“Divine Strake” vs. ‘Divine Strike’ – Did Extraterrestrials Deter the Pentagon from a Preemptive Nuclear War Against Iran?
Exopolitics Research Study #11
Copyright © Michael E. Salla, PhD
drsalla@exopolitics.org
www.exopolitics.org
August 12, 2006
***
IntroductionOn August 31, 2006, a UN imposed deadline will pass for Iran to comply with international efforts to prevent it developing a nuclear enrichment program that could lead to Iran acquiring nuclear weapons capacity. Iran’s predicted non-compliance is likely to once again lead to speculation on a possible US led military campaign to remove Iran’s hidden nuclear facilities, and the possible use of US bunker busting weapons. In considering such a possibility, it is important to evaluate the background factors and policy debates surrounding the indefinite delay of a simulated bunker busting weapon test in June 2006, Divine Strake, that many considered to be a simulation for the development of tactical nuclear bunker busting weapons that would be used against Iran.The possibility of a preemptive nuclear war against Iran led to much internet debate and media interest over whether this could result in extraterrestrial intervention to deter a preemptive war, and how such intervention might occur. Some speculated that a comet strike orchestrated by extraterrestrials may occur, while others discussed a range of alternative extraterrestrial interventions. Consequently, the public announcement of the indefinite delay of ‘Divine Strake’ on May 25/26 led to speculation that extraterrestrials may have played a significant role in this decision by the Pentagon. This paper explores such a possibility and examines whether there is sufficient evidence to conclude that extraterrestrials may have played a role in deterring the Pentagon from launching a preemptive nuclear war against Iran.Was Divine Strake a simulation for a nuclear bunker busting weapon?‘Divine Strake’ was initially brought to public attention with a story in the Washington Post on March 31, 2006, titled, “Pentagon to Test a Huge Conventional Bomb”. Ann Tyson wrote:A huge mushroom cloud of dust is expected to rise over Nevada's desert in June when the Pentagon plans to detonate a gigantic 700-ton explosive -- the biggest open-air chemical blast ever at the Nevada Test Site -- as part of the research into developing weapons that can destroy deeply buried military targets.[1]Tyson interviewed James A. Tegnelia, director of the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency, who confirmed that the test was “aimed at determining how well a massive conventional bomb would perform against fortified underground targets.”The Washington Post article immediately raised public concern over the reference to the mushroom cloud it would generate, whether it was conventional bomb test or not, and whether Divine Strake was secretly designed to simulate a nuclear bunker busting weapon to be used on fortified underground targets.According to Andrew Lichterman, the first public evidence of Project Strake was found in February 2005 Department of Defense budget documents that revealed plans to conduct tests that would simulate the effects of a nuclear weapon. He described a:"Full-Scale tunnel defeat demonstration using high explosives to simulate a low yield nuclear weapon ground shock environment at Department of Energy’s Nevada Test Site” in fiscal year (FY) 2006.[2]Lichterman discovered descriptions of the same program in February 2006 budget documents that described the program of which the Divine Strake test was apparently a part, “will develop a planning tool that will improve the war fighter’s confidence in selecting the smallest proper nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities while minimizing collateral damage.”[3]According to Lichterman, Divine Strake is part of classified Pentagon Advanced Concepts study called Tunnel Target Defeat Advanced Concept and Technology Demonstration(s).[4] Here is how the “Tunnel Target Defeat” project was described in a February 2005 Budget document:The Tunnel Target Defeat Advanced Concept and Technology Demonstration(s) (ACTD) will develop a planning tool that will improve the war fighter’s confidence in selecting the smallest nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities while minimizing collateral damage.[5]If Divine Strake was part of the “Tunnel Target Defeat Advanced Concept” project which was unambiguously described in budget documents as an atmospheric test using chemicals to simulate a low yield nuclear bunker busting weapon, then Divine Strake was simulating a nuclear bunker busting weapon. Since the US Congress had already refused funding for the study of low yield nuclear bunker busting weapons, the official language used to describe Divine Strake deliberately avoided all reference to it simulating nuclear weapon explosions.In the initial Washington Post report of the Divine Strake test, all references to the simulation of low yield nuclear weapons were removed, and Divine Strake was described as follows:The test is aimed at determining how well a massive conventional bomb would perform against fortified underground targets — such as military headquarters, biological or chemical weapons stockpiles, and long-range missiles — that the Pentagon says are proliferating among potential adversaries around the world.The Washington Post story went on to describe the importance of Divine Strake in the development of a conventional bunker busting bomb:Such a bomb would be a conventional alternative to a nuclear weapon proposed by the Bush administration, which has run into opposition on Capitol Hill. The Pentagon for several years has sought funding for research into the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) — also known as the “bunker buster” — after the administration’s 2001 Nuclear Posture Review stated that no weapon in the U.S. arsenal could threaten a growing number of buried targets. Congress, however, has repeatedly refused to grant funding for a study on a nuclear bunker buster, instead directing money toward conventional alternatives.Consequently, it can be concluded that Divine Strake was originally conceived as a simulation for a low yield nuclear weapon, but this was covered up in subsequent public reports that described it as a conventional test due to the opposition of Congress to nuclear bunker busting weapons.What was the Significance of Divine Strake?Seymour Hersh wrote an article in the April edition of the New Yorker that gave a chilling account of the Bush administration's efforts to get the Pentagon to go along with its war plans for Iran. Hersh claimed that Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were leading a Bush administration effort to pressure a reluctant Pentagon to go along with their Iran policy which involved the preemptive use of tactical nuclear weapons. Hersh wrote: "that the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons in such situations has gained support from the Defense Science Board, an advisory panel whose members are selected by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld."[6]According to one of Hersh's sources the Defense Science Board is "telling the Pentagon that we can build the B61 [tactical nuclear weapon] with more blast and less radiation," he said. Hersh's describes that the chairman of the Defense Science Board, William Schneider, Jr., "served on an ad-hoc panel on nuclear forces sponsored by the National Institute for Public Policy." According to Hersh,the panel's report recommended treating tactical nuclear weapons as an essential part of the U.S. arsenal and noted their suitability "for those occasions when the certain and prompt destruction of high priority targets is essential and beyond the promise of conventional weapons." Several signers of the report are now prominent members of the Bush Administration, including Stephen Hadley, the national-security adviser; Stephen Cambone, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence; and Robert Joseph, the Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.In an article released on April 9, "Exopolitical Implications of a Preemptive Nuclear War in Iran," I speculated that the test would be used to persuade the public that "bunker busting" weapons that generated mushroom clouds in a possible attack against Iran were not nuclear weapons but were conventional. I wrote:The Bush administration likely plans to advertise the June test as a new 'conventional' weapon, that generates a mushroom cloud while destroying underground facilities. Consequently, preemptive nuclear strike against Iran's underground facilities could be marketed to a skeptical American and global public as a series of 'new' conventional weapons being used rather than tactical nuclear weapons. The Bush administration could argue that the mushroom clouds generated by the new conventional 'bunker busting' weapons are not due to them being nuclear weapons, and any radioactive fallout was 'proof' that the bunker busting bomb had in fact destroyed a nuclear facility.[7]Consequently, the significance of 'Divine Strake' was threefold. First, it would have made it easier to justify a preemptive war against Iran where the public and senior military leaders were opposed to the use of tactical nuclear weapons as an instrument of national security policy. Divine Strake would have enabled the Bush administration to launch a preemptive nuclear attack against Iran without confirming that nuclear weapons had actually been used.Second, Divine Strake would have enabled the Pentagon to refine its understanding of low yield nuclear bunker busting weapons that could be used against underground assets in countries such as Iran. This would have been indispensable for minimizing collateral damage and therefore the likely adverse public reaction to the actual use of tactical nuclear weapons.Finally, the testing was scheduled at a time when increasing international attention on Iran’s determination to push ahead with its nuclear enrichment program had made it likely that the UN Security Council would shortly pass a resolution declaring Iran in violation of international standards established by the International Atomic Energy Agency. This would have justified international sanctions either from the UN or from individual nations. The use of preemptive military force against Iran would therefore have been more likely thereby requiring the use of bunker busting nuclear weapons to destroy Iran’s hidden nuclear facilities. The completion of Divine Strake would have signaled to the Iranian government that the US was determined to pursue military action Iran if it didn’t reverse its nuclear policy.Consequently, the Nevada test scheduled for Divine Strike would have indicated that a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran was impending. After having been initially delayed from June 2 to June 23, officials from the Pentagon first announced on May 25/26 that Divine Strake had been indefinitely postponed. Given the significance of 'Divine Strake', the announcement was a startling turn around.Indefinite Postponement of Divine StrakeThe rationale for the Pentagon’s indefinite delay was stated to be the reversal of a key government agency over the environmental impact of the scheduled test. In a May 26 press release, the National Nuclear Security Administration, part of the Energy Department, announced the withdrawal of its “Finding of No Significant Impact” for Divine Strake.[8] The Agency declared: “This action is being taken to clarify and provide further information regarding background levels of radiation from global fallout in the vicinity of the Divine Strake experiment.”[9]
What caused the withdrawal of the “no significant” environmental impact determination that had earlier been granted by the same organization? One explanation is the rising tide of protests by various activists, protests by indigenous peoples, and different lawsuits organized in Nevada. These had quickly built up with a rapid coalition of concerned citizens and indigenous Indian organizations that were challenging the proposed test.[10] While such protests and lawsuits certainly created a public relations problem for the Pentagon’s Threat Reduction Agency in charge of the test, it is questionable that these would have been sufficient for the surprising withdrawal of the “no significant” environmental impact determination that led to the indefinite delay of Divine Strake.A second explanation is that the publication of the Hersh New Yorker article tilted the argument in favor of those opposed to a preemptive nuclear strike plan for Iran. Hersh's article first alerted the general public that plans to use nuclear weapons had progressed beyond the contingency planning level, and the Bush administration were seriously pushing to have these operationalized.[11] Hersh exposed the furious policy debate occurring between the Pentagon and the Bush administration and a near revolt among key military personnel. Such a revolt was echoed by the unprecedented series of former generals openly criticizing the Bush administration’s management of the Iraq occupation in April 2006. The revolt allegedly had more to do with a preemptive strike against Iran than past policy on Iraq. It led to Hawks within the Bush administration, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others identified by Hersh eventually deciding to abandon plans for a preemptive nuclear attack.[12] In a more recent New Yorker article, Hersh describes the victory of Pentagon doves over the Bush administration hawks:In late April, the military leadership, headed by General Pace, achieved a major victory when the White House dropped its insistence that the plan for a bombing campaign include the possible use of a nuclear device to destroy Iran’s uranium-enrichment plant at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. …. “Bush and Cheney were dead serious about the nuclear planning,” the former senior intelligence official told me. “And Pace stood up to them. Then the world came back: ‘O.K., the nuclear option is politically unacceptable.’ ” At the time, a number of retired officers, including two Army major generals who served in Iraq, Paul Eaton and Charles Swannack, Jr., had begun speaking out against the Administration’s handling of the Iraq war. This period is known to many in the Pentagon as “the April Revolution.” [13]The indefinite delay of Divine Strake may consequently have been a result of internal national security policy debates, and the victory of generals opposed to a nuclear bombing campaign against Iran. There is, however, a third ‘other worldly’ explanation for why Divine Strake was indefinitely postponed that needs to be considered.Threats Posed by Nuclear Weapons for Extraterrestrial CivilizationsIn 2004, Jean-Jacques Velasco, the former head of the organization monitoring UFO activities in France, SEPRA, a unit within France’s equivalent to NASA, CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales) co-authored a book, OVNI, l'évidence, that used an extensive UFO database collected by French authorities.[14] Velasco found firm empirical evidence that UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin, and a clear correlation existed between nuclear weapons testing and UFO sightings. Velasco’s book brought about a swift reaction by French authorities who forced him to resign from SEPRA, and he was reassigned to another position in CNES.Velasco’s findings are supported in the testimony of a number of military whistleblowers such as Robert Salas who was stationed at Malmstrom Air Force Base in 1967 when seven or eight nuclear minuteman missiles that were part of the Strategic Air Command (SAC) were deactivated by UFOs. Salas vividly described the incident as follows:The UFO incident happened on the morning of March 16, 1967. I was ... on duty at Oscar Flight as part of the 490th strategic missile squad and there are five launch control facilities assigned to that particular squadron.... I received a call from my topside security guard... and he said that he and some of the guards had been observing some strange lights flying around the site around the launch control facility…. I said, You mean UFO? He said, well, he didn't know what they were but they were lights and were flying around. They were not airplanes. They were not helicopters. They weren't making any noise... [A little later] our missiles started shutting down one by one. By shutting down, I mean they went into a "no-go" condition meaning they could not be launched…. These weapons were Minuteman One missiles and were of course nuclear-tipped warhead missiles... this incident was of extreme concern to SAC headquarters because they couldn't explain it.[15]Salas also claims that a similar occurrence involving ten minuteman missiles at another nearby SAC facility, Echo Flight, led to a high level inquiry by the USAF. Salas described his surprise when the investigation was terminated and he was instructed to remain silent. Salas’ testimony has been partially corroborated by other military whistleblowers such as Lt Colonel Dwynne Arneson who was also stationed at Malmstrom Air Force base in 1967, and read a top-secret communication confirming that UFOs were hovering near missile silos.[16]Salas has subsequently written about his experience and the aborted official enquiry in his book, Faded Giant.[17] He subsequently has concluded that UFOs are vitally interested in nuclear weapons and have actively interfered with these in an apparent effort to deter the US and other countries from ever using nuclear weapons. This is supported by the testimony of other whistleblowers such as Colonel Ross Dedrickson who had worked with the US Air Force and Atomic Energy Commission (ret.):After retiring from the Air Force I joined the Boeing company and was responsible for accounting for all of the nuclear fleet of Minuteman missiles. In this incident they actually photographed the UFO following the missile as it climbed into space and, shining a beam on it, neutralized the missile. I also learned of a number of incidents which happened, a couple of nuclear weapons sent into space were destroyed by the extraterrestrials…. the idea of any explosion in space by any Earth government was not acceptable to the extraterrestrials, and that has been demonstrated over and over. [18]So Dedrickson believes that nuclear explosions in space or atmosphere are clearly not acceptable to extraterrestrials and extraterrestrials interfere with nuclear delivery systems to prevent nuclear explosions. Salas believes that UFOs interfere with nuclear weapons out of an altruistic desire to prevent nuclear war on Earth. However Dedrickson gives another explanation that identifies what may be a strong self-interest in UFOs interfering with nuclear weapons. He claims that a nuclear weapons test over the Pacific in the 60s was:… one that the extraterrestrials were really concerned about because it affected our ionosphere. In fact, the ET spacecraft were unable to operate because of the pollution in the magnetic field which they depended upon. It was my understanding that in either the very end of the ‘70s or the early ‘80s that we attempted to put a nuclear weapon on the Moon and explode it for scientific measurements and other things which was not acceptable to the extraterrestrials.[19]Dedrickson’s point that extraterrestrial space craft is negatively affected by nuclear testing demonstrates that a strong self-interest is behind the extraterrestrial interference of nuclear weapons testing.In an article analyzing Velasco’s correlation of UFOs and nuclear weapons, French UFO researcher, Eric Julien speculates that the use of nuclear weapons affects the time/space continuum in ways that disrupt UFO/extraterrestrial navigation and propulsion systems.[20] He argues that there is a correlation between UFO behavior around nuclear tests and 74 alleged UFO crashes documented in Ryan Wood's book, Majic Eyes Only (2006). This is used to support Julien’s thesis that nuclear testing negatively affects UFOs by impacting the space-time continuum they use to navigate to Earth. In his book, The Science of Extraterrestrials, Julien argues that atomic explosions directly impact on the space-time continuum that they occupy.[21] This suggests that use of nuclear weapons threaten the civilizations of extraterrestrials who use space-time to travel and to establish bases of operation on or near the vicinity of the earth.Based on the data presented by Velasco, Salas, Dedrickson and Julien, it can be proposed that the use of nuclear weapons either threatens the key interests of extraterrestrial civilizations on Earth or poses a direct threat to them. Consequently, the planned use of nuclear weapons could provoke extraterrestrials to respond in a preemptive manner. Such responses would directly impact on the ability of the US and other militaries around the world to effectively plan to use nuclear weapons in military operations.If nuclear weapons pose a threat of some undefined nature to extraterrestrial civilizations or their interests, what does this suggest about the means used by extraterrestrial civilizations to respond to the possible preemptive use of nuclear weapons? More specifically, how would they have responded to the Bush administrations plans to use nuclear weapons against Iran?Based on historical precedents described by Salas and Dedrickson, it appears that extraterrestrials have the capacity to deactivate nuclear weapons while either in storage or in flight, and to destroy nuclear weapons while in flight. Consequently, extraterrestrials could give warnings through their communications with individuals and military officials of impending action to prevent the possible use of nuclear weapons. If these warnings went unheeded then extraterrestrials could take a range of defensive measures based on their influence over key policy makers and institutions, and their ability to impact on the capacities of nations to use nuclear weapons. Such measures could culminate in a coordinated set of extraterrestrial responses, a ‘Divine Strike’, to prevent the Bush administration launching a preemptive nuclear war against Iran. These responses may have been communicated and/or displayed, and actively deterred the US military from pursuing a preemptive nuclear attack against Iran.At this point, it can be asked whether the Pentagon’s announcement of an indefinite delay of Divine Strake on May 25/26, was in any way deterred by a possible Divine Strike by extraterrestrials. Furthermore, it can be asked whether public awareness of a possible extraterrestrial ‘divine strike’ played a role in the delay.Historical evidence supporting a possible extraterrestrial divine strike to prevent a preemptive nuclear war can be found in the publicly verified relationship between nuclear weapons testing and UFO sightings, extraterrestrial interference in the storage of nuclear weapons, and the alleged destruction of nuclear weapons by extraterrestrials. If extraterrestrials have acted in the past to interfere with or destroy nuclear weapons, it can be assumed that they would not have remained idle if a nuclear preemptive war against Iran affected their vital interests on Earth, and/or their ability to navigate in the Earth’s vicinity. Certainly, key policy makers familiar with past extraterrestrial interventions to make inoperable or to destroy nuclear weapons, would have factored such a possibility into their calculations over the effectiveness of a preemptive nuclear campaign against Iran. It may have been decided that such a campaign would have been compromised by extraterrestrial interference in the delivery systems of tactical nuclear weapons.Extraterrestrial Divine StrikePublic awareness of a possible extraterrestrial ‘Divine Strike’ first emerged after a series of articles between Eric Julien and the author that discussed the extraterrestrial nuclear relationship, and how this related to the Bush administration’s plans for a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran. In the April 2006 edition of the Exopolitics Journal, Julien argued that nuclear weapons testing threatened extraterrestrial civilizations due to the disruptive effects of such weapons on the space time continuum used by them to visit the Earth.[22] He provided some statistical data on the correlation between nuclear weapons testing and UFO sightings/crashes to support his hypothesis. He speculated that the threat posed by humanity's irresponsible use of nuclear weapons could lead to extraterrestrials taking preemptive actions to prevent such use.Julien’s paper was followed on April 8 by Hersh’s article describing the steps taken by the Bush administration to secure military approval for a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran.[23] I subsequently authored an article on April 9 discussing the plans for a preemptive nuclear attack and how this might be responded to by extraterrestrials that might be directly affected by the use of such weapons.[24] I argued that extraterrestrials could respond in a number of ways to deter the US from launching a preemptive nuclear war against Iran.Julien then authored a paper on April 11, "May 25, 2006 - Day of Destiny," where he discussed his research concerning Comet 73P Schwassman-Wachman 3.[25] He linked the use of nuclear weapons and the threat they pose to extraterrestrial civilizations, to the scheduled May passage of the comet. He cited coded messages contained in some crop circles to support his argument that the unexplained break up of comet 73P in 1995 was linked to extraterrestrials. He further argued that extraterrestrials deliberately fragmented the comet due to their awareness that nuclear weapons would eventually be used in a war and that the extraterrestrials' intent was to time the comet's passage to coincide with a predicted nuclear war. Using an online NASA orbital simulator, Julien tracked the comet's passage, and argued that several fragments from comet Schwassman-Wachman's, would pass through the Earth's ecliptic plane on May 25. This in his view was the most likely date of impact. Using data gained from his own private extraterrestrial communications, Julien predicted that the impact would occur in the Atlantic Ocean and generate giant tsunamis.Julien’s analysis and Atlantic Ocean impact prediction led to great public interest and heated debate, including a public statement I issued on April 25 disassociating myself from Julien’s comet prediction.[26] An article in Aljazeera on May 25 reported widespread panic in Morocco as a result of Julien’s comet prediction.[27] The result of the widespread public debate over possible extraterrestrial responses to a preemptive nuclear strike and Julien’s comet impact prediction, firmly brought into the public realm an association between nuclear weapons and extraterrestrial civilizations, and possible extraterrestrial responses.In conclusion, possible extraterrestrial intervention may have been a key factor in deterring key policy makers from pursuing a preemptive nuclear war against Iran. Extraterrestrial intervention may have helped tilt the policy debate in favor of ‘Pentagon doves’ opposed to a preemptive nuclear campaign. Also, public awareness of possible extraterrestrial intervention may have further helped deter policy makers from pursuing a preemptive nuclear policy. The likelihood that extraterrestrial intervention would have been identified and disseminated by members of the general public may have again helped deter a preemptive nuclear attack. Consequently, extraterrestrial intervention and growing public awareness of possible extraterrestrial responses, a ‘Divine Strike’, may have been key factors leading to the indefinite delay of ‘Divine Strake’.Conclusion: Did a possible ‘Divine Strike’ deter ‘Divine Strake’?The fact that Divine Strake was indefinitely postponed on May 25/26 was strong evidence of a very significant policy shift having occurred over the wisdom of a preemptive nuclear strike against Iran. This was soon followed by a May 31 Press conference where Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, offered to “come to the table with our E.U. colleagues and meet with Iran's representatives.”[28] The US willingness to sit down in face to face discussions with Iran was described as a “staggering turnaround of U.S. policy regarding the Islamic Republic”.[29] The indefinite delay of Divine Strake and subsequent diplomatic overtures to Iran suggest that the preemptive nuclear war option against Iran has been indefinitely pushed back or completely removed as a policy option.Furthermore, the fact that this announcement of Divine Strake’s delay occurred on Julien’s so called "Day of Destiny" may be entirely coincidental or raises the possibility that policy makers were concerned about possible extraterrestrial intervention against plans for a preemptive nuclear war. Some of the ways extraterrestrials could intervene were described in a May 29 Aljazeera article, where I outlined a number of options that might be used by extraterrestrials to affect policy as opposed to a comet strike predicted by Julien.[30] Key among these was past historical examples of extraterrestrials deactivating nuclear weapons which would have made a successful military strike using such weapons highly questionable.The indefinite delay of Divine Strake was partially influenced by domestic political opposition in the US arising from increasing demonstrations and lawsuits over its environmental impact. While public opposition was determined and increasingly well organized, it is unlikely that this on its own would have achieved the cancellation of divine strake. Therefore, a more significant factor in the delay appears to have been the apparent victory of Pentagon ‘doves’ over Bush administration ‘hawks’ in the heated internal policy debate over plans for a military solution to the Iran nuclear problem. Hersh’s description of the policy victory won by senior Pentagon officials opposed to a nuclear preemptive strike as the “April Revolution” does point to Bush administration hawks suffering a significant policy defeat.The third explanation that there may have been an extraterrestrial factor in terms of a possible ‘divine strike’ that helped deter the Bush administration from pursuing its preemptive nuclear war plans for Iran needs to be considered. The way in which extraterrestrials communicated such a possible ‘Divine Strike’ to the Bush administration, the Pentagon and the general public; and the actual way in which such a ‘Divine Strike’ would have unfolded can be best deduced from historical precedents over extraterrestrial intervention in the deactivation and/or destruction of nuclear weapons. In the author’s view, preemptive extraterrestrial action to prevent a planned nuclear strike against Iran was a credible deterrent for policy makers seriously contemplating a nuclear strike against Iran.In conclusion, 'Divine Strake' appears to have been a red line that the Pentagon/Bush administration finally did not cross and have backed off indefinitely. If extraterrestrials did or planned to intervene as the above analysis suggests, then the world's first preemptive nuclear war has been put off indefinitely as a result of extraterrestrial intervention. Furthermore, exopolitical debates in the public realm over the extent and nature of extraterrestrial intervention may have impacted on the policy making process. The possible actions that extraterrestrials might have taken to prevent a preemptive nuclear war against Iran growing public awareness of this, may have been a significant deterrent for policy makers in the Bush administration.Domestic political factors and internal policy debates undoubtedly influenced the Bush administration decision to indefinitely delay Divine Strake on May 25/26, 2006. More unknown is the significance of possible extraterrestrial intervention to deter a preemptive nuclear attack against Iran, and widespread public debate over such an intervention. The announcement of Divine Strake’s indefinite delay may be due entirely to domestic political factors and internal policy debates. If this is the case, then the forthcoming August 31 deadline for Iran to comply with UN Security Council Resolution to stop its nuclear enrichment program may again lead to the threat of military intervention against Iran, and Divine Strake may again be scheduled for testing. Alternatively, a possible extraterrestrial ‘Divine Strike’ may have deterred the US from pursuing such a policy thereby suggesting if Divine Strake does go ahead, it is unlikely to presage a nuclear strike against Iran. The May 25/26 announcement of the indefinite delay of Divine Strake may go down in history as the day a preemptive nuclear war was prevented by possible intervention of extraterrestrials and rising public awareness of such an intervention.***
About the Author: Michael E. Salla, PhD., is the author of Exopolitics: Political Implications of the Extraterrestrial Presence (Dandelion Books, 2004) and founder of the popular website: Exopolitics.Org. He has held full time academic appointments at the Australian National University, and American University, Washington DC. He has a PhD in Government from the University of Queensland, Australia. During his professional academic career, he was best known for organizing a series of citizen diplomacy initiatives for the East Timor conflict funded by U.S. Institute of Peace and the Ford Foundation. He is the Founder of the Exopolitics Institute (www.exopoliticsinstitute.org ); and Chief Editor of the Exopolitics Journal and Convenor of the June 2006, “Extraterrestrial Civilizations and World Peace Conference.”
[1] Available online at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/30/AR2006033001735.html[2] Available online at: http://disarmamentactivist.org/2006/03/31/did-the-washpost-miss-explosive-story/[3] Available online at: http://disarmamentactivist.org/2006/03/31/did-the-washpost-miss-explosive-story/[4] Available online at: http://disarmamentactivist.org/2006/03/31/did-the-washpost-miss-explosive-story/[5] Available online at: http://www.dtic.mil/descriptivesum/Y2006/DTRA/0603160BR.pdf[6] Available online at: http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060417fa_fact[7] “Exopolitical Comment #42,” http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-42.htm[8] Office of Public Affairs, National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Site Office News, May 26, 2006.[9] For further discussion go to: http://tinyurl.com/zls2h[11] Hersh, “The Iran Plans,” New Yorker, 8 April, 2006. Available online at: http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060417fa_fact.[12] See Jeffrey Steinberg, “Behind the Generals' Revolt,” Executive Intelligence Review, April 21, 2006. Available online at: http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2006/3316genls_revolt.html[13] Seymour Hersh, “Last Stand: The military’s problem with the President’s Iran policy”. New Yorker, 3 July, 2006. Available online at: http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060710fa_fact .[14] Jean-Jacques Velasco and Nicolas Montigiani, OVNI, l'évidence (Carnot Editions, 2004).[15] Cited in Steven Greer, Disclosure: Military and Government Witnesses Reveal the Greatest Secrets in Modern History (Crossing Point Inc., 2001) 167-70[16] Cited in Steven Greer, Disclosure: Military and Government Witnesses Reveal the Greatest Secrets in Modern History (Crossing Point Inc., 2001) 177.[17] Robert Salas and James Klotzhttp, Faded Giant (BookSurge Publishing 2005). Details available online at: www.ufopop.org/Special/FadedGiant.htm[18] Dedrickson, in Disclosure, 192-93.[19] Dedrickson, in Disclosure, 192-93.[20] See Julien, "Are We a Security Threat to Extraterrestrial Civilizations?" Exopolitics Journal 1:3 (2006): 164-82 . Available online at: exopoliticsjournal.com[21] See Eric Julien, La Science des Extraterrestres (JMG Editions, 2005).[22] See Julien, "Are We a Security Threat to Extraterrestrial Civilizations?" Exopolitics Journal 1:3 (2006): 164-82 . Available online at: www.exopoliticsjournal.com[24] Michael Salla, “Exopolitical Implications of a Preemptive Nuclear War against Iran.” Available online at: http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-42.htm[25] Available online at: http://www.savelivesinmay.com/slimdocs/Eric-Julien-25-MAY-2006-En.htm[26] See Michael Salla, “Public Statement Concerning Eric Julien's Prediction of Comet 73P Schwassman-Wachman 3 impacting into the Atlantic Ocean on May 25, 2006,” http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-43.htm .[27] Ahmed El Amraoui, “‘Alien Message’ Sparks Tsunami Panic,” Aljazeera, May 25, 2006. Available online at: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F4396687-6C85-4C8C-B47A-3B8F785FE95C.htm[28] Cited in: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/31/AR2006053100937.html[30] Ahmed El Amraoui, “The Truth is Way Out There,” May 29, 2006. Available online at: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EB1724B0-9E51-4F13-831F-FB4DA5E7325D.htm