Slashdot Mirror


Former Military Personnel Claim Aliens Are Monitoring Our Nukes

An anonymous reader quotes Reuters "Witness testimony from more than 120 former or retired military personnel points to an ongoing and alarming intervention by unidentified aerial objects at nuclear weapons sites, as recently as 2003. In some cases, several nuclear missiles simultaneously and inexplicably malfunctioned while a disc-shaped object silently hovered nearby. Six former US Air Force officers and one former enlisted man will break their silence about these events at the National Press Club and urge the government to publicly confirm their reality." I won't worry until Gort shows up.

9 of 498 comments (clear)

  1. Not a Reuters story by longacre · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is a press release written by some guys hawking their book, it was not written by a journalist.

    1. Re:Not a Reuters story by citylivin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Indeed! from reddit:
      PR Newswire is NOT Reuters!

       

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    2. Re:Not a Reuters story by Megor1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Anyone can send what they want out the PR newswire for $500

      --
      Everyone that disagrees with me is a paid shill
    3. Re:Not a Reuters story by Tyler+Durden · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't watch The Colbert Report. That show will confuse the living hell out of you.

      --
      Happy people make bad consumers.
  2. Re:Correlation by jpapon · · Score: 4, Informative
    Working near nuclear missiles doesn't expose you to higher levels of radiation.

    For example, you are actually exposed to less radiation while onboard a US nuclear sub than you would receive on the surface.

    --
    -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
  3. Re:Correlation by CarpetShark · · Score: 4, Informative

    Isn't there a chance that, considering almost all were in close contact with nuclear weapons, the radiation was screwing with their head?

    Nuclear radiation isn't known to cause that kind of delusion as far as I know. I think you're onto something with the common factor though; being responsible for a nuclear missile might well cause a lot of people to become paranoid, and perhaps even to imagine some higher power taking the responsibility/functionality away from them.

  4. But wait.... by rickb928 · · Score: 4, Informative

    This was a panel discussion held at the National Press Club.

    Not a meeting of the National Press Club.

    Big difference. They rented the room...

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  5. Re:Correlation by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Informative

    Working near nuclear missiles doesn't expose you to higher levels of radiation.

    That depends on how near to which parts of them.
     

    For example, you are actually exposed to less radiation while onboard a US nuclear sub than you would receive on the surface.

    That's true - so long as you don't spend any time near the reactor compartment or any nuclear weapons that may be onboard. </neitherconfirmnordeny>

    Why yes, I *am* a former SSBN crewman - why do you ask?

  6. As a matter of fact: Nope, no fact-checkers by yelvington · · Score: 4, Informative

    Newspapers used to have a position called a "fact-checker" .

    As a matter of fact, they did not.

    While newspapers conventionally have had editors who often checked facts, they weren't called fact-checkers, and their primary function usually was to fix bad writing (sometimes the job was more like translation) and to write headlines to fit layouts. The position was usually called "copy editor" or "copyreader" in the United States and "subeditor" in the UK. The primary responsibility for getting things right has always been placed on the reporter, whose job is to gather information and put it into something resembling the written word.

    I've been in journalism for 40 years, and my dad was a newspaper editor before me. The only time I've encountered a "fact checker" has been in connection with a magazine article. Magazine articles often are outsourced to freelancers, whose butts are not necessarily available for kicking the next morning if something is wrong, so fact-checkers are employed to verify information before it's published. Typically they'll call a news source: "Is your name really Heywood Jablome?" There''s no time for that in a daily newsroom.

    Of course, the cited "story" is not journalism at all, but rather an announcement pushed out by PR Newswire, which is a publicity release distribution service. Reuters carries PR Newswire because often the "press releases" contain legitimate and useful information, but it fails to adequately label the content for what it really is.

    So any perceived decline in the profession of journalism can't be blamed for this wacky crap.