Simple Error My Ass-Why Were Nukes Taken To JUMP-OFF Base For Middle East Ops?-Larry Johnson

[kpete]

Simple Error My Ass
By Larry Johnson on Sep 24, 2007 in Current Affairs

...............................

One main question remains unanswered?
Why are such weapons being taken to Barksdale, Louisiana, which is the jump off base for Middle East ops? Just asking.

UPDATE:
(Going thru my mailbox came across the following from a friend and former B-52 pilot. The pilot’s views inform my observations)

................

Obviously there are two possibilities:

1. this was an error and the events that occurred were a tragic mistake of far reaching proportions; and

2. the nuclear weapons were moved on purpose.

.............................

The destination of the aircraft was Barksdale AFB, LA from which a number of the strikes on the Middle East have initiated. Speculation would lead us to believe the weapons were being stockpiled at this facility for a possible strike somewhere in the world. Additional speculation would also lead us to believe the strike was to occur in the very near future. Why else the need to forego the normal overland transportation procedures for nuclear weapons and risk flying them to their destination in violation of a treaty with the Russians. Also how is it the press was aware of this movement? After all who would be suspicious of a B-52 taking off from a B-52 base and a B-52 landing at a B-52 base. This event goes on many times each day for practice missions and training. Some one had to have leaked the information to the press that the U.S. was moving nuclear weapons by air in a treaty violation.

This leads us to two possible scenarios.

1. Whoever leaked the information would have been someone in a position of authority knowing what was going on and concerned the U.S. was actually attempting to use nuclear weapons somewhere in the world and wanting to stop it by exposing it. This someone would have had to have a security clearance of some kind and violated the trust under which it was issued thus being exposed to severe penalties and jail time for potential treason etc. Facing such severe penalties someone would have to be totally committed to his/her own conscience/moral beliefs. This preemptive exposure would put the U.S. on a difficult footing and loss of the surprise factor, thus potentially curtailing the mission.

2. The other possibility would be the information on the flight was leaked on purpose in an attempt to influence a foreign government, group or situation to move in a particular direction. That the U.S. was “Saber rattling” and the stakes were high enough to risk antagonizing the Russians to accomplish it. (With the possibility the Russians were supporting the action and willing to overlook the violation as exemplified by their lack of response in the entire situation.)

In either case we have only seen some minor actions taking by the Department of Defense in an attempt to say; well, by accident we left a few nuc’s laying around on some missiles we were going to destroy and they accidentally got loaded onto a plane that by some coincidence happened to be going to a base other than the one it was assigned to (we rarely fly B-52’s assigned at one station to another station). B-52’s usually take off from their home base, fly their mission anywhere in the world by aerial refueling and then return to the base from which they departed. Often these flights take over 20 to 30 hours. If this was a mistake what is happening to the general officers in the chain of command who would have had to issue lawful orders for the movement of those weapons and all those in the custodial chain who would have had to sign for each weapon as they gained possession of them? It just doesn’t add up. Especially when there is a line item in the budget before Congress to upgrade the missiles the Air Force says they were about to destroy. There appears to be too many loose ends still dangling. In addition to all of this did anyone notice how quickly this entire situation quieted down. Usually the press would play on such a world shaking event for months. They do for other things like the first birthday of Anna Nicole’s daughter. We’ve heard about that for weeks on end. But, for a world event with treaty violation implications, no protests from the other treaty signers or other major world players, we get about three days of news attention and it goes away. It seems the exposure has played its roles and has gone away with hopes all is forgotten.

In closing, again we are not privileged in knowing all of the facts and undercover goings on in this matter to be fully aware of what the real intent of this action, but it appears to be more than what the surface information appears.

more at:
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2007/09/24/simple-error-my-ass/#more-872

[acmavm]

1. If it weren't so damn serious I would have laughed out loud when I read

the 'mistake' story. Everyone takes the public for fools.

Maybe we are. bush**/cheney are still in the White House.

[lateo]

2. Maybe it was a headfake

Sort of like Reagan's "we begin bombing in 5 minutes" quip. Only this one was much much more dire.

[warrior1]

3. This part is interesting.

"Some one had to have leaked the information to the press that the U.S. was moving nuclear weapons by air in a treaty violation."

[formercia]

4. A feint

An ex Navy SEAL co-worker of mine told me that one tactic to distract an enemy is to keep tripping the alarms until they're ignored. When the 'enemy' quits responding to the false alarms is when to strike.

[Junkdrawer]

5. K&R

[Zywiec]

6. Why are such weapons being taken to Barksdale, Louisiana?

"Last fall, after 17 years in the U.S. arsenal, the Air Force's more than 400 AGM-129s were ordered into retirement by then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Minot was told to begin shipping out the unarmed missiles in small groups to Barksdale Air Force Base near Shreveport, La., for STORAGE. By Aug. 29, its crews HAD ALREADY SENT more than 200 missiles to Barksdale and knew the drill by heart."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20926465/page/2/

Of course this is from that neocon paper, the Washington Post, so you you have to take the information that this has already occurred with 200 of the same type missile previously with a grain of salt. Certainly "No Quarter" has a far more respectable reputation than the Post.

[Junkdrawer]

9. I take it you disagree with the B52 pilot....

The United States has had nuclear weapons for over sixty years. Through out this time the tracking, storage and movement of these weapons has been performed without any type of security problem. The chain of custody procedures has been refined to the nith degree to insure that there will never be a mistake. The access to, movement of, and custody of these weapons is so tightly controlled, each serial numbered weapon has to be signed for when possession of it changes (from one person to another), then only after receiving a lawful order to do so. In order to load a nuclear weapon onto an aircraft the Weapon’s Depot Commander must receive a lawful order from above. The order is sent down (in writing) to one of the bomb shelter custodians and the weapon is signed out to a Loader. The Loader, loads the weapon onto an aircraft and will keep the weapon/aircraft under surveillance with the aircraft under armed guard by the Security Police in an isolated protected area until the Aircraft Commander performs his pre-flight inspection on the aircraft and signs a receipt for each of the weapons by serial number. Once delivered at their destination the Aircraft Commander would receive a receipt for the weapons by serial number from the receiving facility.

With all of the necessary orders and paperwork required just to move a nuclear weapon from one room in a storage facility to another, it can be stated with some sort of certainty that this was not a casual mistake as the Department of Defense has eluted to.

....

[Zywiec]

10. No mistake with nuclear weapons is casual. That's obvious to anyone.

But to say that this could never happen, or in 60 years there has never been any type of security problem with nuclear weapons is a joke. The more I read about the conspiracy theories here, the more I wonder if this is a fair representation of what mainstream Democrats think, or just the fringe.

I worked in a nuclear weapons unit for almost four years. It was a very small detachment of about 40 people. 90% of the Soldiers were probably under 25 years old. I saw all kinds of craziness during that time. A lot of drugs and alcohol. Most 24 hour shifts were spent sleeping off the hangover from the night before.

On one occasion, a drunk Soldier returning from a night of partying grabbed an M-16 from the security office and took our SDO (staff duty officer) hostage. From there they went "downrange" to where the weapons were stored. He finally was talked into surrendering.

I guess I should probably just ignore all the threads that have anything to do with this or the military in general.

[Junkdrawer]

12. No offense, but if I had to choose between the stories of an anonymous poster...

and Larry Johnson, I'll pick Larry.

I guess that makes me a fringe lefty conspiracy nut... :eyes:

[Zywiec]

14. How about between Larry Johnson and the Washington Post?

Larry Johnson didn't even know why the weapons were being moved to Barksdale, even though at least 200 of the same weapon platform had been moved there for storage before this incident.

[Junkdrawer]

15. Walter Pincus and the Washington Post are rather infamous for carrying the water...

of the pre-Church Committee CIA...

In 1977, Rolling Stone alleged that one of the most important journalists under the control of Operation Mockingbird was Joseph Alsop, whose articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists alleged by Rolling Stone Magazine to have been willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), Charles Douglas Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), William C. Baggs (The Miami News), Herb Gold (The Miami News) and Charles Bartlett (Chattanooga Times). According to Nina Burleigh (A Very Private Woman), these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner. The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.

....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

[Zywiec]

16. I guess I'll have to agree with your statement

that you are just a fringe lefty conspiracy nut. I hope it is just that, a fringe of DU.

Ciao

[Junkdrawer]

17. Ciao...and say hello to Judith Miller for me...The Aspens are turning again...

:hi:

[mod mom]

23. RUDE! and uncalled for.

[mod mom]

22. Thank you.

[HamdenRice]

20. Your own source does not support your position

The article you cite is about "unarmed missiles." The mistaken movement concerned nuclear warheads.

[MilesColtrane]

34. That WAS the mistake.

The missiles should not have had warheads in them.

How, or why is the question.

[havocmom]

30. I'll go with Larry Johnson over the Washington Post

or just about ANY other American newspaper.

Larry is hardly a left-wing, tin foil-wearing nut. He doesn't have a history of carrying water for any particular agenda. He also is critical and not prone to go flying off the handle.

[Ganja Ninja]

19. Nobody mistakes nuclear weapons for conventional weapons.

It doesn't happen because it can't happen. The two types of weapons aren't even stored together. There is no way you could get the two mixed up because you would never get the opportunity to mix them up. If nukes were taken out of their secure storage and put on that plane it was because they intended to do just that.

[TheWraith]

24. Yes, they are stored together.

They're not supposed to be, or at least they weren't before, but they are now. Read the WaPo report. Amongst other things, it notes that the same bunker on the base was used to store both the nuclear-loaded and non-loaded ACMs. This is because the decommissioning process has gotten behind schedule (probably due to neccessary funds being used in Iraq).

[Junkdrawer]

28. Well, that's the crux of the matter...Is the Wash Post story true or not....

I think Larry Johnson ( and his knowledgeable friends) are calling 'Bullshit' on the Pincus story.

[FogerRox]

46. Actually we are in the midst of converting these missles

AGM-86Bs (ALCMs), the warhead is removed , and the missile is kept for conventional use. The AGM-86C Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM) was developed to increase the effectiveness of B-52H bombers, dilute an enemy's forces, and complicate the defe.nse of enemy territory. CALCM is the only air-launched, conventionally armed, long-range standoff missile deployed in the U.S. Air Force inventory. It is produced by modifying surplus nuclear-armed AGM-86Bs (ALCMs).

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-86c.htm




AGM~86, which has been replaced by the....


AGM-129

[PoiBoy]

7. So... where are these nukes now?

still in Barksdale? or have they been returned to Minot? ....lots of noise from this administration, but are these nukes still stored at this Middle East staging base?

:shrug:

[FormerRepub]

8. Nuke movements

Spook 86, a retired member of the U.S. Intelligence community, writes in his blog that these conspiracy theories have missed the mark and gives some fairly detailed reasons why this particular incident was indeed a stupid and embarrassing mistake. The really frightening thing here is that, even if this theory were completely true, it doesn't appear that ANYONE could do anything to foil the Bush Administrations plans. The Bush Presidency has really demonstrated to me how important it is that we elect someone who is not a part of the neoconservative-ridden Republican Party.

[RC]

11. Or elect any DINO's

That is the real problem - Too many stealth DINO's

[TheWraith]

25. Amen. What people forget is that Bush has pretty much absolute power over the military.

If he wanted nuclear weapons moved, or even used, it wouldn't have to be disguised as an "accident" or "mistake."

[electron_blue]

13. I think the leak was high up in the Bush admin. in order to scare Iran (and everyone else)

I think this is more likely than a leak from a lower-ranking officer in the AF or anyone else much lower down in the military. In other words, I think the leak was made *not* to stop this foolishness, but just to make it known to everyone else (esp Iran) that Bush almost did it. Bush can scare Iran more easily by being "accidentally" discovered to be moving nukes than with empty threats and innuendo. It's a pretty effective tactic to let the enemy see something that makes them think you were about to blast them. Even if you weren't.

So for all these reasons, I think Bush, or Cheney, gave the orders to move the nukes and then arranged for the leak.

[mod mom]

18. If the leak was intended from the administration, the lackey corporate media would be carrying it.

the fact that reliable sources Larry Johnson, TPM, and possibly reliable Air Force Times (Gannett owned), while the major lackeys CNN, networks, WaPo NYT etc delayed any mention until the military Industrial Complex could develop their version, makes me think it was a leak not meant to come out.

[electron_blue]

26. They did carry it. It was in the news for at least a day or two and then sunk.

I saw it on NPR, CNN, ABCNEWs as well as some local stations. It doesn't matter that it sunk. Anyone who heard it remembered it. That's all you needed.

[mod mom]

32. Oops., I knew NPR covered it but hadn't heard of other coverage outside of local Minot

coverage. I was surprised thaat Keith Olbermann didn't cover it.

[electron_blue]

33. no problem. I was particularly interested in this story bcs of my dad's history

of being a missile commander at Minot AFB and followed it intently for a week.

[mod mom]

35. Will you share his conclusions?

[electron_blue]

36. I asked him when it first happened..

and he said mistakes like that didn't happen back in his day. He went on about how elaborate the process was for loading them on planes, but didn't make any judgments in the emails we exchanged. Then oddly enough he went away to a reunion of AF missiliers the following week. I say that is odd bcs he has been out of the AF for over 30 yrs now and this is the first ever reunion he's been to. I haven't had a chance to talk to him since the meeting, but I'm dying to find out what he *really* thinks.

[mod mom]

42. Please report back. Many here also following this story will be interested. thanks.

[Zywiec]

45. How elaborate was the process for loading inert warheads?

Since that's what the loaders mistakenly thought they were putting on the plane, that's the process they would have followed. Not some elaborate process for live nuclear warheads.

[Thothmes]

47. Process

I do not claim to know how the Air Force handles its special weapons. In the Navy you handle dummies and training shapes of nuclear weapons in exactly the same manner that you would handle the real weapon. If you damage a nuclear training shape or dummy weapon you must follow exactly the same procedures in reporting the accident that you would if it were the real weapon

[TheWraith]

21. I'm surprised that Larry Johnson is this off.

Normally I like him, but in my opinion he's just playing to the conspiraloons at the moment.

"The destination of the aircraft was Barksdale AFB, LA from which a number of the strikes on the Middle East have initiated."

It's also one of only two bases in the US where B-52s are kept, which is WHY it's sometimes used for ops targeting the ME. It's also far from the ONLY base that's used that way.

"Speculation would lead us to believe the weapons were being stockpiled at this facility for a possible strike somewhere in the world. Additional speculation would also lead us to believe the strike was to occur in the very near future."

Yet further speculation would lead us to conclude that the Sun is a giant, flaming lemon. Speculation without evidence is meaningless.

"Why else the need to forego the normal overland transportation procedures for nuclear weapons and risk flying them to their destination in violation of a treaty with the Russians."

This is a mistake. Nukes are, indeed, transported by air as normal proceedure. It does not violate any treaties.

"an attempt to say; well, by accident we left a few nuc’s laying around on some missiles we were going to destroy and they accidentally got loaded onto a plane"

It's been noted that the still-loaded missiles were stocked in the same bunker as the de-loaded missiles, practically next to each other. It seems to me that that's just waiting for a mistake exactly like this.

"It just doesn’t add up. Especially when there is a line item in the budget before Congress to upgrade the missiles the Air Force says they were about to destroy."

Bogus assertion. We have about 450 of such missiles. We're updating 40-odd and decommissioning the rest.

"Usually the press would play on such a world shaking event for months."

It's hardly a world-shaking event, except to the people whose responsibility is nuclear weapons security.

[Crabby Appleton]

40. Yep, B-52s are based at the following bases.

so they are either going to or coming from these bases.

2nd Bomb Wing - Barksdale AFB, Louisiana
(11th BS,20th BS,96th BS)
917th Wing (AFRES) - Barksdale AFB, Louisiana
(93d BS)

5th Bomb Wing - Minot AFB, North Dakota
(23d BS)

Air Force Flight Test Center - Edwards AFB, California (one aircraft)

20th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron, Anderson Air Force Base, Guam

[seemslikeadream]

41. Yea that's right Larry Johnson just playing to the conspiraloons

:wtf:

[Blackhatjack]

27. There is a factual disconnect in the official story .... what it means is anyone's guess.

Nukes are NEVER moved from one location to another BY MISTAKE.

THAT IS A FACT. There are too many individuals included in the procedures that must be followed for that to happen by mistake. To argue otherwise is foolish.

Why the nukes were flown is Barksdale is unexplainable given the information we have today.

The poster in this OP is absolutely correct that someone in the chain of command violated their security clearance by disclosing this information to the press. That disclosure of classified information was intentional.

You can list the possible explanations for the transport of nukes to Barksdale, but the truth is we do not know.

But we do know the facts pointed out so far, and there has not been a reasonable explanation given to date from those who do know exactly what happened and why.

[kineneb]

43. My thought as well

When I mentioned the story to Hubby, he gave me one of those "what the f***?" looks and said it sounded odd to him. During Vietnam he worked for the Navy repairing submarines, so he knows a little bit about security. He also said that nuke warheads don't get moved around "by mistake".

The official line is bogus.
No conspiracy theories here; I just don't believe them.

[havocmom]

29. Guess if Larry Johnson keeps talking about this, I can take off my tin foil bonnet

[Kelly Rupert]

31. Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! n/t

[Supersedeas]

37. apparently Walter Pincus has no further questions.

[Junkdrawer]

38. .

[klyon]

39. yes all good points and where are these weapons today?

I would like answers also.

[mloutre]

44. Of course, our having nukes in the air when Israel is stealth-attacking Syrian nuke facilities...

...can't possibly have anything to do with it. Must be just another one of those random coincidences.