[bigbob]

Well, just for the record, here’s what Janes said the day after the event:

“Doug Richardson, the editor of Jane’s Missiles and Rockets, examined the video for the Times of London and said he was left with little doubt.

“It’s a solid propellant missile,” he told the Times. “You can tell from the efflux [smoke].”

Richardson said it could have been a ballistic missile launched from a submarine or an interceptor, the defensive anti-missile weapon used by Navy surface ships.

---

Respectfully, if you have a more recent statement from Mr. Richardson, please share it with all of us, and help us understand why he changed his opinion. I couldn’t find anything in a quick Google search.

Moreover, the allegation and fear here is that there is a cover-up going on.

No madness here, just unexplained facts and speculation.

[trickyricky]

It would be "politically incorrect" to admit there was an SLBM launched right off our left coast.
It makes our military look like boobs, and could frighten the sheeple.
If and when LA gets blown to smithereens we may look back at this incident and say, "Hmmmmm?"

[editor-surveyor]

> “Respectfully, if you have a more recent statement from Mr. Richardson, please share it with all of us, and help us understand why he changed his opinion”

.
He didn’t.

Tolsti2 is a liar that is just spewing excrement out of his piehole.
.

[kanawa]

I sent an email to a Jane’s on Nov. 16 but haven’t received a reply.

The only other mention I’ve found made by Jane’s is the following article....

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/systems/jmr/jmr101119_1_n.shtml

....of which only about a third is available to non-subscribers