Nuke transportation story has explosive implications

[Matthew Lewis]

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne both fired in connection to nuke incident.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080605/ap_on_..._force_shake_up

[Ron Ecker]

And how many of the unanswered questions about the B52 incident, i.e. how it possibly could have happened (and the associated suspicious deaths), are really answered in this report that led to the firings? The report is classified, so we're not entitled to know. My guess is that Gates himself is in the dark, even after reading this report, and is just making himself look good.

[Matthew Lewis]

The "associated" suspicious deaths. You mean the six reported in this thread here?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...46&hl=minot

Two of them, "associated" only because they happened to be stationed at the same base, died more than a month before the incident.

One of the suicides, "associated" only because the death occured on the same day, was stationed in Florida, neither the starting nor ending location of the flight, and was a weather forecaster, an unrelated careerfield. He was on a trip to Portland at the time and his body was found in Washington. Both locations still having nothing to do with the starting or ending locations of the flight.

The other suicide was of a security forces airman that was stationed at Minot.

The last two were a husband and wife who while riding on a motorcycle attempted to pass a van in a no-passing zone (not a smart thing to do in any vehicle and especially dangerous in a motorcycle which is less visible than a car), and the van made a left-hand turn, striking them.

I see one, the suicide of the security forces airman, that I would really call associated. I guess if you really want to stretch your definition of "associated" then they others might fit then. But if you have to reach that much then one could find "suspicious" "associated" deaths for any incident.

[Ron Ecker]

I see one, the suicide of the security forces airman, that I would really call associated. I guess if you really want to stretch your definition of "associated" then they others might fit then. But if you have to reach that much then one could find "suspicious" "associated" deaths for any incident.

I used the plural "deaths" because I didn't recall the details of all of them. I'm not trying to stretch anything, I'm just not going back to look them all up. I did remember that there was some general agreement that one of the deaths should have been looked into, and that is the one that you say you "would really call associated." So let's amend what I wrote to "death" instead of "deaths" that should have been looked into and was not.

[Matthew Lewis]

I see one, the suicide of the security forces airman, that I would really call associated. I guess if you really want to stretch your definition of "associated" then they others might fit then. But if you have to reach that much then one could find "suspicious" "associated" deaths for any incident.

I used the plural "deaths" because I didn't recall the details of all of them. I'm not trying to stretch anything, I'm just not going back to look them all up. I did remember that there was some general agreement that one of the deaths should have been looked into, and that is the one that you say you "would really call associated." So let's amend what I wrote to "death" instead of "deaths" that should have been looked into and was not.

Agreed. I assumed you meant all of them as there are some that think they are all connected. I'm sorry. Some of those deaths are quite a stretch to think they were connected though.

As for how it all happened, my impression was and still is, especially after they failed their recent nuke procedures inspection, that they had become complacent, hadn't been following their checklists, and pretty much just let their standards drop in the past few years.

Edited June 6, 2008 by Matthew Lewis