THE NUKE HOAX

Global War deceptions & mass manipulation, fear-mongering terror schemes and propaganda in the Age of the Bomb

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby simonshack on May 6th, 2013, 5:19 pm

*

"LE TERRIBLE"
Image
http://www.20min.ch/ro/news/monde/story/25542659

President Sarkozy inaugurating the terrible €3.1 billion war toy:
Image

Yes, this is the "nuclear-powered" submarine that supposedly carries the above-mentioned M51 nuclear missiles - which keep popping out of the sky a few miles after launch. French taxpayers must love it! Quel joli jouet! Allons enfants!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_sub ... %28S619%29
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6428
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby Maat on May 6th, 2013, 5:29 pm

:lol: Oh geez, and I thought it couldn't get any funnier! So, who woulda thunk that 75,000 kg would be harder to push through air than 53,000 kg through water :wacko: :rolleyes:, just 22,000 kg difference? :P

Well, old George Carlin aptly called the "arms race" idiocy a "dick measuring contest". Silly buggers!
Maat
Moderator
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: September 9th, 2010, 2:14 am

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby brianv on May 6th, 2013, 5:37 pm

Image

This is awful photoshopping. I guess the crane is analogous to a "nukular" explosion.

Image
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3922
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby lux on May 6th, 2013, 5:42 pm

Image
Gosh -- I wonder who took this "photo" and where they were located?

Note this 2010-dated video purporting to show "Le Terrible" launching an M51 ...

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5T3Kfd8JIg
...which starts off with a close shot of the sub but then pulls back miles for the alleged launch (which looks fake to me).

----------------

But, this brings up another question: How are missiles launched from a submarine?

The answer is not easy to find on the web but I did find this brief description about Polaris missiles.

Polaris submarines carried each missile in a separate launch tube. Down the street from Lockheed in Sunnyvale, another American corporate icon, Westinghouse became the developer of the launch tube for the Polaris missile. To launch missiles from a submarine under water, Westinghouse had to solve several problems. The launch tube had to keep the missile snug in its tube until firing. It had to eject the missile with sufficient velocity so it would head to the surface for a 100’ feet under water, and it had to protect the submarine when ocean water came rushing in to the now empty launch tube. Oil-filled shock absorbers solved the cushioning problem and compressed air launched the missile out of the tube through a thin diaphragm that separated the missile from the ocean once the missile launch covers were opened.


So, these missiles weighing 10s of thousands of Kgs are shot up to the surface for a distance of as much as 100 feet using compressed air. Huh? :blink:
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby hoi.polloi on May 11th, 2013, 6:12 pm

Wow, I just saw this. Hilarious!
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4866
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby simonshack on June 20th, 2013, 1:38 am

*

OBAMA TO REDUCE NUCLEAR ARSENALS BY ONE THIRD

These "news" reached me today through the major Italian newspaper "LA REPUBBLICA":

http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2013/06 ... ef=HREC1-3

Image

As I googled for English versions of these "nuclear disarmament" news, I found nothing but some old articles going back to February of this year (2013). Here's one of them:

Obama to Further Disarm US Nuclear Weaponry

"President Barack Obama is expected to soon issue a new directive on his efforts to drastically reduce U.S. nuclear forces. It would be the latest marker in his stated goal of eliminating such weapons worldwide."
(...)

Frank Gaffney, the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, questions the effectiveness of U.S. nuclear weapons in fulfilling a minimal role.

Gaffney tells Newsmax that the U.S. nuclear-weapons stockpile is quickly becoming obsolete because of platforms dating as far back as the Manhattan Project in the 1940s and an over-reliance on computer modeling instead of real-world testing.

“How on earth do you know that they would actually work?” Gaffney said. “This is one of the dirtiest little secrets in our country, and I think the American people would be horrified if they knew.”
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama- ... /id/492085


Good Heavens! How silly this nuke hoax all is! :rolleyes:

Relax, people! THERE ARE NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON THIS PLANET!
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6428
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby icarusinbound on June 24th, 2013, 8:10 pm

Broken Arrow, Spain 1966

'Accidental' loss of Atomic weapons.... :ph34r:

There have been very-few claimed incidents of this sort over the years. The Palomares and Thule instances may be unique..

The 1966 Palomares B-52 crash or Palomares incident occurred on 17 January 1966, when a B-52G bomber of the USAF Strategic Air Command collided with a KC-135 tanker during mid-air refuelling at 31,000 feet (9,450 m) over the Mediterranean Sea, off the coast of Spain. The KC-135 was completely destroyed when its fuel load ignited, killing all four crew members. The B-52G broke apart, killing three of the seven crew members aboard.

Of the four Mk28 type hydrogen bombs the B-52G carried, three were found on land near the small fishing village of Palomares in the municipality of Cuevas del Almanzora, Almería, Spain. The non-nuclear explosives in two of the weapons detonated upon impact with the ground, resulting in the contamination of a 2-square-kilometer (490-acre) (0.78 square mile) area by plutonium. The fourth, which fell into the Mediterranean Sea, was recovered intact after a 2½-month-long search.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966_Palomares_B-52_crash

Image
The recovered hydrogen bomb displayed on the fantail of the submarine rescue ship USS Petrel (ASR-14) after it was located by DSV Alvin at a depth of 2,500 feet (760 m)

Image
http://www.fotoforensics.com/analysis.php?id=3ed82d8f24146cf9503e2d26e073c0e8dbbd68c7.69743

The pixel compression where the warhead is depicted is completely-different from it's claimed surroundings. That's just one strange part of a rather-curious story.

http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucweapons/box7-3 wrote:For three months, 1,700 U.S. personnel and Spanish Civil Guards worked to decontaminate the area. An estimated 1,400 tons of radioactive soil and vegetation was excavated and sent to the United States for disposal (at the Savannah River Plant) and crops of tomatoes were buried or burned. Through all this, U.S. personnel wore protective clothing and underwent regular radiation checks; such measures were not taken for the Spanish workers. (The Air Force commander in charge later stated, "the U.S. Air Force was unprepared to provide adequate detection and monitoring for its personnel when an aircraft accident occurred involving plutonium weapons in a remote area of a foreign country.")

A radiation survey conducted jointly by the Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA) and the Junta de Energia Nuclear (JEN) found that no less than 650 acres (more than 1 square mile [2.59 square kilometers]) of village, crops, and farms were contaminated; however, during the survey winds picked up and scattered the plutonium dust, and the DNA's subsequent report noted: "The total extent of the spread will never be known." Yet there was only sporadic monitoring of villagers and no effort to determine what level of contamination was acceptable. As the DNA's report later noted, "The Spanish government had not established criteria for permissible levels, which is completely understandable because plutonium-producing facilities and nuclear weapons were non-existent in Spain. Significantly, there were no criteria in the United States for accident situations. The available criteria pertained only to plutonium processing plants." Thus, the DNA applied guidelines governing fallout from tests at the Nevada Test Site.

http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/archive/nucweapons/box7-3

This may be worthy of further research- ideally from sources other than Wiki. Only recently I had to ditch a whole pile of mouldy aerospace magazines that dated from the mid-1940s, through to the early 1970s- I had no option, as physical storage in my life is a constant challenge. Although I didn't manage to do a total check of every one, I could see no contemporary comments on the Spanish saga.

Does anyone have access to good-old immutable undigitised microfiche? Or is it now all shovelled into the fire??
icarusinbound
Member
 
Posts: 393
Joined: November 28th, 2011, 9:49 am

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby diagonal2 on July 4th, 2013, 4:07 am

It seems media are calling high yield explosives as "nukes" now - a "nuke" implies it uses "radioactive materials(uranium-235)", I've seen on countless sites calling the tsar bomba a nuke when it is just a simply a scaled up TNT bomb (destructive non-the less). This guy explains it well: http://heiwaco.tripod.com/bomb.htm
diagonal2
Member
 
Posts: 104
Joined: June 22nd, 2012, 5:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby diagonal2 on July 4th, 2013, 4:50 am

diagonal2
Member
 
Posts: 104
Joined: June 22nd, 2012, 5:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby ElSushi on August 5th, 2013, 7:17 pm

Our dear Nuke Hoaxers never cease to amaze me.


In Hiroshima, there are permanent shadows caused by the intensity of the nuclear blast when the bomb was dropped.

http://imgur.com/gallery/S2YUd

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

And guess who's in Japan right now visiting Hiroshima for the 68th anniversary of the Hiroshima "bombing"?
You got it.Sir Oliver Stone, himself.

U.S. Film Producer Oliver Stone To Meet Hiroshima Survivors

TOKYO, Aug 5 (Bernama) -- U.S. film director Oliver Stone will meet with atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki this week as the two cities commemorate lives lost in the U.S. atomic bombings in 1945, Xinhua news agency reported.

Stone, who arrived in Hiroshima on Sunday, will attend a memorial ceremony Tuesday and visit Nagasaki and Okinawa thereafter, event organisers at the Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs said.

A series of events titled "Toward a nuclear weapon-free, peaceful and just world" will be held from Aug 3 to 9 to commemorate the bombings that led to Japan's surrender at the end of World War II.

Stone will join delegations from 18 countries and hundreds of local participants, local media reported Monday.

The film director visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum where he took time to speak to an elderly lady who survived the Hiroshima tragedy, and examined pictures and plaques related to the 1945 bombing of the city.

Stone, currently involved in making a documentary that questions the U.S.'s use of nuclear weapons in 1945, was quoted as saying the travesty of the events had "strongly affected him."

Similar events and memorial ceremonies will be held from Aug 7 through Aug 9 in Nagasaki, where Stone is also scheduled to meet with survivors.

Stone is well known for a series of films he directed depicting the Vietnam War.

He has received three Academy Awards for his work on the films "Midnight Express", "Platoon", and "Born on the Fourth of July".

Official statistics show that within the first two to four months of the U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, between 90,000 and 166,000 people lost their lives in Hiroshima and another 60,000 to 80,000 died in Nagasaki.

-- BERNAMA

http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v7/wn/newsworld.php?id=968449
ElSushi
Member
 
Posts: 126
Joined: August 3rd, 2011, 9:53 am

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby lux on August 14th, 2013, 12:33 am

I just had a little thought about the nuclear power hoax. As has already been mentioned, nuke power stations are suspected of being “dump loads,” that is, electrical “loads” (resistance devices) which simply burn up excess electrical current. My thought, which carries this a bit further, is that these loads are specifically heating elements inside the boilers which heat up the water that is supposed to be heated by a nuclear furnace. So, electrical power comes INTO the station (secretly), is directed to the boiler heating elements which heats the water, making the steam which drives the turbines and, in turn, produces electric current which is then directed OUT of the station to the grid. This seems like it makes the scam quite easy to hide since power IS being generated and fed out to the grid but, of course, the net result is a loss of power from the conversion to heat and back to electrical power again. The only thing one would have to hide then would be the INCOMING power and the substitution of the nuke furnace with simple electrical heating elements. Since very, very few if any workers would ever actually enter a nuclear furnace, this makes it rather easy to hide. And, an underground incoming power line would be easy to hide as well. The rest is just a fake control board fed by a computer that simulates the nuke furnace operation parameters.

What they tell us:
Image

What it might really be:
Image

So a nuke power station is just a merry-go-round for electrical power -- it comes in, is converted to heat used to boil water which turns a generator which produces electrical power (with losses from conversion) and then goes back out again.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby simonshack on August 14th, 2013, 3:08 am

*

Lux,


Take a look at L3 MAPPS - the "World's leading Simulation Company" - in their own words!
Image

"Providing more than just training devices, our simulator solutions—powered by L-3 MAPPS' unparalleled Orchid® suite of simulation products—will take your engineering team to new heights in approaching plant design issues, procedural deficiencies and reliability improvements."

http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/power-systems-and-simulation.html


Here's some other stuff that they do:

Space Systems and Simulation
http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/space-syste ... ation.html

Space Vehicle Simulation
http://www.mapps.l-3com.com/space-vehic ... ation.html

Nuff said? <_<
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6428
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby lux on August 14th, 2013, 3:55 am

Wow! Great find, Simon.

They're involved with the ISS too according to their brochures.

But, as for the nuke simulator hardware – yeah, that's what I'M talkin' about!
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby lux on August 18th, 2013, 2:34 pm

When hoaxes collide.

Image

Q:What's better then a news hoax?
A: Why, two or more news hoaxes combined, of course!

News media now reporting that fake terrorists could pull off fake attacks on fake nuclear plants placing many fake citizens at fake risk! (You know, like 9/11 ... 9/11 ... 9/11 ...9/11 ... )

Here is one example (there are many more) of this story now circulating the MSM:
Report: U.S. nuclear plants remain vulnerable to terrorists
Washington (CNN) -- None of the 107 nuclear facilities in the United States are protected against a high-force terrorist attack, and some are still vulnerable to the theft of bomb-grade nuclear fuel, or sabotage intended to cause a nuclear meltdown, a new report says.

More BS here.

But the story also seems to both support and poo-poo the report -- I guess they just have to include some controversy or it isn't news!
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: October 1st, 2011, 11:46 pm

Re: THE NUKE HOAX

Postby simonshack on August 18th, 2013, 7:12 pm

lux wrote:Q:What's better then a news hoax?
A: Why, two or more news hoaxes combined, of course!


And it gets even 'better', dear Lux ! :rolleyes:

The very same chap who scolds the US government for not properly protecting their nuclear un-clear facilities - Alan J. Kuperman - wrote this op-ed in the New York Times back in 2009. Here are selected, plum excerpts of it (with my underlinings):


There’s Only One Way to Stop Iran

By ALAN J. KUPERMAN
Published: December 23, 2009 - New York Times

"The United States faces a stark choice: military air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities or acquiescence to Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons."

"We have reached the point where air strikes are the only plausible option with any prospect of preventing Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons."

"...Iran’s atomic sites might need to be bombed more than once :blink: to persuade Tehran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons."

"...because the American military has global reach, air strikes against Iran would be a strong warning to other would-be proliferators."


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/opini ... gewanted=2


What a strange world, huh? The same dude who fears un-clear terror attacks in the US ... wants the US to terrorize other nations by bombing their un-clear plants in multiple air strikes ! :lol:

But the funniest of all is this statement that professor Kuperman utters in a recent TV interview - as he expounds his argumentation as to precisely why the US taxpayers must spend more money protecting their homeland's un-clear plants:

"US civilian nuclear facilities have to defend against the potential attack from .... maybe 5 or 6 attackers - but we KNOW that the maximum credible threat is at least 19 attackers, which is what occured on 9/11."

You may not actually believe that professor Kuperman (the director of the Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Program at the University of Texas) actually uttered this inane howler - so here it is, at ... 1:11 into this short video. Enjoy !

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0nXDVKjSW0

You will (hopefully) excuse me, but it is at times like these that I just cannot hold back a little rant: as I see such outrageously ridiculous individuals - like this Kuperman clown - I sense the urgency of 'doing something about it' and allow myself to issue statements of my own, for what they're worth. There can only be two possible options as to what this Kuperman fellow is - and only one way to stop such folks from spreading their madness :

OPTION1: The man is a complete idiot - (he seriously believes in the stuff he writes and says) and a dangerous threat to civilized society at that. He urgently needs to be confined in a mental institution.

OPTION2: The man works for the 'Nutwork' (the dangerously sociopathic group that currently controls this planet). He is paid to write and utter recklessly insane stuff - and happily lives with it! He urgently needs to be confined - along with his superiors - in a mental institution.

So there. Now, go ahead and call me a "wacky tinfoil-hatter out of his meds" if you wish. I enjoy the freedom of speech that we still have - and will use it to its full extent as long as it lasts. Rant over. Time for me to put together a staid, 'politically correct' op-ed for the New York Times...
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6428
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

PreviousNext

Return to WWI - WWII, the Nuke Hoax, the Cold War and JFK

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron