THEORETICAL PHYSICS AND PRACTICAL PHYSICS ENTIRELY DIFFERENTNov 2013 At first, I thought the nuclear hoax theory to be preposterous, based entirely on the premise that it would require a vast cabal of conspirators, and the question would always remain why scientists in the field of nuclear physics haven't raised the same question.
On the first part of the premise, it doesn't necessarily have to be that vast a conspiracy. If one film production studio is doing all the videos of the nuclear blasts for both the American and Russian side, the stage and production is contained. And I know this brings up the implication of a sort of 1984 Orwellian scenario; but then again if one goes back a little over a hundred years, we see a photograph of all the kings of Europe standing together as one big happy family. For their total reign to have completely disappeared in such a short period of time, questions should be asked why so sudden and why so complete.
For the second part of the premise, the fields of applied physics and theoretical physics are as unmixed as oil and water. Any theoretical physicist would be as unaware as any layman how the practical physics of a nuclear bomb would apply. Again, this applied field could be contained by only a few people. I recall the story of the father of India's nuclear bomb. It seems suspicious to me how such a prestigious scientist is dead in a passenger jet crash on top of a large French mountain, and to this day with all the mountain climbing events in history no one has been able to get to that crash site. What I am trying to imply here is that if a top specialist in the field of nuclear weapons does question the narrative or doesn't follow the script there may be consequences.
Off topic, it seems this is the only site trying to debunk the nuclear hoax premise. Would the poster of this forum care to share their reasons or expertise on why they took the time and energy to try and discount this theory? From my experience, most people would be so comfortable in their world view that the motivation to try and debunk a theory like this would never even occur to them. And would it be too much to ask what the ancestral heritage is of this poster because I am finding that a clear motivation to debunk the nuke hoax theory comes mainly from the 'Jewish' 'community' and rightly so because nearly all the nuclear scientists who were involved in the alleged nuclear bomb were Jewish. The implications are huge.
[There's material on this site on motivations. As regards Jews, I'd say precisely the opposite to you—Jews play no part in debunking, for rather obvious reasons. - Rerev]
EMAIL FROM TOM H---
* The censorship in Japan after the occupation was worse than N Korea today. Roger Dejardins on this:
M-69 aimable clusters delivered by hundreds of B-29 bombers can ruin the day for a lot of people. I am sure plenty of people were injured, maimed, killed during the raids on Japan during that period. Nobody is denying that. Hiroshima, the Top News Story That Wasn't by Humberto Marquez. (2005 story online)
That essay is very telling about what happened in Hiroshima that day. Here is a small sample:
"On 7 August 1945, newspapers in Japan merely printed short articles reporting that B-29 planes had dropped incendiary bombs on Hiroshima, causing some damage."
"By the summer of 1946, the censorship office in Japan had grown to the extent that it employed 6,000 people, who pored over and listened in on all kinds of communication, from letters and telephone conversations to movies and billboards. The press was censored both prior to and after publication."
Desjardins: The Atom Bomb Hoax and More Jewish Lies.
"But the problem, Gonzales noted, is that it wasn't. There are so many stories that were never told, personal accounts that were never written, and which today remain buried with the victims. The news of what happened was covered up for days, months and finally years, until it was completely silenced."
* You may also be interested in this review of the two journalists who reported from Hiroshima: Wilfred Burchett, the journalist who wrote the first report from Hiroshima, and David Goodman, 'independent' journalist and co-author of "The Exception to the Rulers." Here's the review.
* Except for this controlled opposition, we have the official reports from these military controlled sources:
United States Atomic Energy Commission
United States Strategic Bombing Survey
The British Mission to Japan
The Joint Commission for the Investigation of the Atomic Bomb in Japan.
The Naval Technical fission to Japan.
* Review of the Goodman stuff by Roger Dejardins:
Next, observe an example of "controlled" opposition to MacArthur's censorship measures in southern postwar Japan:
Observe how the censors open a window they control to the forbidden sights, and make it appear like an independent journalistic initiative:
Quote: Hiroshima Cover-up: How the War Department's Timesman Won a Pulitzer by Amy Goodman and David Goodman.
At the dawn of the nuclear age, an independent Australian journalist named Wilfred Burchett traveled to Japan to cover the aftermath of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. The only problem was that General Douglas MacArthur had declared southern Japan off-limits, barring the press. Over 200,000 people died in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but no Western journalist witnessed the aftermath and told the story. The world's media obediently crowded onto the USS Missouri off the coast of Japan to cover the surrender of the Japanese.
If it had been that easy, lots of journalists would have reported the aftermath in Hiroshima. The guy almost makes you believe that no other journalists were interested in getting in there.
Wilfred Burchett decided to strike out on his own. He was determined to see for himself what this nuclear bomb had done, to understand what this vaunted new weapon was all about. So he boarded a train and traveled for thirty hours to the city of Hiroshima in defiance of General MacArthur's orders.
Trees were still standing so the claim everything was razed is a bogus exaggeration. He saw no shadows on sidewalks, buildings with stone walls were still standing suggesting the absence of a shockwave. Pictures showed oil everywhere, but that 'independent' journalist had no olfactory senses. No mention of exploded bird carcasses smoldering on the streets. A constructed report designed for hoax maintenance purposes. The truth never got out.
Burchett emerged from the train into a nightmare world. The devastation that confronted him was unlike any he had ever seen during the war. The city of Hiroshima, with a population of 350,000, had been razed. Multistory buildings were reduced to charred posts. He saw people's shadows seared into walls and sidewalks. He met people with their skin melting off. In the hospital, he saw patients with purple skin hemorrhages, gangrene, fever, and rapid hair loss. Burchett was among the first to witness and describe radiation sickness.
He was not paid to connect the burns and illness to the M69 incendiaries used liberally across Japan. He was not paid to tell people how sick petrol can make you when it rains down on you after a major firestorm.
Burchett sat down on a chunk of rubble with his Baby Hermes typewriter. His dispatch began: "In Hiroshima, thirty days after the first atomic bomb destroyed the city and shook the world, people are still dying, mysteriously and horribly-people who were uninjured in the cataclysm from an unknown something which I can only describe as the atomic plague."
Hiroshima, as seen in comparison with other aerial post-bombing pictures of the cities burned down with M69, has the exact same damage signature. Trees still standing with fine brittle charred extremities intact, clear streets free of debris, stone walls still standing, black rain, cancers and petrol induced sickness.
He continued, tapping out the words that still haunt to this day: "Hiroshima does not look like a bombed city. It looks as if a monster steamroller has passed over it and squashed it out of existence. I write these facts as dispassionately as I can in the hope that they will act as a warning to the world."
This was the desired effect, the reason they fabricated that leak.
Burchett's article, headlined THE ATOMIC PLAGUE, was published on September 5, 1945, in the London Daily Express. The story caused a worldwide sensation. Burchett's candid reaction to the horror shocked readers. "In this first testing ground of the atomic bomb I have seen the most terrible and frightening desolation in four years of war. It makes a blitzed Pacific island seem like an Eden. The damage is far greater than photographs can show.
That description fits any number of Japanese cities firebombed with M69. He never really gets around to specifics about how that bombing was different from the rest because he needed to ignore the other cities to make his report on post-bombing Hiroshima appear different.
"When you arrive in Hiroshima you can look around for twenty-five and perhaps thirty square miles. You can see hardly a building. It gives you an empty feeling in the stomach to see such man-made destruction."
In this misdirection, you are led to believe the censorship was in place to hide the horrors of atomic bombings of civilians, not to hide the eye witness reports of swarms of B-29 or M69 canisters raining from the sky or the smell of petrol everywhere.
Burchett's searing independent reportage was a public relations fiasco for the U.S. military. General MacArthur had gone to pains to restrict journalists' access to the bombed cities, and his military censors were sanitizing and even killing dispatches that described the horror.
Casualties were pegged at around 100-200,000 from the get-go. They started playing the casualty card from the first moments they were boasting this so-called radical new weapon's destructive power.
The official narrative of the atomic bombings downplayed civilian casualties and categorically dismissed reports of the deadly lingering effects of radiation.
That is the easiest thing to fake, a detailed report nobody has seen. They can create a fake report later to support any or all new twists to their BS stories.
Reporters whose dispatches conflicted with this version of events found themselves silenced: George Weller of the Chicago Daily News slipped into Nagasaki and wrote a 25,000-word story on the nightmare that he found there. Then he made a crucial error: He submitted the piece to military censors. His newspaper never even received his story. As Weller later summarized his experience with MacArthur's censors, "They won."
They ignored Hiroshima and Nagasaki in every priority bombing run from since the start of those campaigns. Doesn't sound very strategically valuable. The reason those two cities were bombed was to evacuate the land, purify it and install a growing metropolis seaport merchant city to accommodate commerce. Dissolve those pesky land deeds cheaply and efficiently under a shroud of war. For his help in this regard the Emperor honored the commander of the American air raids over Japan with their highest honor to a foreigner in the service of Japan, The Grand Cordon of the Rising Sun.
U.S. authorities responded in time-honored fashion to Burchett's revelations: They attacked the messenger. General MacArthur ordered him expelled from Japan (the order was later rescinded), and his camera with photos of Hiroshima mysteriously vanished while he was in the hospital. U.S. officials accused Burchett of being influenced by Japanese propaganda. They scoffed at the notion of an atomic sickness. The U.S. military issued a press release right after the Hiroshima bombing that downplayed human casualties, instead emphasizing that the bombed area was the site of valuable industrial and military targets.
TNT faking an atomic blast is still TNT, no fallout. Seems they were in a hurry to contradict their earlier assertions on the dangers of radiation poisoning. Those big scary assertions designed to project the bomb as a monstrosity. When it was time to rebuild Hiroshima and Nagasaki they probably felt they needed to launder away the radiation fears to get on with business. Hiroshima was supposed to be poisonous for 75 years, yet oleanders were growing everywhere just one week after. Contradiction is a hallmark of a hoax.
Four days after Burchett's story splashed across front pages around the world, Major General Leslie R. Groves, director of the atomic bomb project, invited a select group of thirty reporters to New Mexico. Foremost among this group was William L. Laurence, the Pulitzer Prize-winning science reporter for the New York Times. Groves took the reporters to the site of the first atomic test. His intent was to demonstrate that no atomic radiation lingered at the site. Groves trusted Laurence to convey the military's line; the general was not disappointed.
Laurence quoted General Groves: "The Japanese claim that people died from radiation. If this is true, the number was very small." This downplay of the radiation is diametrically opposed to the fear mongering they fed us while emptying the treasury of its contents under false pretences. Back then it was the mutant this and mutant that, cancers, deformities, and birth defects. Nothing was spared. Men could shrink after sailing through a radioactive cloud, giant ants.
Laurence's front-page story, U.S. ATOM BOMB SITE BELIES TOKYO TALES: TESTS ON NEW MEXICO RANGE CONFIRM THAT BLAST, AND NOT RADIATION, TOOK TOLL, ran on September 12, 1945, following a three-day delay to clear military censors. "This historic ground in New Mexico, scene of the first atomic explosion on earth and cradle of a new era in civilization, gave the most effective answer today to Japanese propaganda that radiations [sic] were responsible for deaths even after the day of the explosion, Aug. 6, and that persons entering Hiroshima had contracted mysterious maladies due to persistent radioactivity," the article began. Laurence said unapologetically that the Army tour was intended "to give the lie to these claims."
"Ring true!" They exhibited burns and burn-related illness. Remember folks, these estimates do not employ comparative models of the kind that would point out plainly why those two cities were different than any other post-incendiary raid targets in Japan. The omission of comparisons is deliberate and necessary to sell that fable.
Laurence then went on to offer his own remarkable editorial on what happened: "The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda aimed at creating the impression that we won the war unfairly, and thus attempting to create sympathy for themselves and milder terms . . . Thus, at the beginning, the Japanese described 'symptoms' that did not ring true."
Assignment for readers: go verify that claim independently. Verify its authenticity. Hoaxsters love to lay-it-on-thick when something is extremely problematic to verify.
But Laurence knew better. He had observed the first atomic bomb test on July 16, 1945, and he withheld what he knew about radioactive fallout across the southwestern desert that poisoned local residents and livestock. He kept mum about the spiking Geiger counters all around the test site.
Another example of the high return on a minimal investment. A few endorsements by their mass media affiliates and they divest the treasury of billions of dollars.
William L. Laurence went on to write a series of ten articles for the Times that served as a glowing tribute to the ingenuity and technical achievements of the nuclear program.
The hoax now had a public relations branch.
Throughout these and other reports, he downplayed and denied the human impact of the bombing. Laurence won the Pulitzer Prize for his reporting. How else are you going to get merchants to buy office space in Hiroshima and Nagasaki if you don't pretend the hype about radioactivity was grossly exaggerated?
It turns out that William L. Laurence was not only receiving a salary from The New York Times. He was also on the payroll of the War Department. In March 1945, General Leslie Groves had held a secret meeting at The New York Times with Laurence to offer him a job writing press releases for the Manhattan Project, the U.S. program to develop atomic weapons. The intent, according to the Times, was "to explain the intricacies of the atomic bomb's operating principles in laymen's language." Laurence also helped write statements on the bomb for President Truman and Secretary of War Henry Stimson.
The press were clearly under the control of the military. Boxed into the lie.
Laurence eagerly accepted the offer, "his scientific curiosity and patriotic zeal perhaps blinding him to the notion that he was at the same time compromising his journalistic independence," as essayist Harold Evans wrote in a history of war reporting. Evans recounted: "After the bombing, the brilliant but bullying Groves continually suppressed or distorted the effects of radiation. He dismissed reports of Japanese deaths as 'hoax or propaganda.' The Times' Laurence weighed in, too, after Burchett's reports, and parroted the government line." Indeed, numerous press releases issued by the military after the Hiroshima bombing-which in the absence of eyewitness accounts were often reproduced verbatim by U.S. newspapers-were written by none other than Laurence.
In plainspeak this means to approach anything claimed or written by "atomic Bill" as highly suspicious and not to be bought outright.
"Atomic Bill" Laurence revered atomic weapons. He had been crusading for an American nuclear program in articles as far back as 1929. His dual status as government agent and reporter earned him an unprecedented level of access to American military officials-he even flew in the squadron of planes that dropped the atomic bomb on Nagasaki. His reports on the atomic bomb and its use had a hagiographic tone, laced with descriptions that conveyed almost religious awe.
How many public schooled minds will buy this crap and make it a compelling reason to believe in atom bombs and spit on deniers?
In Laurence's article about the bombing of Nagasaki (it was withheld by military censors until a month after the bombing), he described the detonation over Nagasaki that incinerated 100,000 people. Laurence waxed: "Awe-struck, we watched it shoot upward like a meteor coming from the earth instead of from outer space, becoming ever more alive as it climbed skyward through the white clouds. . . . It was a living thing, a new species of being, born right before our incredulous eyes."
That is the way I would describe the strategy with which they waltzed out of the treasury with billions for non-existent atom bombs.
Laurence later recounted his impressions of the atomic bomb: "Being close to it and watching it as it was being fashioned into a living thing, so exquisitely shaped that any sculptor would be proud to have created it, one . . . felt oneself in the presence of the supranatural."
A recognized fraud acting as the gatekeeper of the atomic secrets. So typical.
Laurence was good at keeping his master's secrets-from suppressing the reports of deadly radioactivity in New Mexico to denying them in Japan. The Times was also good at keeping secrets, only revealing Laurence's dual status as government spokesman and reporter on August 7, the day after the Hiroshima bombing-and four months after Laurence began working for the Pentagon. As Robert Jay Lifton and Greg Mitchell wrote in their excellent book Hiroshima in America: Fifty Years of Denial, "Here was the nation's leading science reporter, severely compromised, not only unable but disinclined to reveal all he knew about the potential hazards of the most important scientific discovery of his time."
What Japanese doctors? We are not supposed to ask.
Radiation: Now You See It, Now You Don't A curious twist to this story concerns another New York Times journalist who reported on Hiroshima; his name, believe it or not, was William Lawrence (his byline was W.H. Lawrence). He has long been confused with William L. Laurence. (Even Wilfred Burchett confuses the two men in his memoirs and his 1983 book, Shadows of Hiroshima.) Unlike the War Department's Pulitzer Prize winner, W.H. Lawrence visited and reported on Hiroshima on the same day as Burchett. (William L. Laurence, after flying in the squadron of planes that bombed Nagasaki, was subsequently called back to the United States by the Times and did not visit the bombed cities.) W.H. Lawrence's original dispatch from Hiroshima was published on September 5, 1945. He reported matter-of-factly about the deadly effects of radiation, and wrote that Japanese doctors worried that "all who had been in Hiroshima that day would die as a result of the bomb's lingering effects." He described how "persons who had been only slightly injured on the day of the blast lost 86 percent of their white blood corpuscles, developed temperatures of 104 degrees Fahrenheit, their hair began to drop out, they lost their appetites, vomited blood and finally died."
Obfuscation, convolution, contradiction, omission, how can anything that flawed be true? Where are all the flight and maintenance logs for any of those 4000 B-29s? Why are they not part of the Smithsonian exhibits as historically-significant relics to display?
Oddly enough, W.H. Lawrence contradicted himself one week later in an article headlined NO RADIOACTIVITY IN HIROSHIMA RUIN. For this article, the Pentagon's spin machine had swung into high gear in response to Burchett's horrifying account of "atomic plague." W.H. Lawrence reported that Brigadier General T. F. Farrell, chief of the War Department's atomic bomb mission to Hiroshima, "denied categorically that [the bomb] produced a dangerous, lingering radioactivity." Lawrence's dispatch quotes only Farrell; the reporter never mentions his eyewitness account of people dying from radiation sickness that he wrote the previous week.
Those maintenance and fuel logs might yield the evidence of how many B-29 were fuelled to fly to Hiroshima. I estimate 160 of those 4000 B-29s built were saturating Hiroshima with aimable cluster M69 incendiaries. That means the fuel was logged, the flight time was logged, and those planes were loaded with incendiaries. Logistics at this level would reveal a lot of compelling evidence. So, they make the historical logs and maintenance/fuel records disappear like they made the stars in space photos and atom bombing shockwave seismograms go away?
EMAIL FROM TOM H--
JEWS AND NUKES: The history of directors of the Lawrence Livermore lab. Not one was not Jewish.As for my comments that this is a Jewish cabal conspiracy. I am merely connecting the dots. Again the theoretical physicists behind the bomb were mostly Jews if not all Jews. The secret Hollywood film studio that did all the documenting of the bomb footage, again they were all Jewish. The history of directors at Lawrence Livermore lab, not one was not Jewish. The Rosenbergs who were the media puppet scape goats for selling the so called secrets to the Russians were conveniently Jewish. The reason being I believe is that it is more public fodder to build up the idea in the nations mind that these poor innocent Jews are always being killed by the nasty Saxons yet take note that the Judge who sentenced them to their alleged death was a fervent Jew and both the prosecutor and the defense were Jewish.
In this regard, it looks as if the stage was set for martyrdom. And if you look at the appeal letter of (vocation actress) Ethel Rosenberg allegedly sent to Eisenhower and you read it over very carefully you will notice that it doesn't have the genuine intent of someone pleading for their life i.e. affirmed innocence. Instead it looks politically crafted. It first starts out with a bowing down to the greatness of the president, like she was the slave bowing down to a modern day Pharaoh, it then relates to a foreign event and implies that her death and her husbands death would be an act of vengeance no different than what she calls the vengeance of “racists and butchers” who wiped out her people in Europe. You see the political nature of this letter looks like a calling card to victimhood and I have sincere doubts the Rosenbergs were executed. This is how far I believe the conspiracy goes. Now I am not advocating by these implications that the Jewish people on whole are in on this conspiracy. I am merely stating that amongst this cult of Judaism there are agents actively working to deceive the public. Most Jews I imagine are unaware of the cabal amongst their ranks but because of their being raised as world martyrs they would passively be complicit to the operation merely by the their conditioned paranoia in believing emotionally that they are existentially at risk at all times. These emotions would go very far towards insulating this cabal, would they not?
[The above is slightly tidied-up from Tom H's emails. Much of the information clearly came from Roger Desjardins, and isn't well sourced. I'd like to find out how he knew about Japanese newspaper reports on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and other things. At this time of writing he remained extremely unenthusiastic about a talk on these issues. But I live in hope I might be able to talk with Roger Desjardins some time; after all, he appears to have originated the ideas of nuke hoaxes and must have a huge amount of useful material]