A comprehensive summary of the missing nukes story can be found here. The official story does not comport with what’s known about military procedures for handling nuclear weapons.
Stormer also makes a key point, which is not exactly a secret: “There is a strict chain of custody for all such weapons. Nuclear weapons handling is spelled out in great detail in Air Force regulations, to the credit of that service. Every person who orders the movement of these weapons, handles them, breaks seals or moves any nuclear weapon must sign off for tracking purposes.†[7]
Stormer continues:
“Two armed munitions specialists are required to work as a team with all nuclear weapons. All individuals working with nuclear weapons must meet very strict security standards and be tested for loyalty — this is known as a ‘[Nuclear Weapons] Personnel Reliability Program [DoDD 5210 42].’ They work in restricted areas within eyeshot of one another and are reviewed constantly.â€[8]
Stormer unwraps the whole Pentagon cover-up by pointing out some logical facts and military procedures. First he reveals that: “All security forces assigned [to handle and protect nuclear weapons] are authorized to use deadly force to protect the weapons from any threat [including would-be thieves].†[9]
The article goes on to raise questions about electronic monitoring, command and control (C2) and the computerized tracking system, all of which should (theoretically) prevent nuclear weapons getting misplaced like a set of car keys.
Most interestingly, the author reviews the rash of mysterious deaths, reorganizations and reprimands that have taken place around this event.
This story is very creepy. If you go see, scroll down to the notes. Some of the people involved have backgrounds in meteorology-related disciplines, and one might speculate what that’s all about. It reminded me that Nova did a show on the earth’s magnetic field, which has been weakening and may be poised for a sudden reversal. Apparently this phenomenon has occurred many times over the earth’s history, but it would wreck havoc on our lives.
You could perhaps take comfort in the knowledge that these reversals happen infrequently—on average every 250,000 years—but maybe not when you consider that it’s been over 700,000 years since the last reversal, and the next one may be currently underway.
Sometimes it just feels like all hell is about to break loose.

#1 by malcontent on October 30, 2007 - 6:53 am
I only take issue with one paragraph in the article.
There are 2 plausible scenarios that I can conjure an 1 is that they were indeed intended for deployment against Natanz or some other hardened Iranian facility. The basis for this rests in the open dissent that has been expressed by General Petraeus’ boss, Admiral Fallon, regarding belligerence toward Iran. I deduce from Fallon’s stance that the Navy will not be participating in an act of aggression toward Iran. It can easily be established as an illegal order and quashed when the CENTCOM commander happens to agree with that point.
Perhaps the AF officers also deduced this on their way to Barksdale?
The other scenario is that this was a sabre rattling ruse to alert Iran, Russia and China that we don’t necessarily need to develop new bunker busters to effectively neutralize Iran’s ace in the hole, Natanz.
Either way, the facts are not likely to come out in our lifetime. I still don’t understand how most of America can sleep at night with such a transparently false cover story.
Name that song
#2 by Marlena on October 30, 2007 - 7:38 am
Well, it would be good news indeed if dissent within the military is strong enough to literally close off certain avenues of attack. I hope that’s the case.
#3 by malcontent on October 30, 2007 - 9:18 am
Currently all tactical nukes within range of Iran are under the control of the Navy, with the possible exception of 1 missing cruise missile with a variable payload of 5 to 150 kilotons.
Another link with some tidbits for the post mortem
http://geronimomanifesto.blogspot.com/2007/10/stolen-barksdale-nuclear-weapon-how-why.html