<Lord Oxburgh Warns Oil Demand To Outstrip Supply The Oil Drum Talking Energy in Corcaigh (or "Cork" as you probably know it)>

247 comments on Greenspan Claims Iraq War Was Really for Oil

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

marcosdumay on September 16, 2007 - 1:59pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

1) Northen Rock bank, at UK had problems (yesterday's top news here).

2) The current top news.

3) The EU Central Bank have just trow a few bilion euros to save Northen Rock (again, you can find that at yesterday's DrumBeat).

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
mbkennel on September 16, 2007 - 4:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

One more:

B-52's "accidentally" loaded with nuclear weapons inserted in their delivery system.

Against signed US treaties; airborne alert of nuclear weapons was canceled in 1968.

In other words, pilots in combat aircraft have not carried live nuclear weapons for decades. Merely putting them on a B-52 as opposed to a secured cargo container would be an extraordinary event, and furthermore the pilots of the bomber would have been instantly alerted by their display as to the status and kind of every munition.

People who have experience dealing with USAF procedures previously have written on blogs and forums at their utter incredulity at the official "accidental" explanation; that there is no possible way this was an accident, and that the safety and procedural checks are immense and stupendously redundant, requring multiple authorizations and serial number checks

And yes, apparently six warheads left. Five were found.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Will on September 16, 2007 - 4:26pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Given all of the supposed safeguards (and I believe they are numerous), and given the incident was entirely within established military operations...

How did this event become public? (who leaked it)

Or perhaps:

Why did this event become public? (why the leak)

I'm not looking for a conspiracy rant, but some educated opinions would be appreciated.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
new account on September 16, 2007 - 6:24pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top



According to the initial news report the source was one or more military officers:

Commander disciplined for nuclear mistake

By Michael Hoffman - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Sep 7, 2007 19:02:15 EDT

The Air Force continued handing out disciplinary actions in response to the six nuclear warheads mistakenly flown on a B-52 Stratofortress bomber from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30. The squadron commander in charge of Minot’s munitions crews was relieved of all duties pending the investigation.

It was originally reported that five nuclear warheads were transported, but officers who tipped Military Times to the incident who have asked to remain anonymous since they are not authorized to discuss the incident, have since updated that number to six.


http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2007/09/airforce_nuclear_warhead_070905/



Other comments on the web suggest that they reported it because of thier concern over: 1) unauthorized movement of nuclear weapons; 2) concern with personnel outside the regular chain of command seeking to bypass normal checks on weapon movements for purposes unknown.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
dissident on September 16, 2007 - 7:51pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Incredible. This is the "Office of Special Plans" racket all over again. Americans need to wake up that the current administration is composed of dangerous kooks.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

247 comments on Greenspan Claims Iraq War Was Really for Oil

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version