Posted on 07/14/2002 8:46:23 PM PDT by dubyaweluvya
Gulf War Veterans were told they were not human guinea pigs but 50% of them returned with respiratory and nerve disorders.
500,000 American troops served in the Gulf War. You're saying that 250,000 cases of respiratory or nervous disorders resulted. That's a load of BS.
What "classfied" information do you personally have access to in order to assure us just as the Navy and the ARmy and so many others have tried to assure us for decades that experiments on humans were never performed????
I'm familiar with FBE Juliet's objectives and overall tasking. Chemicals are not on the agenda--it's a command and control experiment. One thing to look for is who's working on the FBE Juliet: I don't see any medical or biology types, it's all electronics engineers and computer geeks.
You are correct. I'll be floating on the Coronado helping to support that software.
OK, technicians' checklist:
Multimeter...check.
Electronics tool kit...check.
Protocol analyzer...check.
Chewing gum...check.
Baling wire...check.
Twelve-pound sledge (aka master reboot tool)...check.
Sacrificial goats and pigeons to bring network up after crash...check.
Size 12 boondockers to resynchronize the ethernet hub...check.
Anyone know what the EG&G government service flights, aircraft and terminal facilities *airline* package from Las Vegas McCarren airport to the Groom Lake *Area 51* secret research and test flight center is called?
None.
I'm less concerned with the possibility that this particular navy electronic warfare research project will be utilizing chemicals hazardous to the surrounding civilian population than I am about enemies exploiting the operation with a biological or chemical attack for which the US Navy could then become a plausable scapegoat.
While the U.S. Navy certainly has participated in particularly despicable conduct against both its own personnel and innocent civilian bystanders who've gotten in their way, their more usual modus operandi is an after-the-fact coverup of an accident or blunder that has resulted in unforseen consequences, as with events ranging from the USS Iowa turret explosion and the USS Vincennes shootdown of the Iranian A300 Airbus back in 1988 back to the WWII sinkings of the USS Leopoldville and the German bombing of the port of Bari on 2 December 1943 that released mustard gas from the John Harvey, resulting in hundreds of cases of mustard gas exposure and dozens of deaths. And, of course, the usual military secrecy coverups....
Because the last one was "Fleet Battle Experiment India." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Hotel." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Golf." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Foxtrot." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Echo." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Delta." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Charlie." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Bravo." And the one before that was "Fleet Battle Experiment Alfa."
Are you, perchance, discerning a pattern in these names?
In and around Florida, involving operational testing of the Pelican, among other things. They going to be a part of *Juliet* as well?
No, that is the international phonetic alphabet for all radio communications, not just aviation. Obviously, you don't know what you're talking about.
Could this infer air strikes?
Yup. Air strikes are supporting fires, after all, right along with howitzers and naval gunfire support.
Top Gun at Miramar a bit more involved perhaps?
Nope. Top Gun ain't AT Miramar any more, buddy. That base now belongs to the United States Marines--Top Gun moved to Fallon, Nevada.
And Top Gun is a school for training fighter tactics instructors. Their syllabus runs independently of fleet exercises or fleet battle experiments.
It confirms my earlier connection to chemical spraying from the air.
No, it doesn't. It confirms that the Navy is very unimaginative in how it names its Fleet Battle Experiments.
Not so much air strikes as coordinated defence against air attack. And the generic *Fleet Battle* names aren't necessarily shared by all the involved forces- they were known as *Agincourt Update* to the Marines, for instance.
But interestingly, the alphabetically-named series of fleet operations first began in California ibn March 1997, just after the naval exercises around Long Island in 1996 that were taking place when TWA Flight 800 was shot dow, er, had it's centerline fuel tank explode. Just a coincidence, perhaps, but clearly, some close oversight to prevent accidental civilian fatalities during military exercises is probably a good thing...if an afterthought.
-archy-/-
Concur. Although the Army's idea of *Badd* for their ACTD program acronym is no improvement.
Indeed, and addibng in the entire mix of airborne warning and control aircraft, aircraft IFF codes and identifiers for different services and allied aircraft, shared communications capabilities and CEOIs, real-time interchange of data regarding incoming ballistic or cruise missiles, to say nothing of en-route airstrikes, chemical attacks or NUKEDETS, and the subtle guidance of messages transmitted from on high by the pesky national command authority expecting near-immediate compliance, and they can be a pain, indeed.
The alternative can be screwups and donkey clusters like the Panama and Grenada invasions, missile hits on US vessels though the missiles were spotted by other ships [whether above or beneath the surface, heh,heh,heh] or *surprise* attacks like Pearl Harbor and 09/11/2001.
A pain? Oh yes. And as it's happening, US troops in Bosnia are having to private-purchase radios for use on squad and platoon operations, including house-to-house searches. And worse.
-archy-/-
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.