Welcome Guest!
 SlickPlus2
 Previous Message All Messages Next Message 
MR #10 COLUMBIA: ACCIDENT OR SHOOTDOWN?  Jim Rarey
 Mar 01, 2003 12:16 PST 


MEDIUM RARE

by Jim Rarey



February 8, 2003



COLUMBIA: ACCIDENT OR SHOOTDOWN?



When a government agency suffers a catastrophic failure, one of the
first reactions is self-preservation. In the case of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Columbia disaster,
the cover-up began even before the event.



In the last several years NASA has seen increasing criticism from
Congress as an expensive boondoggle with little scientific benefit. This
is particularly true with the space station which some see as a
financial fiasco that is little more than a PR program to trumpet
US/Russia “cooperation” with U.S. taxpayers paying most of Russia’s
share of the cost as well as our own.



As NASA expanded the number of shuttle flights, improvements in safety
features were postponed as scarce budget dollars were reallocated. When
a safety panel warned last year of problems, NASA removed five of the
nine members and fired two consultants. A sixth member, Admiral Bernard
Kauderer, was so upset he resigned from the panel.



In the immediate aftermath of the Columbia crash, attention focused on
ceramic tiles that shielded the fragile body of the orbiter from the
intense heat of over 3,000 F it experienced when it reentered the
earth’s atmosphere. Ground readings of heat sensors on the shuttle had
shown alarming elevation of temperatures on parts of the body. The
logical inference was that the shuttle had lost some of the protective
tiles.



It was then disclosed that a piece of insulation on the fuel tank had
come loose on liftoff and hit one of the wings. A team reviewed videos
of the takeoff and concluded the incident did not pose a safety hazard.
This was reported to the staff of program manager Ron Dittemore. While
Dittemore told a new conference he accepted full responsibility as
program manager, he had not shown enough interest to actually attend the
review meeting. He initially dismissed the falling insulation as a cause
of the shuttles failure.



Two panels were set up to investigate the national tragedy. One
comprised NASA officials and the other an “independent” panel, made up
of military brass and representatives from other government agencies
(More about the membership of the “independent” panel later.) The
so-called independent panel at first was to work under the direction of
the NASA Administrator, Bush appointee Sean O’Keefe. However, pressure
from Congress and others forced O’Keefe to relinquish control to Admiral
Harold W. Gehman, chair of the panel.



In the meantime, a steady stream of articles in the mainstream media,
led by the venerable New York Times, exposed a litany of problems NASA
has encountered over the last dozen years with both the insulation and
the heat-resistant tiles. This in itself is curious as we are used to
seeing the NYT and other media make excuses for government failures
usual blaming under funding, lack of communication and low-level
incompetence.



Veteran researchers know that the New York Times is a transmission belt
(mouthpiece) for the elite power structure in Washington and New York.
It prides itself as being the “newspaper of record” for the country with
its motto, “All the news that’s fit to print.” A more fitting title is
the one given his book by former Times editor Herman Dinsmore, “All the
news that fits.” At any rate, the news that is emphasized in the Times
is what the power structure wants the public to believe, whether or not
it is t rue or merely diversionary.



NASA has admitted that, theoretically, loss of just a few tiles could
start a reaction that would cause the shuttle to disintegrate. If that
is true, it’s a wonder in view of the news articles about known problems
how they convinced astronauts to make the trips, assuming they were
informed of past problems with the tiles.



A total of about 24,000 tiles are used on each shuttle and each one is
hand glued to the body. A “wiggle” test is made to see if the tile
bonded which experienced technicians can only do properly. If not bonded
properly, they are subject to coming off under intense heat. The same is
t rue of the adhesive holding the insulation on the fuel tank. The tank
contains fuel kept at a temperature of below minus 400 degrees
Fahrenheit and formation of ice has been a problem that has come off and
hit the tiles. Also, the extreme cold causes the adhesive to shrink once
it has been applied.



United Space Alliance is the prime contractor for the NASA shuttle
program. It is a joint venture of Boeing and Lockheed Martin defense
contractors who formed the company rather than compete against each
other for individual contracts with NASA. It handles programs at both
the Kennedy Center in Florida and the Johnson Space Center in Houston,
Texas. The venture subcontracts work out to hundreds of other companies.




A 1995 study showed that 90 percent of all tile damage resulted from
foam (insulation) on the fuel tank “debonding” during liftoff and
smacking into the craft. In 1997 technicians found about 100 damaged
tiles on the Columbia caused by loss of insulation unseen by launch
cameras.



Although only one such debonding was reported in Columbia’s January
liftoff, program manager Dittemore told a new conference that other
cameras were “out of focus” and they didn’t get a clear view of the
entire launch.



The flood of stories reporting significant problems in the program, of
which the above is only a sampling, would lead one to believe that the
Columbia disaster can be directly attributed to NASA’s failure to solve
the quality and safety problems endemic in the shuttle program. That is
unless the uncharacteristic openness of the government and media is
meant to divert attention from another possible cause.



An amateur astronomer/photographer in California may have caught the
actual cause of the demise of Columbia on film. The San Francisco man
(whose name is being withheld) had set a camera up on a tripod and was
shooting separate frames, about six to eight seconds apart, as Columbia
streaked across the California sky.



As he shot the five frames, the photographer said he saw several
fragments break away from the shuttle. However it wasn’t until he
developed the film that he saw what has come to be called the “West
Coast Anomaly.” The film revealed the space shuttle getting zapped by a
purplish electrical bolt with an odd “L” shape. Two San Francisco
Chronicle reporters, who viewed the photographs, confirmed the
description. The photos were taken just seven minutes before the
Columbia completely disintegrated over Texas.



The bay area man contacted the Johnson Space Center in Houston and
former astronaut Tammy Jernigan was sent to collect his camera and the
photographs to deliver to NASA. Her first reaction on seeing the picture
is quoted as “wow.” Jernigan is currently a manager at the Department of
Energy’s secret Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. The University of
California, under a contract to the Dept. of Energy, runs the lab.



NASA is also interested in analyzing a video shot by Jay Lawson of the
Fleischmann Planetarium at the University of Nevada at Reno. His video
shows a burst of light at the shuttle just moments before NASA’s
timeline shows heat sensors recording an unusual increase in surface
temperature on the orbiter.



Before any analysis had been done, a NASA spokesman advanced two
possible explanations for the phenomenon on the San Francisco photo.
Although on a tripod he said the camera might have been jiggled while
snapping the picture. Alternatively the apparent electrical charge could
be what NASA calls a “sprite” which is an electromagnetic phenomenon in
the upper atmosphere that jumps from clouds to the ionosphere or in the
reverse direction. It is little understood (at least by NASA) although
an expert in the field discounted that possibility from the description
and the fact that the clear sky was cloudless at the time.



Regardless of source, such a blast of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) energy
would do considerable damage to the shuttle perhaps destroying tiles or
at least loosening the adhesives holding the tiles and insulation in
place. The consequence is eerily similar to the effect of EMP weaponry
developed by the U.S. Military in the general category of directed
energy.



In that vein it may be instructive to examine the backgrounds of the
seven-member “independent” panel appointed by NASA Administrator Sean
O’Keefe (who also appointed all members of the in-house NASA panel).
Aside from two civilian safety experts from the Department of
Transportation and the Federal Aeronautics Administration (FAA), the
other five are top military brass.

Chairman of the panel (of which the official title is, “Space Shuttle
Mishap Interagency Investigation Board”) is Rear Admiral (Ret.) Harold
Gehman. Gehman was the first commander of the U.S. Joint Forces Command.
His last assignment before retiring in 2000 was a dual one. He was
Supreme NATO Commander, Atlantic and Commander of all military forces in
the continental United States.



Gehman also headed the military investigation of the bombing of the
U.S.S. Cole in Yemen, competing with the FBI investigation headed by
anti-terrorism chief John O’Neill. The U.S. ambassador to Yemen, Barbara
Bodine, felt O’Neill was getting cooperation from Yemeni officials that
the military was not and eventually declared O’Neill persona non grata
and he was sent back to New York.



O’Neill retired from the FBI after clashing with FBI Director Louis
Freeh over the bureau’s failure to investigate Saudi Arabia’s support of
terrorist activities. Shortly after he took the position of Security
Director at the World Trade Center, O’Neill died mysteriously in the
9/11 attacks. He had successfully evacuated the first tower that was
hit, where is office was located, but his body was found under a
stairwell in the second tower.



Rear Admiral Stephen Turcotte is commander of the U.S. Naval Safety
Center at Norfolk, Virginia.



Major General John L. Barry is director of Plans and Programs,
Headquarters Air Force Materiel Command at Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base in Ohio UFO researchers will recognize the base as the home of the
notorious top-secret “Hangar 18” where relics from the 1947 Roswell, New
Mexico. “UFO incident” occurred.



Major General Kenneth W. Hess is U.S. Air Force Chief of Safety,
Kirtland AF Base at Kirtland, New Mexico. The base runs the Directed
Energy Directorate of the AF Directed Energy Laboratory located 140
miles north of the base at the northern end of the White Sands missile
range. The Directorate’s charter is to improve the Air Force’s ability
to track missiles and then destroy them with laser energy through the
atmosphere.



Last, but certainly not least, is Brigadier General Duane W. Deal. To
insure no bias is inserted by this writer, a portion of General Deal’s
official biography is reproduced verbatim from the Air Force website.

“Brig. Gen. Duane W. Deal is Commander, 21st Space Wing, Peterson Air
Force Base, Colo. The Air Force’s largest wing geographically and
organizationally, the wing consists of a work force of more than 6,000
officer, enlisted, civilian and contract employees. This work force
provides missile warning and space control for combat forces and the
governments of the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom through
its 35 units operating 14 space weapon systems at 20 worldwide locations
in six countries spread across 10 time zones.”

That should put to rest any controversy over whether or not the U.S.
military has operational anti-missile weapons in space.

According to a Feb. 6th article by Dan Feldstein in the Houston
Chronicle, “A piece of debris classified “top secret” is somewhere among
the thousands of shards of the space shuttle Columbia spread across
Texas.” He is referring to a telecommunication device that handles
encrypted messages between the shuttle and ground.

Although DOD payload specialist David Hess said the device was not used
in the lone Defense experiment on the shuttle (an AF miniature satellite
threat reporting system) might it be used to cloak the entire
investigation in secrecy under the rubric of “national security?”

We shall have to wait and see if the openness so far displayed by the
government and media extends to the analysis and explanation of the
“West Coast Anomaly.”

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes.)

Permission is granted to reproduce this article in its entirety.

The author is a freelance writer based in Romulus, Michigan. He is a
former newspaper editor and investigative reporter, a retired customs
administrator and accountant, and a student of history and the U.S.
Constitution.

If you would like to receive Medium Rare articles directly, please
contact the author at jimrarey @comcast.net.

	
 Previous Message All Messages Next Message 
  Check It Out!

  Topica Channels
 Best of Topica
 Art & Design
 Books, Movies & TV
 Developers
 Food & Drink
 Health & Fitness
 Internet
 Music
 News & Information
 Personal Finance
 Personal Technology
 Small Business
 Software
 Sports
 Travel & Leisure
 Women & Family

  Start Your Own List!
Email lists are great for debating issues or publishing your views.
Start a List Today!

© 2001 Topica Inc. TFMB
Concerned about privacy? Topica is TrustE certified.
See our Privacy Policy.