Could the “Meteor” than exploded over Russia (and Cuba) this week have been a response to this encroachment on US Defense over Guam? “Oh Yeah? watch this suckas!”
Don’t think that the USA could or would disguise a weapon as a Meteor ???? Then you might want to read up on THIS:
US ‘tsunami bomb’: N.Z. archive secrets revealed (Add 60+ years of Technology and what do you have)
BY: Bill Gertz
Two Russian nuclear-armed bombers circled the western Pacific island of Guam this week in the latest sign of Moscow’s growing strategic assertiveness toward the United States.
The Russian Tu-95 Bear-H strategic bombers were equipped with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and were followed by U.S. jets as they circumnavigated Guam on Feb. 12 local time—hours before President Barack Obama’s state of the union address.
Air Force Capt. Kim Bender, a spokeswoman for the Pacific Air Force in Hawaii, confirmed the incident to the Washington Free Beacon and said Air Force F-15 jets based on Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, “scrambled and responded to the aircraft.”
“The Tu-95s were intercepted and left the area in a northbound direction. No further actions occurred,” she said. Bender said no other details would be released “for operational security reasons.”
The bomber incident was considered highly unusual. Russian strategic bombers are not known to have conducted such operations in the past into the south Pacific from bomber bases in the Russian Far East, which is thousands of miles away and over water.
John Bolton, former U.N. ambassador and former State Department international security undersecretary, said the Russian bomber flights appear to be part of an increasingly threatening strategic posture in response to Obama administration anti-nuclear policies.
“Every day brings new evidence that Obama’s ideological obsession with dismantling our nuclear deterrent is dangerous,” Bolton said. “Our national security is in danger of slipping off the national agenda even as the threats grow.”
Defense officials said the bombers tracked over Guam were likely equipped with six Kh-55 or Kh-55SM cruise missiles that can hit targets up to 1,800 miles away with either a high-explosive warhead or a 200-kiloton nuclear warhead.
The F-15s that intercepted the bombers were based at Kadena Air Base, Japan, and were deployed to Guam for the ongoing annual Exercise Guahan Shield 2013.
Two U.S. B-2 strategic bombers were deployed to Guam in late January and last fall advanced F-22 fighter bombers were temporarily stationed on the island. Three nuclear-powered attack submarines and the Global Hawk long-range drone also are based in Guam.
About 200 Marines currently are training on the island. Earlier news reports stated that Japanese and Australian military jets joined U.S. jets in the Guam exercises.
Guam is one of the key strategic U.S. military bases under the Obama administration’s new “pivot” to Asia policy. As a result, it is a target of China and North Korea. Both have missiles capable of hitting the island, located about 1,700 miles east of the Philippines in the Mariana island chain.
This week’s bomber flights are a sign the Russians are targeting the island as well, one defense official said.
Guam also plays a key role in the Pentagon’s semi-secret strategy called the Air-Sea Battle Concept designed to counter what the Pentagon calls China’s anti-access and area denial weapons—precision guided missiles, submarines, anti-satellite weapons, and other special warfighting capabilities designed to prevent the U.S. military from defending allies or keeping sea lanes open in the region.
Defense officials disclosed the incident to the Free Beacon and said the Russian bomber flights appeared to be a strategic message from Moscow timed to the president’s state of the union speech.
“They were sending a message to Washington during the state of the union speech,” one official said.
The bomber flights also coincided with growing tensions between China and Japan over the Senkaku islands. A Chinese warship recently increased tensions between Beijing and Tokyo by using targeting radar against a Japanese warship.
The U.S. military has said it would defend Japan in any military confrontation with China over the Senkakus. The bomber flights appear to signal Russian support for China in the dispute.
Meanwhile, Obama on Wednesday telephoned Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to reiterate U.S. nuclear assurances to its ally following North Korea’s third detonation of an underground nuclear device.
A White House statement said the president told Abe, who visits Washington next week, that the United States “remains steadfast in its defense commitments to Japan, including the extended deterrence offered by the U.S. nuclear umbrella.”
“It shows that the Russians, like the Chinese, are not just going to sit idly by and watch the United States ‘pivot’ or ‘rebalance’ its forces toward Asia,” said former State Department security official Mark Groombridge.
“One could argue the Russians were poking a bit of fun at the Obama Administration, seeing how they flew these long-range bombers close to Guam on the same day as the state of the union address,” he said.
“But the broader implications are more profound,” said Groombridge, now with the private strategic intelligence firm LIGNET. “The Russians are clearly sending a signal that they consider the Pacific an area of vital national strategic interest and that they still have at least some power projection capabilities to counterbalance against any possible increase in U.S. military assets in the region.”
Airspace violations by Russian Su-27 jets triggered intercepts by Japanese fighters near Japan’s Hokkaido Island last week. The Feb. 7. incident prompted protests from Tokyo and took place near disputed territory claimed by both countries since the end of World War II.
The Russian air incursion around Guam was the third threatening strategic bomber incident since June. On July 4th, two Bear H’s operated at the closest point to the United States that a Russian bomber has flown since the Soviet Union routinely conducted such flights.
The July bomber flights near California followed an earlier incident in June when two Bear H’s ran up against the air defense zone near Alaska as part of large-scale strategic exercises that Moscow said involved simulated attacks on U.S. missile defense bases. The Pentagon operates missile defense bases in Alaska and California.
Those flights triggered the scrambling of U.S. and Canadian interceptor jets as well.
The bomber flights near Alaska violated a provision of the 2010 New START arms treaty that requires advance notification of exercises involving strategic nuclear bombers.
Military spokesmen sought to play down the June and July incidents as non-threatening, apparently reflecting the Obama administration’s conciliatory “reset” policy toward Russia that seeks better relations by tamping down criticism of Moscow, despite growing anti-U.S. sentiments and policies from the regime of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey questioned his Russian counterpart, Gen. Nikolai Makarov, during a meeting at the Pentagon July 12th.
The latest Russian nuclear saber rattling through bomber flights comes as the Obama administration is planning a new round of strategic arms reduction talks with Russia. State Department arms official Rose Gottemoeller was recently in Moscow for arms discussions.
The president was expected to announce plans to cut U.S. nuclear forces by an additional one-third in a new round of arms reduction efforts with Moscow.
However, the president did not announce the plans and said only during his state of the union speech that he plans further arms cuts.
“Building Guam as a strategic hub has played a critical role in balancing U.S. security interests in responding to and cooperating with China as well as in shaping China’s perceptions and conduct,” wrote Government Accountability Office analyst Shirley A. Kan in a September 2012 report.
“Since 2000, the U.S. military has been building up forward-deployed forces on the westernmost U.S. territory of Guam to increase U.S. presence, deterrence, and power projection for potential responses to crises and disasters, counterterrorism, and contingencies in support of South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Taiwan, or elsewhere in Asia.”
AND……… Speaking of ALLEGED METEORS:
Well, people *can* take protective measures if they are warned a bit in advance of a possible meteorite strike. They can get away from windows to avoid flying glass. They can take shelter in a central room on the lowest floor of a building. And certainly, everyone should start filling plastic and glass bottles with tap water, and purchase canned sardines, salmon, tuna fish, chicken, canned beans, dried lentils, barley, etc. Notice that RT (Russian Television) is warning us of another meteor threat, *not* our U.S. television networks. In fact, our own Gov't, NASA, is lying to us, right through your TV screen -- telling us: "Oh, that asteroid pass and that meteorite strike are unrelated, folks. Just a coincidence." We should all realize that politicians and television are *not* going to warn you in advance of a meteorite strike. The money powers who own and control politicians and the TV networks will not alert the public. They do not want to disturb their stock market. MORE HERE
The 1947 UFO controversy of Roswell, N.M. is like a bad penny: It keeps turning up.
The legend, rehashed by conspiracy theorists in countless documentaries, revolves around allegations that an unusual object fell from the sky — an object so bizarre that the U.S. Air Force issued a press release that a flying saucer had crashed.
That story was quickly recanted, creating what would become one of the greatest urban legends in American history.
Until now, most debunkers doubted that there was even one crash. Now, in an exclusive interview, retired Air Force Lt. Col. Richard French told The Huffington Post that there were actually two crashes.
The More things “Change”….. the more they stay the same.
“If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”“If an Air Force general blows the whistle on the Obama White House, does anyone in the media hear the corruption?”
At a hearing on Thursday, lawmakers on strategic forces subcommittee, especially the Republican chairman, Michael Turner, requested that the House Oversight Committee investigate if Falcone’s company garnered any type of special treatment from the White House or from Obama appointees.
The hearing came after a report by a blogger on a news and commentary web site alleged that the Obama White House pressed General Shelton to downplay his concerns about the proposed Lightsquared system.
President Obama’s underlings deny any wrongdoing, and officials at Lightsquared denied the charges that it is receiving preferential treatment from President Obama or his staff.
Republican staff members on the subcommittee say that the decorated General Shelton told the lawmakers that Obama administration officials urged the general to describe Lightsquared’s system favorably during his congressional testimony.
During the hearing, General Shelton told committee members that the wireless broadband network manufactured by Lightsquared would have a negative impact on the current Global Positioning System (GPS) relied on by both the U.S. military and private sector users of the GPS.
General Shelton told the committee members: Tests with Defense Department experts, civilian agencies and others “indicate the LightSquared terrestrial network operating in the originally proposed manner poses significant challenges for almost all GPS users.”
The general insisted through his spokesperson on Friday that he had not “watered down his testimony due to alleged White House pressure.”
According to a source familiar with the Lightsquared probe, many officers at the Pentagon are highly suspicious of the President, the White House staff and even Obama’s appointees at the Defense Department.
Another occurrence being probed is that the allegation that Lightsquared at first offered to sell satellite phones on its network, however the Federal Communications Commission allegedly issued a special waiver to the firm thus allowing sell terrestrial-based wireless service to other companies.
Department of Defense officials. such as General Shelton, in the past have raised concerns about interference with GPS users, and the FCC would then promise to disallow a firm to begin operating their network until after intense testing is carried out to ensure there is no disruption to satellite navigation.
The head of the FCC declined to appear before the committee on Thursday, which the chairman, Turner, called an “affront” to the panel.
Meanwhile, Falcone and Lightsquared executives are taking the offensive by giving Obama-friendly journalists at Politico exclusive interviews.
LightSquared CEO. Sanjiv Ahuja, and its billionaire backer, Phil Falcone, denied all allegations that the wireless company used its political pull with the Obama administration to secure approval of its business plans with the Defense Department.
“It’s just very disappointing that people are not seeing the facts here, and [that] this has become a real political issue,” Falcone, a senior executive at the hedge fund firm Harbinger Capital, said during his Politico interview. “It’s not a function of being a Democrat or a Republican, it’s about trying to be an innovator. … It’s very disappointing and frustrating that we are getting stonewalled like this. … I kinda scratch my head every single day and say I can’t believe this is happening.”
Falcone and Ahuja denied receiving special treatment from the White House or the FCC in their ongoing quest to become the nation’s first wholesale wireless broadband provider, according to Politico.
But some observers see things differently. Mike Baker, a political strategist and a former military officer, believes that this investigation needs to be taken to wherever or whomever it leads. He’s like to see a special prosecutor appointed.
“This is a very important national security issue, not some politically-motivated witch hunt like the Valerie Plame-CIA case. But we all know that with the news media protecting this president, the chances of anything being done are slim or none,” he quipped.
“First of all, we know what motivates politicians and big business. In the middle you have a career officer who is a four-star general. Whom would you believe? What’s in it for General Shelton to make up stories?” Baker asks.
“Let’s hope General Shelton sticks to his guns and that more Pentagon and Justice Department officials decide enough is enough from this administration,” Baker added.
Skipping right to the list – Read the entire article HERE
10. United Technologies (NYSE: UTX)
- Arms sales 2010: $11.41 billion
- Total sales 2010: $54.33 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 21%
- Total profit: $4.71 billion
- Total employment: 208,220
- Sector: Aircraft, Electronics, Engines
Hartford, Conn.-based United Technologies is a multicompany industrial conglomerate with subsidiaries that include elevator company Otis and refrigeration giant Carrier. The company also manufactures components for use in military aircraft and vehicles. One of its subsidiaries, Pratt & Whitney, builds aircraft engines for dozens of different fighter jets. Among the jets equipped with Pratt & Whitney engines are the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the latter of which is being produced by the hundreds for nine different countries. United Technologies is also heavily involved in aircraft manufacturing. It owns Sikorsky, one of the largest helicopter manufacturers in the world. Sikorsky builds the popular UH-60 Black Hawk. Roughly one-fifth of United Technologies’ total revenue came from arms sales in 2010.
9. L-3 Communications (NYSE: LLL)
- Arms sales 2010: $13.07 billion
- Total sales 2010: $15.68 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 83%
- Total profit: $0.96 billion
- Total employment: 63,000
- Sector: Electronics, Services
L-3 Communications is a top contractor in fields such as communications, intelligence and surveillance. According to the company, its customers include nearly every defense, intelligence and security agency in the U.S., as well as allied foreign governments and commercial customers. Among its many products, the company produces the L-3 SmartDeck, a fully integrated cockpit system, and the AVCATT mobile aviation training simulator, designed for the U.S. Army. Although the company’s arms sales have increased steadily for a number of years, their rate of increase slowed significantly between 2009 and 2010. The company’s rank among largest arms producers fell from 2007’s eighth to ninth in 2010.
- Arms sales 2010: $14.41 billion
- Total sales 2010: $24.76 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 58%
- Total profit: $0.74 billion
- Total employment: 75,200
- Sector: Aircraft, Artillery, Electronics, Missiles, Military vehicles, Small arms/ammunition
Italian defense contractor Finmeccanica is the largest high-tech industrial group in Italy. Partially owned by the Italian government, the conglomerate has a large array of products in six areas: aeronautics, helicopters, defense systems and electronics, space, transportation and energy. The company has formed dozens of joint ventures in Europe and the rest of the world. Notable Finmeccanica enterprises include helicopter manufacturer Augusta Enterprises, missile manufacturer MBDA and EuroTorp, the world’s leading antisubmarine torpedo manufacturer. In 2007, Finmeccanica was the number nine weapons manufacturer in the world. In 2010, it moved to eighth, with a 46% increase in sales over that time.
- Arms sales 2010: $16.36 billion
- Total sales 2010: $60.60 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 27%
- Total profit: $0.73 billion
- Total employment: 121,690
- Sector: Aircraft, Electronics, Missiles, Space
European company EADS, short for European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company N.V., is the second of three non-U.S. companies on this list. The corporation, which includes major subsidiaries such as Airbus, is a leader in aerospace and defense products. EADS has a 37% share in missile manufacturer MBDA, and is one of the companies responsible for the development of the Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jet. Only 27% of EADS’s sales are arms sales, which is the second-smallest share among the largest arms-producing companies. The company has a major presence in markets in the Middle East, North America, Europe and more.
6. Raytheon (NYSE: RTN)
Raytheon’s guided missile system.
- Arms sales 2010: $22.98 billion
- Total sales 2010: $25.18 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 91%
- Total profit: $1.88 billion
- Total employment: 72,400
- Sector: Electronics, Missiles
Raytheon is a Cambridge, Mass.-based American defense contractor. It is the world’s largest manufacturer of guided missiles and produces such widely used weapons as the AIM-7 Sparrow missile, the AIM-9 Sidewinder missile and the BGM-109 Tomahawk. The company is also responsible for the Air Warfare Simulation program used by the U.S. Air Force. In 2010, the company had nearly $23 billion in arms sales, more than 90% of its total revenue for the year. These sales were up 17% from 2007.
5. General Dynamics (NYSE: GD)
General Dynamics Abrams M1A1 Main Battle Tank
- Arms sales 2010: $23.94 billion
- Total sales 2010: $32.47 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 74%
- Total profit: $2.62 billion
- Total employment: 90,000
- Sector: Artillery, Electronics, Military vehicles, Small arms/ammunition, Ships
General Dynamics is an American defense company that deals in aerospace, combat systems, information systems and technology, and marine systems. Although the company has been around since 1952, it has enjoyed a resurgence beginning in the 1990s, thanks largely to a number of mergers. Since 1997 General Dynamics says it has acquired more than 50 companies. Over this same period, its revenue increased from $4 billion to more than $32 billion. It also added more than 60,000 employees to its workforce. Currently, 74% of the company’s sales are arms sales. General Dynamics owns Electric Boat and Bath Iron Works, two of the largest naval vessel builders in the world. General Dynamics is notable known for its Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine, the Seawolf-class submarine, the M1 Abrams tank and the Arleigh-Burke-class destroyer.
4. Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC)
- Arms sales 2010: $28.15 billion
- Total sales 2010: $34.76 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 81%
- Total profit: $2.05 billion
- Total employment: 117,100
- Sector: Aircraft, Electronics, Missiles, Ships, Space
Northrop Grumman is the fourth-largest weapons contractor in the U.S. The company, which is based in Falls Church, Va., is one of the leaders in aerospace technology and the leading producer of naval vessels in the world. The company manufactures Nimitz-class carriers that are the current flagships of the U.S. Navy. And over the next few years it is also set to build the new, $9.7 billion Gerald R. Ford-class supercarriers. Northrop Grumman also develops radar systems for aircraft and ground defense, sensor systems for a variety of vehicles and several unmanned aircraft and drones. Weapons systems sales accounted for 81% of company revenue in 2010. Arms sales grew by approximately $3.5 billion between 2007 and 2010.
3. Boeing (NYSE: BA)
- Arms sales 2010: $31.36 billion
- Total sales 2010: $64.31 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 49%
- Total profit: $3.31 billion
- Total employment: 160,500
- Sector: Aircraft, Electronics, Missiles, Space
As recently as 2007, Boeing was the largest arms producer in the world. By 2008, it had fallen behind Lockheed Martin and U.K.-based BAE Systems. The aerospace and defense company remains one of the largest in the world, however. Boeing is the second-largest aircraft producer in the world by deliveries, behind only Airbus. It is also the second-largest U.S. government contractor, procuring just under $19.5 billion in contracts in 2010. Major products produced by the company include the KC-767, an aerial refueling tanker, and the F-15 fighter jet. Boeing made less in arms sales in 2010 than it did in 2009, although arms sales made up a larger amount of total sales — two percentage points, to be exact — in 2010 compared to 2009. Even in 2010, however, only 49% of revenue came from arms sales, which is among the lowest rates among companies on this list.
2. BAE Systems
- Arms sales 2010: $32.88 billion
- Total sales 2010: $34.61 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 95%
- Total profit: $1.67 billion
- Total employment: 98,200
- Sector: Aircraft, Artillery, Electronics, Missiles, Military vehicles, Small arms/ammunition, Ships
BAE Systems is an aerospace and defense contractor based in the UK. The company has a major U.S. subsidiary, BAE Systems, Inc., which by itself would be the seventh-largest weapons manufacturer in the world. The British company was formed in 1999 through the merger of Marconi Electronics (which was at the time a subsidiary of GE) and British Aerospace. BAE produces weapons systems in nearly every major military category, including aircraft, defense electronics, vehicles, naval vessels and small arms. Among the company’s notable contributions are the M2/M3 Bradley fighting vehicle, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Type 45 destroyer and the Astute-class nuclear submarine. In 2010, 95% of its revenue came from arms sales, $32.88 billion in all.
1. Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT)
- Arms sales 2010: $35.73 billion
- Total sales 2010: $45.80 billion
- Arms sales as pct. of total sales: 78%
- Total profit: $2.93 billion
- Total employment: 132,000
- Sector: Aircraft, Electronics, Missiles, Space
Lockheed Martin is the largest arms-producing and military services company in the world, with nearly $3 billion more in arms sales than second place BAE Systems. Although military sales make up the majority of its revenue, it is significantly less than many other major arms-producers, including BAE’s 95% share. In addition to being the world’s largest arms-seller, Lockheed is also the largest federal contractor in the U.S. by a large margin. In 2010, the company’s government contracts totaled nearly $36 billion. Lockheed produces a number of major products, including the Trident missile and the F-16 and F-22 fighter jets. Despite being the largest military service company on this list, Lockheed is only the fourth-largest company by overall sales among the companies featured on this list. In 2007, the Lockheed was the third-largest arms producer.
Now check out these 11 weapons that only America has
President Obama jets to Florida today for a mix of official and political business that will steal some headlines in the Sunshine State and line his campaign coffers with at least $4 million.
The act of presidential piggybacking (oink) — coupling official duties, in this case a speech on the economy, with political fundraising — was not pioneered by Obama but is prominently on display this year.
Obama has taken four trips outside Washington, D.C., since Jan. 1, including 18 re-election fundraisers interspersed with various activities related to his duties as president. Most recently, Obama concluded a three-day, three-state swing when he attended eight fundraisers and two official events.
The president’s jet-setting has drawn the usual criticisms from his political opponents but also raised the curiosity and questions from taxpayers about who bears the sky-high costs.
Official presidential travel has traditionally been paid for by taxpayers as part of executive branch operations, while political trips and events are to be covered by a candidate’s campaign committee. On the occasions that they mix, the costs are to be split.
“Most presidents have doubled up on trips and said they followed the law, which is a complex formula no one really understands,” said Brendan Doherty, a political science professor at the U.S. Naval Academy and author of the forthcoming book “The Rise of the President’s Permanent Campaign.”
“And even on a fully political trip, the taxpayer ends up paying part of the bill,” he said, citing the nature of the American presidency.
As a rule of thumb, an incumbent president’s campaign is expected to reimburse the government the cost of a first class commercial airline ticket for each person riding Air Force One to or from a political event, campaign finance experts say.
But that amount doesn’t come close to covering the proportional operating cost of Air Force One, or the army of Secret Service agents, White House advance teams, the fleet of Air Force cargo planes transporting the presidential motorcade or the helicopters that often ferry the president from an airport to a remote site.
Air Force One – known in the military as VC-25 – costs $179,750 per flight hour alone in fiscal year 2012, Maj. Michelle Lai of the 89th Airlift Wing told ABC News.
That figure includes fuel, flight consumables, depot level repairs, aircraft overhaul and engine overhaul. Pilot and airmen salaries are not included because they are paid regardless of the plane’s use, Lai said.
Obama’s trip to Florida and back today will cost at least $674,000 in Air Force One flight time alone.
His three-day, three-state swing that included two official events and eight fundraisers, netting more than $8 million last week, incurred flight costs of $2.1 million, based on the Air Force figure and flight times gathered from press pool reports.
As for how the proportion of that bill is broken down for Obama campaign to pay, experts say the law is murky and the practice of reimbursement somewhat “on your honor.”
“At the end of the day the Federal Election Commission has not been abundantly clear about how the costs of mixed purpose travel should be paid for,” said Paul Ryan, an expert in FEC law with the Campaign Finance Institute.