Subj: Navy Spy Plane Intel
Date: 4/5/01 8:20:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time

Hi Kent, Re the Navy spy plane flap, I’ve been spending lots of time reading
threads at, where ex(?) mil/intel discuss things.  This one
post offers info from a different perspective, and slips out some tech
capabilities which pertain to this and other mil-intel capabilities we have.
  It’s worth a read. In the attached Word file I tried to highlight some of
the more outstanding points for a quick glance.  But here is the unformated
text :


In the continuing effort to make China the bogeyman of the 21st century,
Washington has scored yet another coup - the loss of the EP-3E Aries II
surveillance aircraft.
It's very reminiscent of the phony FBI Hanssen Spy Case. In other words,
what the US Government is saying just doesn't jibe with the facts.
The implausible government story states that the Aries II aircraft was
supposedly escorted by ancient Chinese F8 fighter planes to a Chinese
military base at Hainan Island.
The Aries II has an electronic counter-measure capability that could
completely fry the electronic components of a state-of-the-art MIG 29, let
alone a vintage Chinese F-8. Its defensive capability consists of highly
advanced directional microwave weaponry.
Also this US Navy aircraft uses technology that is proprietary to the
National Security Agency. Most of the technology on the aircraft is
electronic intercept in nature.
According to Department of Defense statements, all protocols were broken.
This indicates that the incident has been staged to create a deliberate
transfer of this technology. This technology is so advanced that even the
NSA was queasy about giving it to the Chinese.

Since this technology is not proprietary to the Department of Defense and
since the NSA directly controls the contractors who produce this equipment,
there wasn't any way for those who are in favor of transferring this
technology to China, as a matter of illegal covert State policy, to effect
this transfer without staging an international incident. Therefore an
incident had to be created to give the Chinese this technology.
Whoever was in charge of the aircraft command must have been in on it.
Otherwise they would not have had the authority to circumvent the protocols,
unless directly ordered to do so. The aircraft then would either be in
pieces and the crew would be floating in life rafts. Or they would all be
By the way, the military designation of the EP-3E Aries II aircraft is high
enough that all crew members carry cyanide capsules. They must not fall into
enemy hands for interrogation. And that is precisely where they are at this
The Department of Defense claims they know nothing -- another bogus claim,
since throughout the inside of the aircraft, there is a discreet video
system which continues to broadcast.
The Defense Department is also trying to imply that the Chinese are jamming
the signals, but what they're not saying is that the Chinese don't have the
technological capability to jam these signals. These are highly advanced
microburst transmissions that can even be bounced off of China's own
satellites. The Chinese would not even be aware of it. Russian and Chinese
equipment cannot even detect such complex microburst transmissions.
The protocol on this aircraft is very simple. If there was any chance that
the aircraft could fall into hostile hands, the crew is deemed to be
completely expendable. The protocol can only be overridden by the President
of the United States.
The only logical conclusion about this incident is that it is simply an
ongoing transfer of sophisticated technology to the Chinese military.
First, the government had admitted that there were 24 personnel on the
aircraft the "majority of which were US Navy personnel." The aircraft's has
19 operating stations, Who are the non-Navy personnel, which the government
refuses to identify?
Second, why did the crew not execute its emergency protocol and destroy the
The media is reporting that the crew is supposed to destroy the technology
by any means necessary. What they're not saying is that the aircraft has a
self-destruct mechanism already built in. It could have been completely
If it appears that the aircraft is about to fall into "hostile" hands, the
normal protocol is that the self-destruct mechanism is supposed to be
activated. If the aircraft is over international waters, they are supposed
to actually ditch the plane and land on the water. The aircraft is built, so
it can make an emergency water landing.
Since the Aries II is a naval aircraft, it is built to stay afloat long
enough for the crew to get out and the life rafts to automatically inflate.
The aircraft also carries emergency survival equipment with an EBIRB, an
emergency locating system.
The protocol then would have been to either destroy the plane or land on the
water, in which case, had the emergency self-destruct mechanism been
rendered inoperable for any reasons, as the plane began to sink, the
emergency self-destruct mechanism would have been activated automatically
when sea water came into contact with the amitol derivative explosives in
the mechanism. Amitol automatically explodes when sufficiently saturated by
Even if the self-destruct mechanism had been rendered inoperable, as the
aircraft sank into the ocean and filled with seawater, it would have
automatically detonated. The question remains - why weren't these protocols
If the plane was able to travel an additional 76 miles and land on hostile
territory, why couldn't it have flown to Vietnamese territorial waters? The
US Government claims that the plane was "severely damaged" and had to make
an emergency landing.
How "severely damaged" could the plane have been and still have flown 76
miles to make a landing at a Chinese air force base?
The aircraft had to fly north when it could have simply turned west. Since
it was less than 76 miles from Vietnamese territorial waters, there would
have been no threat there given the extremely hostile relationship between
Vietnam and China regarding territorial disputes in that region.
One could almost say that the reason the protocol was not invoked was
because China was not considered a "hostile" country.
The "coincidental" nature of this international incident also plays into the
hands of the Republican right and the defense contractors clamoring to sell
Taiwan the large and profitable arms package which includes the Aegis II
missile system.
The longstanding Bush family connections with defense contractors who would
profit handsomely by this sale should also not be underestimated vis-a-vis
the creation of this current incident. Regarding the yet unidentified extra
personnel on the aircraft -- could they in fact be electronics experts who
were there to help the Chinese dismantle the technology?
The key system the Chinese want from this aircraft is called SCSS, Story
Classic Surveillance System. It is the most sophisticated electronics
surveillance and communications reception technology ever constructed.
It has the ability to intercept and decode transmissions.
It can locate the source of the transmissions and automatically translate
from any language into English. It can pick up computer transmissions,
telephone and fax transmission, and long wave transmissions from submarines.
In short, this device can intercept any electronics communications generated
anywhere on the planet, underneath the ocean, and even in outer space. There
has never been anything like it. It is estimated to be 20 years ahead of any
other similar technology.
The reason why Washington wasn't able to get this device to China through
the usual illicit means is that it is proprietary to the National Security
Agency. They're the ones who control these devices and they're the ones who
build these devices.
Its capabilities are truly fantastic -- simultaneous translation in all
languages from any intercepts -- underwater traffic, cable traffic, email
traffic, telephone traffic, and satellite traffic. And it can also pinpoint
the location of where the transmission originates.
The National Security Agency has been consistently opposed to the Washington
policy of covertly arming China. NSA does not have the same vested interest
that those in the shadows of the White House and the Department of Defense
have in arming China.
It must be remembered that the modus operandi is to rearm China and to make
China the bogeyman of the 21st century, so everybody can start making money
again. Essentially it's an effort to turn back the clock.
NSA does not have a vested interest in this because it doesn't need to
operate from a large covert infrastructure. It doesn't have to generate
illicit covert monies the way others do. It's not like the CIA or Department
of Defense. It is really a more technically oriented agency dealing in
electronics. It doesn't deal in a lot of field intelligence and the sales of
weapons and narcotics to produce illegal covert revenue streams pursuant to
the sustenance of illegal illicit or surreptitious State policy. It is more
of a technical adjunct and therefore the NSA doesn't have this vested
The SCSS is proprietary technology built by the NSA. It's built by a shadowy
electronics company known as Vtek Industries, which is secretly controlled
by the NSA. It's so tightly controlled that the DoD and others in Washington
haven't been able to get their hands on it.
This SCSS system is also the same system used in the NSA Westar 7 satellite,
which has the ability to monitor all telephone communications on earth.
Unlike the Echelon system, which is an invasive system, the SCSS is a
passive intelligence gathering system.
The Chinese F8 fighters, which supposedly forced the Aries II to land, are
knock-offs of early MIG-21 jets from about 1961.
The US Government is saying that the two Chinese F8 fighters were on
"routine patrol"(you could ask -- how do they know that?) and one of them
collided with the EP-3E.
They're not mentioning the fact that the Chinese actually scrambled the
aircraft out of their airbase on Hainan Island to intercept the Aries II,
even though the aircraft was over international waters.
The electronic countermeasure capability of this aircraft is so advanced and
the Chinese ECCM (electronic counter-counter measure) is so antiquated that
it is in fact possible that the only way the Chinese aircraft could do
anything would be to ram the US aircraft..
The Aries II ECM capability would have completely fried out the fire and
control mechanisms of the F8. They couldn't have fired. They couldn't have
locked on the radar and target imaging system. The only thing they could
have done to be a threat is to have rammed the aircraft.
That part of the story has plausibility, but now they're saying the contact
was accidental.
How do you make "accidental" contact with weather conditions of a brilliant
clear sky and unlimited ceiling?
They would have visually seen it from a long way off, since it's a large
The other explanation is that the Chinese aircraft was letting the Aries II
know that if they didn't fly to Hainan Island that the Chinese pilots were
prepared to sacrifice their lives and ram the plane. In other words, "your
ECM technology may have fried our fire and control mechanism and our target
imaging system but we will still ram you."
The Chinese pilots didn't have the bigger picture. They were scrambled out
on a mission and sent after this aircraft with the instructions to force
this aircraft to land on Chinese territory by any means necessary.
It's also unlikely that the Navy personnel on the Aries II knew the reasons.
It's probably only the shadowy unidentified non-Navy extra personnel who
knew what was going on. Therefore the Navy personnel didn't really have any
choice. It was either fly the plane to Chinese territory -- or get rammed.
These are the issues the US Government is dancing around. And just like the
Hanssen case, the more the government talks about this incident, the more
they contradict what they said before.
First they said there were 24 people on the aircraft. Then when everyone
noticed the aircraft complement of people was less, they said there were
additional non-Navy personnel, which they weren't prepared to identify. Then
suddenly the F8s were on patrol. Then they admitted that they were scrambled
out. Then they said, the plane had to make an emergency landing.
The Department of Defense briefing stated that the plane was in "severe
distress" and "They were going down and they had to make an emergency
landing" when they were able to fly an additional 76 miles.
This always happens because you've got the State Dept issuing press
releases. You've got Defense issuing press releases. The Navy is issuing
press releases. And as always in government, they don't coordinate the lies.
Everyone has different agendas, and consequently there isn't any cooperation
for the LCC. The LCC (Lie Coordination Committee) function doesn't work And
this really exists. Usually it comprises one of the Deputy Assistant
Secretaries of each agency in the cabinet.
The problem is when there are so many turf battles and cases of inter-agency
rivalry, these agencies have different agendas and the normal Lie
Coordination function doesn't work.
Most recently, the Navy has issued another contradicting statement -- that
contrary to public knowledge, the aircraft was not fitted with an explosive
self-destruct mechanism.
The Navy spokesman actually said that the self-destruct mechanism in the
aircraft consisted in having a hammer at every operating station. Every
operating station comes with its own emergency hammer that's built into it.
The instructions on the hammer state that if there's any chance that the
plane will fall into hostile hands, the station operator is instructed to
"take the hammer and beat the ever loving piss out of this piece of
In fact the Department of Defense issued a statement that as the plane was
being escorted to Chinese territory, the crew was supposed to be taking
their hammers and beating the piss out of their stations. Why did the
aircraft personnel wait until the aircraft was on the ground before
attempting to destroy the equipment, while armed Chinese troops were
entering the aircraft?
The DoD has repeatedly stated the level of technology is so advanced that if
it were to fall into hostile hands, it would seriously impact US offensive
military capabilities for a decade. Therefore, either the Department of
Defense is over-hyping this equipment. Or someone in Washington wanted this
equipment to be in Chinese hands. There is no other explanation.
And here's the ludicrous context of this ludicrous story.
With the most secret electronics surveillance system in existence - for
which crews are supposed to become expendable, before the equipment falls
into enemy hands, the only self-destruct mechanism, according to the
Department of Defense, is a spare hammer with the instructions on the label
"to beat the ever loving piss out of it…"
This is not your ordinary hammer, but a "special" Department of Defense
hammer, which undoubtedly cost the American taxpayer $600.
But the real operating protocol for the emergency procedures of the Aries II
-- if there is any possibility that the aircraft should become involved in a
situation wherein said technology may fall into hostile hands -- the crew
becomes completely expendable.
They are to undertake whatever measures are necessary to prevent this
equipment from falling into hostile hands. In other words, the technology on
this aircraft is so sophisticated that it is CL-1 (Compartmentalized Level
1) technology, the highest possible classification that exists.
The people who fly the Aries II surveillance aircraft equipped with this
technology are essentially operating on a wartime protocol, while flying
parallel to the coast of a hostile nation. They must counter any threat to
this technology by its destruction.
If the Department of Defense claims that the aircraft doesn't have an
explosive self- destruct mechanism, the question remains - why didn't they
just let the plane go into the ocean?
The crew's lives are immediately expendable upon threat, which means that
they are to expend their lives to prevent the technology and equipment in
question from falling into hostile hands. So why is the crew still alive?
And why is the aircraft still intact?
64 Posted on 04/04/2001 20:51:36 PDT by wooly_mammoth