a directive some time ago in respect of what they call "continuation".
It's meant to be implemented in case of either a natural disaster, or an attack on the US (including a major terror-attack), resulting in (and that's the key-word, I believe)

"...A high number of civilian casualties".

That directive would, effectively, result in the opportunity to introduce martial law and the replacement of the existing democratic structures with a dictatorial system.
Were that to happen, the questions which you mentioned could no longer be asked by anyone- unless the questioner had suicidal tendencies.

As to why it would make sense to steal one of their own nukes- you answered that yourself, when you mentioned the security-measures in place these days.
If they wanted to pull off a false flag involving nuclear material, it would be near impossible to get stuff like that past those security-measures, I would imagine (although they are of course the ones controlling those security-measures).
But I agree- it's not something which presently has a very high probability;
they would find it difficult to present anyone as a potential scapegoat right now.
If there is a nuke missing, they would keep that as a very last resort- short of being dragged out of their offices by the FBI, I would think; but the longer they would hang on to the damn thing, the greater the possibility of someone in the appropriate position within the military getting on their trail.
One of the problems with any of that stuff is that, even if one was missing and has long since been recovered, no one would be likely to hang up a big neon-sign saying "...you can feel safe now- we've got it back".
In fact- that this whole story has surfaced at all is almost a small miracle, I think.
And certainly highly, highly unusual.

This post has been edited by Devilsadvocate: Dec 16 2007, 09:05 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Dec 16 2007, 11:56 AM
Post #27





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,920
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Albert

Thanks for the info about the FBI presence in Scotland prior to the PanAm 103 incident. Very interesting. There was a story somewhere in about the last year which indicated there was significant perjury by some European cop at the trial.

And I agree completely that a thorough study of the passenger list for TWA 800 might reveal why it was taken out.

Can't buy into the RFK Jr. thing though. At least not at this point in time.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tit2
post Jan 7 2008, 04:28 PM
Post #28





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 123
Joined: 27-April 07
Member No.: 999



http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/?q=node/92

9-11 Cover-Up, Treason and The Bomb
Mon, 01/07/2008 - 15:47 — dlindorff

If a new article just published Saturday in the Times of London

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle3137695.ece

based upon information provided by US government whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, a 37-year-old former Turkish language translator for the FBI, is correct, we have not only solid evidence of prior knowledge of 9-11 by high up US government officials, but evidence of treasonous activity by many of those same officials involving efforts to provide US nuclear secrets to America’s enemies, even including Al Qaeda.

The story also casts a chilling light on the so-called “accidental” flight of six nuclear-armed cruise missiles aboard an errant B-52 that flew last Aug. 30 from Minot AFB in North Dakota to Barksdale AFB in Shreveport, Louisiana.

The Sunday Times reports that Edmonds, whose whistleblowing efforts have been studiously ignored by what passes for the news media in American news media, approached the Rupert Murdoch-owned British paper a month ago after reading a report there that an Al-Qaeda leader had been training some of the 9-11 hijackers at a training camp in Turkey, a US NATO alley, under the noses of the Turkish military. (Given the militantly secular traditions of the Turkish military, they had to have looked into an Islamic terror training camp within their borders, at least to establish that it was not targeting Turkish interests.)

Edmonds, who was recruited by the FBI after 9-11 because of her Turkish and Farsi language skills, has long been claiming that in her FBI job of covertly monitoring conversations between Turkish, Israeli, Persian and other foreign agents and US contacts, including a backlog of untranslated tapes dating back to 1997, she had heard evidence of “money laundering, drug imports and attempts to acquire nuclear and conventional weapons technology.” But the Turkish training for 9-11 rang more alarm bells and made her decide that talking behind closed doors to Congress or the FBI was not enough. She had to go public.

Edmonds claims in the Times that even as she was providing evidence of moles within the US State Department, the Pentagon, and the nuclear weapons establishment, who were providing nuclear secrets for cash, through Turkey, to Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, agencies within the Bush administration were actively working to block investigation and to shield those who were committing the acts of treason.

Pakistan’s ISI is known to have had, and to still maintain close contacts with Al-Qaeda. Indeed, the Times notes that Pakistan’s nuclear god-father, General Mahmoud Ahmad, was accused of sanctioning a $100,000 wire payment to Mohammed Atta, one of the 9/11 hijackers, immediately before the attacks.

Edmonds claims in the Times article, that following the 9-11 attacks, FBI investigators took a number of Turkish and Pakistani operatives into custody for questioning about foreknowledge of the attacks, but that a high-ranking US State Department official repeatedly acted to spirit them out of the country.

Edmonds was fired from her FBI translating job in 2002 after she accused a colleague of having illicit contact with Turkish officials. She has claimed that she was fired for being outspoken, and in 2005 her position was reportedly vindicated by the Office of Inspector General of the FBI, which concluded that she had been sacked for making valid complaints.

One of those whom Edmonds claims in the Times report was being investigated in connection with the nuclear information transfers was Pentagon analyst Lawrence Franklin. Franklin was convicted and jailed in 2006 for passing US defense information to American Israel Public Affairs Committee lobbyists and sharing classified information with an Israeli diplomat. Franklin, in 2001, was part of the Pentagon Office of Special Plans, a kind of shadow intelligence unit set up by the Bush administration inside the Pentagon whose job it was to gin up “evidence” to justify a war against Iraq. In that capacity, he (along with several other OSP members and arch neocon schemer Michael Ledeen) was also identified by Italian investigative journalists working for the newspaper La Repubblica, as having been at a crucial meeting in December 2001 in Rome with the Italian defense and intelligence service ministers. La Repubblica reports that at that meeting a plan was hatched to fob off forged Niger embassy documents as evidence that Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium ore from Niger.

If Edmonds’ story is correct, and Al-Qaeda, with the aid of Turkish government agents and Pakistani intelligence, and with the help of US government officials, has been attempting to obtain nuclear materials and nuclear information from the U.S., it casts an even darker shadow over the mysterious and still unexplained incident last August 30, when a B-52 Stratofortress, based at the Minot strategic air base in Minot, ND, against all rules and regulations of 40 years’ standing, loaded and flew off with six unrecorded and unaccounted for nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

That incident only came to public attention because three as yet unidentified Air Force whistleblowers contacted a reporter at the Military Times newspaper, which ran a series of stories about it, some of which were picked up by other US news organizations.

An Air Force investigation into that incident, ordered by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, claimed improbably that the whole thing had been an “accident,” but many veterans of the US Air Force and Navy with experience in handling nuclear weapons, as well as experts in arms control, say that such an explanation is impossible, and argue that there had to have been a chain of orders from above the level of the base commander for such a flight to have occurred.

Incredibly, almost five months after that bizarre incident (which included A< href="http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/?q=node/57">several as yet unexplained deaths of B-52 pilots and base personnel occurring in the weeks shortly before and after the flight), in which six 150-kiloton warheads went missing for 36 hours, there has been no Congressional investigation and no FBI investigation into what happened.

Yet in view of Edmonds’ story to the London Times, alleging that there has been an ongoing, active effort for some years by both Al Qaeda and by agents of two US allies, Turkey and Pakistan, to get US nuclear weapons secrets and even weapons, and that there are treasonous moles at work within the American government and nuclear bureaucracy aiding and abetting those efforts, surely at a minimum, a major public inquiry is called for.

Meanwhile, there is enough in just this one London Times story to keep an army of investigative reporters busy for years. So why, one has to ask, is this story appearing in a highly respected British newspaper, but not anywhere in the corporate US media?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jan 7 2008, 06:12 PM
Post #29





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,920
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Because the US media serves the government as a propaganda tool?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
chek
post Jan 8 2008, 07:27 AM
Post #30





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 187
Joined: 24-October 06
Member No.: 157



I'd add that The (London) Times/ Sunday Times used to be considered quality newspapers of record up until Murdoch acquired them, which was his reason for doing so after cornering the UK tabloid market with his tits'n'sport flagship The Sun. Since then it's generally reckoned both papers journalistic standards have sharply declined.

If the story is being carried by his News Corporation on this side of the Atlantic, it can't be long till one of his US operations carries it, though I'd guess his credibility over there is as low as it is here. Which begs the question what impact will it have after being purveyed by one of the chief architects of the dumbing-down movement?

I'm not big on US media personalities, but as Walter Cronkite's no longer available perhaps some sort of interview with someone like Keith Olberman, either in print or better yet on air would be the ideal vehicle for a story of this importance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Carl Bank
post Mar 31 2008, 10:44 AM
Post #31





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,114
Joined: 21-October 06
From: Berlin
Member No.: 121



They will count their nukes now:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....;#entry10736391
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Jun 12 2008, 04:16 AM
Post #32



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Related info is at:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9194

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=10648

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=10472

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9800

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9647

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9503

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....rksdale+nuclear

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9093

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9063

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9024

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9017

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=8960

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=8857

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=8850
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trapster
post Apr 10 2009, 03:31 AM
Post #33





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 223
Joined: 25-February 09
Member No.: 4,177



Wow!

I read about this issue years ago when it first came out. Look at the timing, just days after the 'nukes go missing' incident, the Israeli air force launches a major strike into Syria. The reported purpose was to take out a Syrian nuke weapons facility.

The theory is that Cheney had authorized a nuke strike against Iran using the stolen nukes. Once the attack too place, that's the end of it, as in 'it's done and you can't do anything to change it so shut up about it and go along.' Same play as was used on 9/11.

But, my question is:

Is there still at least ONE missing nuke out there??
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ricochet
post Apr 10 2009, 05:00 AM
Post #34





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 746
Joined: 25-April 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,225



yes
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Trapster
post Apr 11 2009, 01:03 AM
Post #35





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 223
Joined: 25-February 09
Member No.: 4,177



QUOTE (Ricochet @ Apr 10 2009, 05:00 AM) *
yes


NUTS!

Please elaborate. What do you say 'yes'.

Webster Tarpley and others (Bowman?) believe that during the events taking place on 9/11, nuclear launch codes were compromised.

In other words, those who pulled of the attacks were also threatening to go to full scale Armageddon if their wishes of Empire were not followed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th September 2014 - 09:57 AM