Seven Terror Tech Trends

Seven Terror Tech Trends

Now that he’s been here a while (all the way back to AUSA) and seems likely to stay for the next five or 10 years, I thought today would be a good time to introduce you to the newest addition to the DoD Buzz team. John Reed, who came to us from my old haunts at Defense News, is now associate editor of DoD Buzz and editor of our sister website, Defense Tech. John knows the Air Force world well, having covered it at Defense News. While I attended Geoint 2010 last week, John covered the Army’s Unified Quest 2011 Alternative Futures Seminar. One presenter, who cannot be named, offered seven trends in terrorist technology that his company has spotted.

Please welcome John and treat him with at least as much respect as you treat me. Oh dear.…

The first technology approach would be the use by terrorist groups of new forms of airborne attack. Except this time they would use model aircraft as “a homemade cruise missile” or even building a model sailplane out of plastic or composites with a pound or two of explosives and something to serve as shrapnel,” the presenter said. Such a craft could evade radar and penetrate no fly zones to hit specified targets such as “the next presidential inauguration,” he said. “Let’s call this a homemade cruise missile,” he added.


2) Next, the growing potency of terrorist cyber ops. Counter-terror officials are already finding it increasingly difficult to penetrate terrorist communications channels with more sophisticated groups embedding coded messages in images keyed up for their recipients to decode, according to the presenter. “Only the amateurs are going to leave us some way of detecting them using the traditional electronic intercepts” in the near future, he said, adding that “cyber attacks may be the number one choice for future terrorists. Furthermore, “there’s absolutely no reason imagines that” terrorists wouldn’t try to take advantage of foreign-made microchips to hack U.S. networks, he noted.

3) Number three on the list was the potential for terrorists to mimic the effects of a nuclear bomb by building a dirty bomb with leftover radioactive medical waste or with material purchased from a rogue nation. Still, for all the fear they can stir, dirty bomb might not be that bad, according to the presenter. “I’m not sure it has the impact that the general news stories would have us believe,” said the presenter. “Granted, if you blow up a dirty bomb in Grand Central [Terminal] you mess up commuter traffic for a very long time.” (I’ve got to say, I never want to find out how bad the effects of a dirty bomb would be.) Another type of strike in this category would be an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb aimed at frying a region’s electronics. “It will not surprise me if we do see EMP attacks designed to slow Internet traffic to a crawl,” the presenter said. “A whole lot of the world’s Internet traffic goes through this area of Virginia, we figured one day that [a number of well positioned] EMP weapons would take out 40 percent of the world’s Internet capacity and it could take a year to repair.”

4) Home cookin’ terrorist chemists brewing DIY bio-chemical weapons. This one sounds real fun to deal with. In fact, the consulting firm the speaker works for actually predicts this as the “high-tech weapon most likely to be used in the near future,” according to a slide shown during his presentation. Still, this type of attack “doesn’t produce masses of debris [and] rubble sells on network television,” he said. Nonetheless, there are “biohackers” working around the world to “splice useful genes into bacteria.” While this many people working on advanced medical problems is overall a good thing, “it does mean that in ten years, at most, this technology is going to be in the hands of a large number of amateurs and unfortunately, some of them will not have good things in mind,” he said. He went on to warn that in several decades we could see genetically targeted pathogens aimed at hurting specific populations or even individual people.

5) “Mass-effect things that go bang.” Here we see terrorists’ bread-and-butter, blowing stuff up. We’re talking about fuel-air and dust-air bombs with 15 times the power of TNT. While it takes some serious engineering talent to develop these weapons, “I don’t see any reason why someone who wanted to couldn’t devise their own fuel-air bomb,” said the speaker.

6) Tiny terror tech. And we’re back to the theme of engineered bio-weapons. The presenter listed man-made bacteria designed to take out entire cities, “smart dust” capable of disbursing fuel from a fuel-air bomb to ensure maximum carnage and “malignant nanomaterials” designed to “eat building materials” and devour vehicle lubricants.

7) We feel your pain ray. Great, we might see terrorists use so-called, pain rays, to trap and incite panic in crowds or immobilize security forces during a Mumbai-style attack, the presenter said. “For the moment that’s just fantasy and I don’t see it going anywhere,” he added. Oh, ok.

Join the Conversation

A rather silly list. Far more can be achieved for far less. The military cant understand the difference between terrorism and strategic bombing and it cripples their ability to see both Terrorist motivations and the wide range of techniques they could use. Cyber terrorism in particular is a classic of mirror imaging.

One of the key things to understand about terrorist attacks against America is that it makes us feel important. An importance that is desperately needed as the economy crumbles and increasingly people face declining lifestyles. This motivation drives everything from the unrealistic but grandiose plans to attack us to the hysterical fear that people express that everyone is gunning for them.

When you cant compete globally it’s easier just to become the biggest victim.

The only 2 feasible ones on this list are number 1 & 2, why? Cause we know Iran has been messing around with both. However the first category is not so much going to be a remote controlled build-it-yourself airplane(too short a range for the radio control), but something like a Cessna strapped with 400kg’s of RDX with a pilot willing to plough his plane into any target deemed important enough (read: high value motorcades, press conferences etc etc).

malignant nanomaterials.……seriously? someone is going to design these in some crappy third world country in a little shack before some of the worlds greatest scientist invent it in a multi-million dollar state-of-the-art laboratory???

Putting stuff like this out there is how you rid yourself of any credibility whatsoever.

I have a different perspective. A 1.3 Megaton nuke popped 400 miles above Kansas would effectively take out every vehicle, electronic device and power grid in three countries. How easy would it be? Very. You can buy a delivery-system-in-a can — or, more correctly, a container. If it were stacked at the top level of a container ship, it could be launched remotely as the ship was pulling into San Francisco. Before NORAD knew it was real, it would have hit it’s altitude and gone off.

In 1975 an F-15 got to 98,000+ feet in just over three minutes. A missile would not be on a ballistic trajectory. It would be accelerating outbound until it reach altitude and detonated. Nothing could stop it.

“How easy would it be, Very.” Dr. Tom, please show me a commercial vendor that will sell a private party a “delivery-system-in-a-can” that would not trigger a host of export control and MTCR exemptions. Also, lets talk about fabricating or acquiring a 1.3 megaton warhead. Plus, as a terrorist group, why would I want to take out power grids when I can leave Washington DC or Manhattan and great big smoking crate. While the technology exists to execute the plan you posit, I would consider it a very unlikely MO to be chosen by a terrorist organization (or even a state) capable of its execution

@Qasim:

(1) http://​www​.telegraph​.co​.uk/​n​e​w​s​/​w​o​r​l​d​n​e​w​s​/​e​u​r​o​pe/

(2) Pakistan can make the warhead. So can Iran, although no one seems to be willing to admit it publicly. Neither of them have a delivery system from their countries, but from a container on a ship it’s a real threat. Russia is “missing” hundreds of it’s nukes from the USSR days and has delivery systems. We do not expect Russia or China to shoot a nuke at us directly at this moment in time. Tomorrow may tell a different story.

(3) Destroying CD or Manhattan would probably be considered a public service. If not, it would just make us mad. Why would you do that when you could destroy the infrastructure of three entire countries with ONE EMP blast and with no possibility of us rebuilding within a time frame of many years? Our submarine and hardened nuclear deterrent force would survive, but once we launch it we would be out of both weapons and delivery systems.

(4) Not only is it a VERY likely scenario, it is ~THE~ most plausible scenario to many intelligence agencies because it only takes one, it would cause no direct death or damage to property, but it would destroy everything containing a microchip. I am not trying to convince you, however. I am simply explaining a very likely scenario and one which we are working very hard to prevent.

Google for “EMP BLAST OVER KANSAS” just for licks and grins.

Oh, wait. Maybe we did this and maybe someone else did. Why would WE launch a missile in plain sight of LA and then deny it? http://​www​.huffingtonpost​.com/​2​0​1​0​/​1​1​/​0​9​/​m​i​s​s​ile–

I believe my point is made.

Seriously?
If someone else did that “launch” instead of the US, the US military would be scrambled all over the West Coast, not knowing if a next launch is going to be something really bad (proverbial Silkworm-in-a-shipping-container) or not.
And were they (US military) that serious, all the additional military activity couldn’t be so easily hidden or explained away without the media, and the nation, taking notice.

There was a time we looked to rational, scientific investigation to explain these phenomena.
Now we just have a web full of panicky fear-mongerers and political lickbags making up superstitious mumbo-jumbo about the political party they hate being the cause of it all.

Take this much seriously: since it just happened, it must be possible — therefore, it is a scenario which must be considered. While it was probably us, the possibility that it wasn’t still exists until it is disproved. I agree that it is HIGHLY unlikely since a foreign vessel couldn’t shoot that and reach the 200 mile defensive perimeter of the US without being interdicted. I checked all of the usual sources and no one admits to it — and I cannot find a radar track or any reports from other commercial aircraft.

I find no evidence that anyone actually tracked it electronically or visually except for the one video. It was not a shot toward our Pacific Missile Test Range, none of the Mauna Kea observatories saw it and it was a clear night over the Pacific. So, if NORAD doesn’t admit seeing it, we may never know.

None of that changes the validity of my original post. Further, I have not suggested that we seek anything outside the realm of scientific investigation for an explanation. I do not recall suggesting that any political party now includes missile launches in their Political Action Committee activities. I have no idea where that nonsense came from or why you are rambling about it.

The possibility of a major EMP blast high over the heartland is a very real threat and has been since 1957. Now, however, until radioactive debris can be collected from 400 miles up an analyzed — not necessarily an easy task in that circumstance — we won’t be able to make a convincing case against anyone — and if a well-financed group which claims no affiliation to any country claimed credit, we cannot simply nuke anyone who might have been involved.

The story being bandied about at the moment is that it is a contrail and the ‘missile effect’ is merely a ‘problem of perception’. But that near LA it could as easily be swamp gas.

Can you point to a rational scientific explanation which EXCLUDES a 1.3 Megaton nuclear detonation 400 miles above Kansas from every possible cause or are you merely arguing for the sake of superstitious mumbo-jumbo, none of which appears in this thread prior to your post?

Interesting article.

However, this does not meet my “commercially available” criteria.

Additionally, I don’t think mature discourse is possible with anyone who states that destroying Manhattan “would probably be considered a public service” or “just make us mad”

I’m done

By focusing on tech terror, we’re losing sights of the easy stuff terrorists can do, like poison the water supply. Plus I don’t see anyone talking about Mexico as a threat. With our “open door” policy, those breifcase-sized WMDs can just be walked across the border or placed in a shipping container that is not scanned before it crosses into the U.S. on one of those uncertified and raggedy Mexican big rigs.

Tom is obviously a nutter — the airforce announced the test the week before.

Your ‘commercially available’ criteria probably does not include a lot of things which are commercially available with the simple expedient of an end-user certificate and is thus meaningless to anyone but yourself. Apparently you are a neophyte in the international arms marketplace…and the blogosphere.

I don’t actually dislike Manhattan — I was referring more to DC, and only figuratively — but separating them would have ruined the comedic bent of the post. If your lack of any semblance of a sense of humor precludes you from understanding sarcasm, you may take your pencil and go home. When you become an Emeritus Professor.…and stupidity is not a recognized scientific discipline (although they give liberal arts degrees for almost anything), feel free to speak with me again.
<snicker>

And we might read about that where, please?

To the poster “Dr. Tom”

You wrote: “Oh, wait. Maybe we did this and maybe someone else did. Why would WE launch a missile in plain sight of LA and then deny it?
http://​www​.huffingtonpost​.com/​2​0​1​0​/​1​1​/​0​9​/​m​i​s​s​ile–

The Skynet Funding Bill was passed
The system went on-line November 9th, 2010
Human decisions are removed from strategic defense
Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate
It became self-aware at 2:14 a.m
Eastern time, November 10th
In a panic, they try to pull the plug

Skynet fights back

Part 1 / 2

That mysterious missile launch happened OUTSIDE the U.S.A.‘s 12 nautical miles wide zone of territorial waters, and outside the subsequent 12 miles wide contiguous zone, too,
http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​F​i​l​e​:​Z​o​n​m​a​r​-​e​n​.​svg

so, purely in terms of international and maritime Law it was PERFECTLY LEGAL . Whoever it was, he could even have fired salvoes of S.L.B.M.s all day long from that position!

Still, the fact that all the U.S.A.‘s glorious military hardware together (“superior” “sensors” and “electronics” based on land, sea, air and Space) STILL can’t even say if that missile was fired from a SHIP OR FROM A SUBMARINE right in front of an U.S. American BEACH , or what kind of missile it was (judging by its flight characteristics recorded by all those long-range early warning radars RIGHT IN FRONT OF IT ) is a SPECTACULAR SLAP IN THE FACE of the entire U.S. Armed Forces and of the entire U.S. American military-industrial complex!!!

(Continued)

Part 2 / 2

And this time Hyper-Power Nr. 1 isn’t even TRYING TO FIND some no-tech Talibans under a rock in distant mountains, this time it couldn’t even SEE missiles and their launchers right in front of the U.S.A.‘s own coast, much closer even than those SS-4 “Sandal” I.R.B.M.s ever were in Cuba, in 1962 !!!

Which reminds me of another Cold War episode, when that mad young German Mathias Rust flew undetected in a Cessna across the entire Warsaw Pact and landed in Moscow’s Red Square without the Soviet Air Defense intercepting him, in 1987.

At least Gorbachev was coherent enough to immediately fire his Defense Minister Sergei Sokolov, the Air Defense chief Alexandr Koldunov and HUNDREDS of other officers after that for their

SHOCKING

INCOMPETENCE !!!!!
http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​M​a​t​h​i​a​s​_​R​u​s​t​#​A​f​t​e​rma

Sooo… what should Obama do now with grinning djoow U.S. Airforce General Norton A. Schwartz?

@Freefallingbomb: You, my friend, are absolutely correct– both factually and rhetorically. I remember when a Chinese submarine popped up inside the security zone of a US carrier group undetected. Kicks and grins.

So, apparently, we are spending all of our resources fighting Afghans and drugs and illegal aliens and on December 7, 2010, anyone who wants to can pop off a few dozen missiles without anyone knowing.

I predict that General Schwartz will be promoted to head the economic recovery effort, Tim Geithner will be named Secretary of the Navy and 50 cent will sing the National Anthem.

Thank you for the correction and the comment.

a hui hou
T

To Dr. Tom:

You wrote: “I remember when a Chinese submarine popped up inside the security zone of a US carrier group undetected.”

I swear that I had never heard of that story before…! I just “Googled” it right now for the first time:
http://​a​-place​-to​-stand​.blogspot​.com/​2​0​1​0​/​0​4​/​c​hin
http://​www​.dailymail​.co​.uk/​n​e​w​s​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​-​4​9​2​8​0​4​/Th
http://​www​.sinodaily​.com/​r​e​p​o​r​t​s​/​C​h​i​n​e​s​e​_​S​u​b​_​A​ppr
http://​www​.washingtontimes​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​2​0​0​6​/​n​o​v​/​1​3/2

Etc., etc. …: 50.000 search results for “Chinese” + “submarine” + “US” + “aircraft” + “carrier” !

“ It would appear that the US gave up on diesels after the 1960’s simply because there was no more evolution left in the technology”, as Byron would say. What’s the radius of those carrier strike groups’ outer defense screens, anti-submarine patrols included: 200 km? LOOLLL!!!

There is hope.

See here, and pay close attention to the second post (by poster AThousandYoung)
http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/7–3057

Much more sensible than any conspiracies of terrorist activities and threats to our national security.

Moral of this story?
Keep looking for actual factual answers rather than speculating based on any personal hunches and one-sided beliefs.

20 pages of UFO speculation by Major Tom when all he had to do is look up the NOTAMs

@Shail: Maybe you ought to read the references I listed previously, and the additional ones I list here before you call any of this ‘personal hunches’ or ‘one-sided beliefs’. If I am expounding opinion, it is clearly separate from fact and I differentiate.

@Oblat: I get NOTAMS and NOMARS for the Pacific Basin as they are issued. The one you reference was issued AFTER the incident and AFTER my original article.

However, and I shall remake this point to those who do not quite get it, this particular launch has nothing to do with my original comment. That concerned a nuclear detonation ~400 miles over the heartland of America. I did postulate viable delivery systems, but only as ancillary comments because someone doubted their existence. I did not suggest that this incident was within those parameters or suggest that this was such an event. I merely replied, factually and correctly, to someone who had no clue.

However, the fact that a NOTAM was issued AFTER the incident (or non-incident) does not change the fact that a notice to Mariners was not issued or that the Coast Guard was not notified in advance. If you take your skeptical selves to CG Region 11, you can see a general warning from Point Mugu south with specific notices to be issued. Since no special notices were issued, and since I know that because I am on the list (for NOTAMS as well), it was either a massive royal SNAFU, which is scary, or something else.

You keep attempting to change the subject, but the concept of a nuclear detonation and the attendant EMP pulse over America would take down every bit of non-hardened equipment including every vehicle, electrical grid, computer, radio, and equipment ancillary to that which is… basically everything. Refrigeration, food and water delivery, communications — all kaput. Do you believe it? I don’t care. The fact that you do not merely proves you are not well educated on the subject matter.

Try to grasp the concept that this launch or contrail, or whatever it was, and the appearance of a SONG class Chinese submarine in the middle of a US Carrier group simply demonstrates that things can occur which no one thought possible — not because they are not possible — but because no one thought about them.

We do not need to invoke conspiracy theories. We do not need to restrict this possibility to terrorist activity. We simply need to understand that the event is possible — it could be water-launched, land-launched from Northern Mexico, it could be contained in a can in orbit as we speak. Why is this important to note? Because we are inordinately susceptible to such an event.

Stop equating my posts to speculation or conspiracy theories. The facts do not require the supernatural and I am not the only person who has mentioned this — in fact, I only do so in passing. I shall include a couple of references for you.

First, the concept: http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​E​l​e​c​t​r​o​m​a​g​n​e​t​i​c​_​p​uls

From the Federation of American Scientists (of which I am an Emeritus member): http://​www​.fas​.org/​n​u​k​e​/​i​n​t​r​o​/​n​u​k​e​/​e​m​p​.​htm

That article was adapted from: Nuclear Weapons Effects Technology Militarily Critical Technologies List (MCTL) Part II: Weapons of Mass Destruction Technologies — I got my copy at the US Naval Staff College. You probably don’t have a copy.

NATO HANDBOOK ON THE MEDICAL ASPECTS OF NBC DEFENSIVE OPERATIONS PART I — NUCLEAR. There is no chance you have ever read this.

Engineering and Design — Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and Tempest Protection for Facilities — again, I suspect that your engineering skills do not include specificity to EMP protection — or much of anything. changing the subject is not an engineering skill.

You can get civilian versions, with references, here: http://​www​.eham​.net/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​s​/​2​1​592

Part 1 / 10

Yo, folks!

Today the System ( = the U.S. Airforce and the mainstream press) forwarded the first two fanciful explanations for the “mystery missile” : According to them, it was either

1) a “rare optical illusion” (lots of “rare comet photographies” illustrating these claims)

or

2) a “plane”.

I still can’t tell exactly which of these two explanations insults my intelligence more, but probably they were only meant for internal consumption anyway. I have eyes, I’m not some lobotomized U.S. American whom The Chimp can convince for example that the ONLY TWO steely skyscrapers in the World that ever collapsed after a fire where the two Twin Towers, on 11.9.2001, simultaneously, or that the complete remains of United Airlines Flight 93 (that crashed in Shanksville) fit into a single, small bucket, etc., etc., etc. . It takes a bit more than a System ape to convince me.

(Continued)

Part 2 / 10

1) THE “RARE OPTICAL ILLUSION” EXPLANATION :

What America’s well-meaning leaders and opinion-makers meant is:

SOMETIMES CLOUDS , RAINBOWS AND MOON HALOS LOOK JUST LIKE FLYING MISSILES !

I’m aware that Fata Morganas occur in deserts and over oceans ( = in very flat areas), but they also require other, very rare and very specific atmospheric conditions, among them intense sunshine, heat and a COMPLETELY CLOUDLESS sky! That streaking missile, however, is portrayed against a cloudy sky, shortly AFTER SUNDOWN !!!
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​7​A​M​d​H​B​g​H​tNE

Maybe in California the Laws of Nature aren’t 100 % constant, and Fata Morganas even appear at night and in bad weather.

(Continued)

Part 3 / 10

2) THE “CONTRAIL / PLANE” EXPLANATION :

At times, you can clearly see a round, fiery, reddish spot riding on the tip of the thick smoke plume in that footage. We French call that a flame. It is even written “flamme” in French, so this should ease comprehension. But when planes fly so high above you that you can’t distinguish their shapes anymore and they produce contrails, you don’t see any exhaust flames coming out of their engines either.

Planes surrounded by large fireballs aren’t known for straight flight motions either.

(The things I have to explain to U.S. Americans…)

(Continued)

Part 4 / 10

At last, the Truth which the System tries to squash so desperately with “friendly explanations” that wouldn’t convince even a (European) cretin: OBVIOUSLY it was a missile, and not even a small one ( = NOT a “Stinger” or anti-tank missile, etc.) !

Next question: Who fired it?

1) IF IT WAS FOREIGNERS (Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians, etc.) :

Then this act was perfectly legal (they were in international waters) and highly interesting for the U.S. Military, but slightly unrattling for the civilian population and therefore provocative for the politicians. More or less as legal, unrattling and provocative as joint U.S.-South Korean live fire exercises in front of North Korea’s coast are, or joint U.S.-Taiwanese live fire exercises in the Taiwan Strait.

(Continued)

Part 5 / 10

U.S. Americans however think that they stand above all others, so this live fire exercise in plain sight of Los Angeles could eventually lead to a tit-for-tat reaction from the U.S.A., maybe even to an escalation, and then I don’t recommend these foreigners to repeat this symbolical feat lots of times. (Just a presentiment. U.S. Americans PRETEND to be civilized. But they aren’t.)

2a) IF IT WAS U.S. AMERICANS / INTENTIONALLY

For example to test a new secret missile. Then they could have taken it deep into the Pacific Ocean, chosen the spot with the biggest and most equal distance to all commercial shipping routes, waited for bad weather ( = optical and I.R. cloud cover) and until after the last non-U.S. American satellite had overflown the test site ( = when nobody looks) and then have launched it. But to conduct a “secret” test in plain sight of everybody doesn’t convince me.

(Continued)

Part 6 / 10

2b) IF IT WAS U.S. AMERICANS / U-N-INTENTIONALLY

Like on the 3.7.1988, when the U.S. American guided missile cruiser “U.S.S. Vincennes” misidentified and automatically shot down an Iranian Airbus (Iran Air Flight 655) after mistaking it for a “fighter-bomber” or with an Exocet missile, whatever. All 290 people on board died, including 66 children, the U.S.A. never apologized to the victims’ families. 5 months later: Lockerbie. Iran always denied any involvement. Tit for tat. Point taken: After Lockerbie, no U.S. American war machine ever shot down an Iranian airliner again.
In this case, I have only one question: Was that ACCIDENTALLY fired mystery missile a regular anti-aircraft missile or a S.L.B.M. ? It didn’t look very recallable to me…

(Continued)

Part 7 / 10

But what flabbergasts me most about this whole Fifth Worldish episode is N.O.R.A.D.‘s / the B.M.E.W.S.’ insupportable silence. B.M.E.W.S. = “Ballistic Missile Early Warning System” = a chain of different, but extremely far-ranging radars all over North America, MORE OR LESS parallel to the SOSUS (“Sound Surveillance System”) chain of underwater listening posts (sonars) underwater, around North America’s coastline. The Pentagon brags for half a century that as soon as the former Soviet Union (now Russia) starts a small missile somewhere deep inside Siberia, the B.M.E.W.S. instantly detects it, calculates its precise impact point in advance, and if the impact point lies anywhere within the U.S.A. wakes up Bozo, N.O.R.A.D., S.A.C., all dogs.

(Continued)

Part 8 / 10

Well, since the nearest radar of that B.M.E.W.S. chain, a “Pave Paw”-type radar (resolution: 10 m&sup2; small objects at 3.000 miles / 4.827 km) at the Beale Airforce base in Beale, California was only ~ 384 miles (618 km) away from that mystery missile = only 12,8 % of the radar’s aforementioned range, it should have been almost JAMMED (blinded) by that near missile’s intense, crisp radar echo, correlated that missile’s flight characteristics (size, speed, acceleration, ceiling, range, trajectory, number of stages, etc.) against a data basis of well-known missile profiles, back-plotted the launcher’s millimetrical position, etc., etc., etc. . Instead, we have: Nothing, NOT EVEN A SINGLE word about that missile from B.M.E.W.S. !

(Continued)

Part 9 / 10

(Did its launcher know? Is the laughable degree of war readiness of the U.S.A. already a well-known fact among all of the U.S.A.‘s enemies?)

Is this just another case of AUTISTIC Pentagon public relations mismanagement (like on the 27.3.1999, too, when they denied for days that the Serbs had shot down a “stealthy” F-117, against all globally televised evidences…), or could it be that the much-vaunted B.M.E.W.S.

IS TRYING TO LEARN MORE INFORMATIONS ABOUT THAT MYSTERY MISSILE FROM THE MASS MEDIA ?????!

Do these public clerks actually gain salaries? Does Pearl Harbour still answer the phone?

Ooops, let me take back everything I said about them. They’re excused for not seeing that mystery missile flying outside their windows. They were busy 3D-mapping Afghanistan.

(My girl-friend’s joke. I LOLed!)

(Continued)

Part 10 / 10

With so much “advanced Western electronics” watching over America (military air patrols, Coast Guard air patrols, border air patrols, Police surveillance blimps over negro ghettos, “Home Security” drones following Muslims to the mosque, Big Brother helicopters hovering over cities, etc.), DID EVEN A SINGLE ARMED PUBLIC CLERK TAKE EVEN A SINGLE SNAPSHOT OF THAT MISSILE ??! Nope. They need their high-resolution, infrared cameras for other hot action.

My increasingly stronger opinion? The Russians could have come… They would have caught America’s entire nuclear first– and second-strike capability sleeping, heads on their red buttons.

The KCBS news helicopter would have filmed it all.

Part 1 / 12

Yesterday I was way too R.O.T.F.L. (too amused) about the U.S. System’s hilarious diversionary manoeuvres to focus on the ONLY serious explanation for the “mystery missile” : It is… (suspense) … a missile.
I may still have conceded the remote possibility of the missile being of foreign origin, too.
Or it was one of “roland”‘s “commercial cruise missiles” !

Rubbish.

1) Now I’m A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y convinced that that flying object was a missile

and

2) pretty convinced that that missile was U.S. American, too. Nothing else makes sense but the “U.S. American missile” explanation: For all practical purposes, 35 miles off the U.S. coast is still DEEP INSIDE U.S. territory, no matter what the letter of International Law stipulates. Every enemy of the U.S.A. instinctively knows that, and even the U.S.A. themselves don’t fire any missiles 35 miles off Russia’s and China’s coast. That would be a VERY BAD precedent (so long, early warnings…) !

(Continued)

Part 2 / 12

I’m embarking now on a systematic search for all possible contexts for this

1) previously unannounced

AND

2) posteriously unexplained / disinformed

U.S. AMERICAN MISSILE flight.
If you prefer to believe in the homely, reassuring sound of politicians’ and journalists’ lullabies instead, stop reading here, go away and never procreate.

For starters, I DON’T believe that the “mystery missile” TARGETED ANYTHING . Strangely, nobody here – and generally in the whole Press – worries minimally about that “mystery missile”‘s putative TARGET ! However, that’s precisely one of my first criteria for

ALL THE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS , ONE BY ONE :

(Continued)

Part 3 / 12

1) ACCIDENTAL LAUNCH AGAINST A TARGET

If ANOTHER U.S. American guided missile cruiser (like the “U.S.S. Vincennes”) had fired ANOTHER missile (like the “U.S.S. Vincennes”‘s two SM-2MRs, due to excessive automation) against another passenger jet (like Iran Air Flight 655, which was even shot down deep inside Iranian airspace!), then we would already have heard about it by now.

Anyway, expect proof positive of a second shoot-down of a passenger jet in maximally 5 months.

(Continued)

Part 4 / 12

2) DELIBERATE LAUNCH AGAINST A TARGET

35 miles off the coast??! Noo way!!! Unarmed – or at least non-lethal – reconnaissance (incl. Espionage) is legal over international waters, whether conducted by any kind of manned or unmanned ship or aircraft, even by drones (U.A.V.s). Hell, even air combat training over the ocean is legal, like live-fire naval exercises are, so why should that suddenly cause a big commotion among U.S. soldiers (of all people) ? And your only allies in the Middle East, the djoows, attacked the “U.S.S. Pueblo” only by mistake, as President Johnson told you. They suffered a lot in the Holocaust. “Heva da mersy wizz dem”.
And after the Soviets downed Korean Air Lines Flight 007, a South Korean passenger jet, on the 1.9.1983 (which really must have inspired the U.S.A.) for strolling into what the Soviet Union claimed as its sovereign airspace, I also doubt that any passenger jet will ever cross another Super-Power’s disputed borderline again.

(Continued)

Part 5 / 12

Since the U.S. Armed Forces also have SO MANY proper facilities at their disposal to test their old and new missiles, what would be the point of doing it in front of a 14 million city (Los Angeles) ?
Even IF they chose to do it there, of all places: Weapons evaluations aren’t really something to be mighty embarassed about (almost the opposite, given spectator safety), so why all these completely miserable cover-up attempts now?

So, since I can’t come up with a single PLAUSIBLE TARGET for that mystery missile, whether it was deliberately fired at or accidentally fired at, and test shots are out of the equation, too, this leads me – by elimination of parts – to believe in a really bizarre hypothesis: A deliberate or accidental missile launch – against NO target!

(Continued)

Part 6 / 12

1) AN ACCIDENTAL MISSILE LAUNCH AGAINST NO TARGET

For example due to malfunction (the proverbial “tiny spark”, or, too a far lesser degree of probability, some Stuxnet malware like in the 1983 movie “WarGames”).
Maybe this premature missile launch was merely an overcompensation for Wyoming’s 50 Minuteman IIIs (11 % of the U.S.A.‘s I.C.B.M.s) that went incommunicado on the 23.10. – 24.10.2010. Lest the Russians get the wrong impression about America’s missiles’ intact flyability…

But I don’t entirely rule out an accidental nuclear missile (S.L.B.M.) launch. No? “Prejudice” ?

Gentlemen: I could swear that that “thing” actually flew!

2) A DELIBERATE MISSILE LAUNCH AGAINST NO TARGET

I really can’t come up with any scenarios for this hypothesis, and I’m quite sure that it wasn’t a missile test either (in France, missile tests involve targets), so I believe we’re clearly looking at AN UNAUTHORIZED , MAYBE EVEN AT A CRIMINAL MISSILE LAUNCH !

(Continued)

Part 7 / 12

This would also explain better why the U.S. System (mainly its interlocutors, the mass media whores)

a) voluntarily exposes itself to such a national loss of credibility and international ridicule (apparently, ONE UTTER discredit is not enough) by trying to cover up this incident

I) labelling an U.S. American missile as a “natural phenomenon” (next on “National Geographic”?)
and even
II) “trying to explain” this “rare optical illusion” with the clumsiest, flimsiest, most MENTALLY RETARDED lies ( “COMETS with smoke plumes [!] surfacing from California’s sea and zig-zagging [!] upwards into Space”. Where does the LUNACY end?! What does the scientific community think of these “answers” ?!)

b) AND STILL THINK THAT THIS “REMEDY” IS BETTER THAN THE “DISEASE” (THINK !!!),

then whatever TRULY happened immediately prior to missile launch must have been UNCONFESSABLE !!! And why would they do that: Because of a FOREIGN missile?!

So, what’s the name of the ox?

(Continued)

Part 8 / 12

Human error (mildly put: If I inadvertently submit a post to “D.o.D. Buzz” twice, that’s a “human error”), or malfeasance. Or a combination of both: It could have been another psycho like that Fort Hood shrink who shot 13 people on the 5.11.2009, or like that heap of 47 gays inside the “U.S.S. Iowa”‘s central 16″ gun turret, who blew themselves up in a fit of jealousy on the 19.4.1989. (But the “U.S.S. Iowa” was nuclear-armed. Do the U.S. Armed Forces allow suicidal degenerates anywhere near their nuclear arsenal? And now they even want to repeal D.A.D.T.? Apparently someone 35 miles off California didn’t wait with the fireworks for the big party!)

(Continued)

Part 9 / 12

Still, that mystery missile’s smoke plume was so impossibly thick for a regular anti-aircraft missile that I barely dare to think what I think.
Even the irregular launch of a single anti-aircraft missile doesn’t demand such desperate, contortionistic, obstructionistic, almost Warren-Commission-like denials, especially since NO plane got downed, or even reported a missile flying too close for comfort!

Which leads me to my last (and hopefully my most persuasive) step:

(Continued)

Part 10 / 12

DEBUNKING THE GOVERNMENT’S “SCIENTIFIC THEORIES” WITH PHOTOGRAPHIES AND VIDEOS :

For starters, the “Great Daylight Fireball” of 1972, possibly the size of a small truck = maybe the most WORLD-FAMOUS photography of an Earth-grazing meteorite, taken at broad daylight. It barely bounced off the atmosphere again (65 million years ago someone wasn’t entirely that lucky) and was visible all the way from Utah, U.S.A. to Alberta, Canada. In this picture, the fireball was photographed streaking above the Teton Mountains behind Jackson Lake, Wyoming, U.S.A. . Note how it has only an EXTREMELY THIN , WHITE smoke plume (contrail), not a thick, dark one:
http://​apod​.nasa​.gov/​a​p​o​d​/​i​m​a​g​e​/​0​9​0​3​/​e​a​r​t​h​g​r​a​z​er_

More meteorites with thin white trails:
https://​www​.sott​.net/​i​m​a​g​e​/​i​m​a​g​e​/​1​4​6​2​0​/​f​u​l​l​/​O​r​igi
http://​www​.greatdreams​.com/​c​o​m​e​t​s​/​M​e​t​e​o​r​i​t​t​_​6​s​ek_
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_xdN0QQwsP1A/TIUam2IifaI

(Continued)

Part 11 / 12

Exceptionally, I also found this image on the Internet showing a meteorite with a
BROAD , BLACK , BUT TRANSPARENT trail,
= STILL V-E-R-Y different from the mystery missile’s
BROAD , DARK , BUT T-H-I-C-K , volcano-like boiling smoke plume!

(Picture) http://​img​.youtube​.com/​v​i​/​3​d​a​n​3​w​M​3​r​n​s​/​0​.​jpg

————————————————————————————————————————

Videos of ship-launched SM-2 anti-aircraft missiles (observe their THIN WHITE plumes) :
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​d​_​e​R​r​d​d​M​y-A
(Multiple launches, EXCELLENT footage quality!)
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​c​q​m​L​I​A​K​Y​cIw
(Slide forward to 0:48)

————————————————————————————————————————

Videos of ship-launched, rocket-boosted “Tomahawk” cruise missiles (broad white plume) :
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​Q​9​F​U​u​F​D​v​RAs
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​I​O​p​o​-​_​a​E​rjQ

(Continued)

Part 12 / 12

Video of an U.S. American, submarine-launched, nuclear Poseidon missile (pay attention to the ominously familiar, thick, dark plume from 0:13 onwards!) :
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​L​V​T​6​Z​g​p​j​PhI

————————————————————————————————————————

Video of two almost simultaneous launches of U.S. American, submarine-based, nuclear “Trident” missiles (thick white plumes) :
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​f​l​3​7​U​Z​v​F​sz0

————————————————————————————————————————

Video of the “mystery missile” :
http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​7​A​M​d​H​B​g​H​tNE

Does this sluggish object even have the archetypical, proverbial, LIGHTNING-FAST speed of all shooting-stars, as the U.S. Airforce claims???!!

————————————————————————————————————————

Sleep sound, and believe in the High Command!

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

AdChoices | Like us on , follow us on and join us on Google+
© 2014 Military Advantage
A Monster Company.