Hear him out. This was made post-Fukushima. He's not arguing against nuclear power or of radiation poisoning; he's arguing that nukes are not a practical weapons system; that the nuclear threat has been a complete myth to control the masses and to justify the keeping of secrets.
Apr 22, 2011
Does North Korea have Nukes ?
Does Iran have The Bomb?
Does any country have Nuclear Weapons ?
When did they first acquire them, how many do they have?
Perhaps its all a big lie
I see no nuclear war
Mutually assured destruction its a very convenient excuse.
Even if nuclear weapons do exist, wouldnít it be cheaper and easier to pretend.?
Why spend millions and billions on weapons you know you are never going to use?
The cold war was a fraud the globalist elite ran both sides, why would they want to point nuclear weapons at one another?
The governments and the elites that control them have such a history of lying to the public cam we not assume we are not being told the truth ?
If nuclear weapons do exist why do they tell us, when they are so secretive about all their other weapon systems? Take HAARP, Directed Energy Weapons, Rail Guns and coil guns.
What about "Rods of God" or Kinetic weapons largely unknown to the public? Yet, based on Newton-level physics, provable by a child in garden shed and with similar destructive potential as supposed nuclear weapons and yet these are often considered a myth by the public who believe in nuclear weapons, although they don't have even the remotest understanding of the physics behind them.
Isnít it convenient that there is only one rare element on Gods periodic table capable of producing nuclear explosions? There is energy trapped in all elements after all. Isnít it still more convenient that it is only a very specific isotope of uranium that can be used. Can they really make plutonium or is it just a theoretical element created to make the theory behind nukes more convincing to scientists who are familiar with uranium and its properties,
People say Nuclear Weapons must exist because nuclear power exists, I say you can get an electric current from a potato, but you canít destroy a city by ramming two potatoes together, nor by imploding a potato for that matter .
Using the heat from decaying nuclear fuel to boil water to turn turbines to produce electricity is a very different thing from making mega explosion from it.
What happens when nuclear test fails? Is like donít return to a lit firework?
Why have lots nuclear weapons pointed at your enemy as a deterrent, when one very big one or lots strapped together is more then enough deterrent to dissuade any country from invading?
The first and most obvious question is about Hiroshima and Nagasaki
How big were the explosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? , could they have been exaggerated? , they would have been the biggest explosions anyone had ever seen .
The scam at work here relies on a psychological effect best described as ďI caught a fish it was this bigď, As long as itís the biggest fish youíve ever caught people have a tendency to say it was as big as they want it to be and as big as they are told it is.
It is difficult to know what the truth is , but do you really think that a piece of uranium was shot down a tube by some Cordite at another piece of uranium and that this exploded with enough energy to destroy a city or that a small amount of Plutonium was imploded to the same effect..
The Bomb known as Little Boy dropped on Hiroshima was notably similar in its dimension to a Daisy cutter (a large conventional bomb possessed by the American military used in Vietnam and Afghanistan), Fat Man dropped on Nagasaki was similar in its dimensions to a FOAB (the father of all bombs a Fuel air bomb possessed by the Russian Military, said to be equivalent to at least 40 tonnes of TNT).
There is evidence that the Germans were using fuel air bombs on the Russian front, this has been largely covered up , in the history books the Blitzkrieg tank formation is given as the reason for the Germans overwhelming success against the Russians ,was it instead that they were using fuel air bombs.
If the Germans were using fuel air bombs , why would this be edited from history, Could it be that if people were aware of the destructive power of fuel air bombs, people would not have been so easily fooled by the events of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Could the damage to the city of Hiroshima been exaggerated by the effect of a Firestorm such as that which occurred in Hamburg and Dresden. As Hiroshima was a wooden city, untouched by previous bombing so we are told, there would have been no fire breaks. An extreme fire in the centre of the city my well have caused more damage than any explosion, if there was any explosion at all that is. A simple firestorm would better explain why many of the more substantial buildings and bridges remained.
Have a look at the footage from Hiroshima, do you see a diminishing blast radius emanating from a single point. What of the footage from the plane that supposedly dropped Little Boy, do you see anything more than a relatively small plume of smoke? Have a closer look is it not actually two plume of smoke filmed from angle to make it look like one, the same can be said of the footage of Fat Man at Nagasaki.
What of all the Nuclear tests? They cant be faked, surly well, the footage of them certainly is. A child can see how the footage was put together using footage of smaller explosions (without anything to provide size comparison ) and footage from cameras pointed at the Sun.
But what of all the witnesses, how could they be fooled?
Simple really, itís the worst magic trick in the world ever.
Imagine going to see the greatest illusionist in all the world perform a magic trick and he asks you to wear a blind fold, cover years and put your head in your lap before he does anything.
Iíd ask for money back
Can a man with his eyes closed tell the difference between a nuclear explosion and a conventional one?
Certainly not when he conditioned and drugged into believing what he is told, as much of the military are.
The Blinding light that is used to excuse the need to have all the witnesses close there eyes is more than likely produced by a large mirror reflecting the light of the sun across the witnesses or achieved using floodlighting.
The explosion were mostly created using large towers of hundreds of tonnes of TNT, footage of the Americans making such towers of TNT at Los Alamos exists, their excuse for this is that they made them for comparative purposes.
How do you know they didnít have two teams both building towers of TNT with a small mountain between them each was told they were the ones doing it for comparative purposes and that the explosion on the other side of the mountain that was a real one.
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki the existence of nuclear weapons still needed to be further confirmed to the public, perhaps because of a lack of footage and evidence from Hiroshima and Nagasaki and so the fakery continued moving to the island of Bikini Atoll , the main reason given for the blasts at Bikini Atoll were to test the effect of nukes on navel hardware though many believe that it was a way of getting rid of military surplus left over from world war two. The first blast was probably a fuel air bomb of some kind , the second much bigger explosion was probably large amounts of submerged TNT.
Isnít it odd that the Atom Bomb was not big enough?, As the story goes they began to put additives into the bombs that give much higher yield from the same amount of nuclear fuel, and so nukes become Thermo nukes, These still supposedly relied on fission essentially the same process that supposedly produces heat in a nuclear reactor. However using this myth they created the myth of the Fusion bomb. They claim to use a fission bomb to start a fusion reaction in hydrogen. This supposedly creates an explosion , many times bigger than that of the early fictional fission bombs. This they called the Hydrogen bomb or H Bomb. There is even less evidence of the existence of H bombs then there is of their fictional fission predecessors.
By this time of course after much research and money spent they were beginning to understand the plausibility of making nuclear explosions and weather it was actually even theoretically possible to which there is much debate. It probably remains way beyond mans capability.
Regardless the fakery continued with other countries joining Russia and America in the charade, Together they continued to feed the public more fake footage. Stretching the truth even further then they had before.
The first supposed H Bomb was known as Ivy Mike it was on Enewetak Atoll , the Device was the size of small factory building, It is a possibility that this was a simple hydrogen explosion such as we have recently seen in Fukushima, but on a bigger scale or may well have been a building sat on top of lot of buried TNT or other explosive.
And so begins the myth of shrinkage, almost immediately they began to convince the public that such a device was of a size such that it could be used as practical weapons system, it can not, you need to go to your enemies country and build it there, you certainly cant catapult it at the enemy, stick it on the end of a missile, drop it out of an aeroplane, or on the back truck or in a brief case. Soon enough they will claim you can fit one in the back of a mobile phone, in a match box or on the end of pin. People will believe anything.
If such devices did exist as well as being very large such devices would need to be very much environmentally controlled, you can not moth ball them, if you want a nuke youíve got to build it and keep it on stand by, you can not just take one of the half megatonne ones of the rack as so many people seem to believe.
The nuclear fuel in any nuclear bomb would decay just as it does in Nuclear reactors in power stations in fact it can be argued that this would happen at a greater rate, any decay would diminish any likely hood of explosive potential.
The American propaganda would have us believe that they have an arsenal of missiles not just each with a nuke, but that in fact divides in flight into numerous missiles each with a nuclear warhead onboard, the obvious question is when and where was that ever tested?
If they told you they had a missile that divided into missiles which divided into missiles which, in turn divided into more missile and then more missiles, each with a nuclear warhead onboard, would you believe them?
What happens when a government wants to buy some new nuclear weapons, well they right a cheque to industrial military complex, and in time they get a note back saying ď Congratulations you are now the proud owner of a new nuclear deterrent. ď You donít honestly believe that the politician or bureaucrat that signed the cheque gets to see these nuclear weapons or to take them apart to check there not just full of lead.
Do you think the money was honestly spent manufacturing and delivering Nuclear weapons? Perhaps what is delivered is just labelled thus, "a bunch of duds."
Some of the money is spent on convincing the world youíve got nukes, but the rest, well where do think it goes?
Lets say a government has paid for some nuclear weapons, the industrial military complex has got them over barrel, they can come back to the government in question and say for example, ďWe have made you some nukes, but the thread on the warhead doesnít fit the missile. Oops, sorry.Ē
The government cannot sue for fear of admitting publicly they do not have a nuclear deterrent, so what can they do, but sign another cheque. It is essentially a protection racket.
You pay them or else.
What of the nuclear club, well-encouraged by the propaganda of other countries and there supposed nuclear threat. Countries begin to investigate the possibility of making there own nuclear deterrent, it doesnít take to long for them to realize that it is not a practical weapons system.
So they say to the Nuclear Club, ďWe are going to join you, now we can say we have nukes as well, if you say we donít we will tell the world you donít either.Ē
People ask why did or would they create this myth ?
Its simple really beyond the obvious profit motive, the elites have often through history controlled and manipulated the masses with myths of the imminent end of the world at the hands of some mythological peril or another, often it is about control through fear of an enemy, two sides in a fake war controlling their population using fear of the opposing side .
But in addition the main reason for the creation of the nuclear myth is the rise of the secret services. Nuclear weapons provide a perfect excuse for government to keep secrets and tell lies to their population, as result of the nuclear weapon myth the population demands it, without nuclear weapons there is little or no justification for keeping secrets and telling lies to the population or for the organizations charged with that task.
Many people will be angered buy what I have to say, some because they donít like the suggestion that they have been fooled. You would think that it would be a liberating notion , that people would be relieved that there are no nuclear weapons, often it seems that people have come to feel safe in the idea that there government has nukes, they feel protected by the myth of nuclear weapons, that acts like a security blanket keeping them and their nation safe, a fictitious deterrent against a fictitious threat.
Eventually the public, given enough time will naturally begin to wonder why there never has been a nuclear war, or no cities destroyed by nuclear explosion as an act of terrorism or more likely a self inflicted False Flag attack. However the powers that be are already preparing the ground to explain this away. The Americans and the Russians have both, in the START Treaty agreed to destroy a third of their fictional nuclear arsenals.
There was much press coverage recently of a resent press conferences by military eyewitness to UFOs disarming nuclear weapons from Russia and America. Here, they are clearly creating the excuse that there will never be a nuclear war because the aliens will not allow it.
Recently, there was a lot of talk in the media of them using a nuclear weapon to stop the mysterious oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico. Did they? Of course, they didnít - nuclear weapons donít exist, custom-building a nuclear device at or for such depths would be an huge undertaking, costing trillions and taking years and would be very unlikely to explode let alone solve the problem.
Oh, and remember. If an Oppenheimer tries to sell you a bridge, tell him to shove it up his arse. In time, it might become a worthless diamond.