So whose was the L.A. 'mystery missile'?

So whose was the L.A. 'mystery missile'?
By Jack Cashill

On Monday evening, Nov. 8, a helicopter-borne Los Angeles news crew shot stunning footage of what appeared to be a missile rising out of the Pacific about 35 miles west of the city.

In the days since, competing theories have crowded the Internet as to what that news crew actually recorded. In a quick survey, nearly half of the technical experts with whom I corresponded were inclined to believe the jet contrail theory given tepid blessing by the Pentagon.

My own research into the destruction of TWA Flight 800 off the coast of Long Island in July 1996, however, has left me forever suspicious of official government explanations.

This is especially true when there is a Democrat in the White House, as there also was in 1996. On these occasions, the media can be impressively incurious.

One alternative theory for a missile scenario deserves attention if only for its compelling logic. In the dissection of any seeming conspiracy, logic precedes logistics. The why of an event matters at least as much as the what.

Try this logic on for size: Last week, President Obama wrapped up his Asian junket with a trip to the G-20 summit in Seoul.

There, as Bloomberg reports, Obama "attacked China's policy of undervaluing its currency." Continuing its military metaphors, Bloomberg adds that the gathering was "marked by clashes." Not without its own ammunition, China "took aim at the Federal Reserve's monetary easing."

Had the Chinese wanted to use more than words to show their ability to strip America of its creature comforts, they could not have chosen a more symbolic way than an EMP – electromagnetic pulse –attack on, say, a cruise ship like the Splendor.

As it happens, the Splendor lost its power early Monday, Nov. 8, some 44 miles offshore and roughly 200 miles south of San Diego. No media report that I could find questioned the official "fire in the engine room" explanation. It may even be true.

Later that same day, however, about 300 miles north, the news crew spotted the apparent missile launch. With the presumed missile launch might the U.S. have been saying to China, "You can take out our cruise ships, but we can take out your country"? Or might China have been saying to the U.S., "We have got you squarely in our crosshairs"?

"Andrew," a retired U.S. Navy fire-control technician platform-certified in the gun and missile systems on board Adams-class guided missile destroyers, argues for the latter.

"What I saw in the recent video concerning the object 30 miles off the coast of California," contends Andrew, "is blatantly a foreign-made, large Cruise or ICBM missile, being launched by a sub-surface aquatic platform."

Andrew believes it is not one of ours because the vapor trail appears brownish or "dirty." Says Andrew, "We put a lot of sweat and money into our 'birds' and part of that is the fuel cells. They burn very clean, a whitish-blue in fact, not a dirty blackish brown."

Adds Andrew, "Any high-ranking expert who believes this is a condensation trail off of a commercial airliner is lying or stupid. I hope you hear from other fire-control techs who saw the same thing I did!"

Andrew also rules out the possibility that this was one of our missiles accidentally launched. A launch of a missile of this size – large Cruise or ICBM, according to Andrew – requires at least five people all doing something specific at the right time.

"There is no 'one red button' to launch a missile," says Andrew. "That's all Hollywood BS. It's impossible to accidentally launch a missile!"

As was true with the demise of TWA Flight 800, which killed 230 good people, the media are content to sleep through the ensuing investigation. Citizen journalists, however, are a naturally skeptical breed.

Glen Schulze, whose technical expertise proved very helpful in the TWA Flight 800 investigation, sent the FAA a Freedom of Information Act request within three days of the sighting.

In that Schulze has already experienced roadblocks unique to his own situation, allow me to cite his references for those who might be interested in following up on their own.

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552 and /or the Privacy Act, 4 U.S.C. 552a, I hereby submit the following specific request for SO CAL TRACON Radar Data from FAA monitored flight operations on the following day and times in electronic form via CD media.
This is an urgent FOIA request for SO CAL TRACON Radar Data – both primary and secondary returns – described and identified as follows –

An electronic file/s containing time-of-day and the spherical radar coordinates and applicable beacon altitudes of all radar target returns of all types – primary and secondary – from all SO CAL TRACON antennas within a 100 Nautical mile range of Santa Catalina Island between 0000 and 0300 Zulu 9 November, 2010. The returns from multiple FAA antenna sites may be integrated together into one 3 hour file time base as was done by the SO CAL TRACON in responding to FOIA# 2008-002427WS.

There was a time when the major media used to do the reporting citizen journalists now do. Today, the media content themselves with recycling White House press releases and dismissing real reporters as "conspiracy theorists."

As the truth reveals itself, stay tuned to WND. We will keep you posted.

Whatever it was, it wasn't an airplane contrail. The lighting is wrong. Were it an airplane contrail, it would have been brighter, whiter, the farther away it was, and clearly it wasn't.

However, I do not think the Chinese are ready, just yet, to challenge the US like this.

imaginethat wrote:Whatever it was, it wasn't an airplane contrail. The lighting is wrong. Were it an airplane contrail, it would have been brighter, whiter, the farther away it was, and clearly it wasn't.

However, I do not think the Chinese are ready, just yet, to challenge the US like this.

I dunno....a missile went up...and the United State did nothing. What is this challenge you speak of? It seems to me someone shot off a missile and got no credit for doing so. Perhaps they need to do something more dramatic next time?

And what was the US supposed to do?

If it was a Chinese missile, I suppose we could retaliate by refusing to honor the debt they hold.

Or who knows? A malfunctioning US missile? Do you think they'd tell us if it was. I don't think so.

What is with conservatives recently? Have we gotten addicted to the fear so vigorously purveyed by the neoconservatives? Do we need to be fearful now? Has it become our daily fix?

The Ds go around all hope and changey, and the Rs go around all gloom and doomy. Both sides are run by jackasses, and they sure as hell know how to ride the emotions of the people.

imaginethat wrote:And what was the US supposed to do?

If it was a Chinese missile, I suppose we could retaliate by refusing to honor the debt they hold.

Or who knows? A malfunctioning US missile? Do you think they'd tell us if it was. I don't think so.

What is with conservatives recently? Have we gotten addicted to the fear so vigorously purveyed by the neoconservatives? Do we need to be fearful now? Has it become our daily fix?

The Ds go around all hope and changey, and the Rs go around all gloom and doomy. Both sides are run by jackasses, and they sure as hell know how to ride the emotions of the people.

That pretty much sums it up.
For the record, I do think this was a Chinese missile, which is why it is being kept quiet. It puts BO in an untenable situation if word get out....so the best thing to do is keep it quiet.