Friday, September 4, 2015

SEC: Government Destroyed Documents Regarding Pre-9/11 Put Options

Posted on June 15, 2010 by WashingtonsBlog
On September 19, 2001, CBS reported:
Sources tell CBS News that the afternoon before the attack, alarm bells were sounding over unusual trading in the U.S. stock options market.
An extraordinary number of trades were betting that American Airlines stock price would fall.
The trades are called “puts” and they involved at least 450,000 shares of American. But what raised the red flag is more than 80 percent of the orders were “puts”, far outnumbering “call” options, those betting the stock would rise.
Sources say they have never seen that kind of imbalance before, reports CBS News Correspondent Sharyl Attkisson. Normally the numbers are fairly even.
After the terrorist attacks, American Airline stock price did fall obviously by 39 percent, and according to sources, that translated into well over $5 million total profit for the person or persons who bet the stock would fall.
***
At least one Wall Street firm reported their suspicions about this activity to the SEC shortly after the attack.
The same thing happened with United Airlines on the Chicago Board Options Exchange four days before the attack. An extremely unbalanced number of trades betting United’s stock price would fall — also transformed into huge profits when it did after the hijackings.
“We can directly work backwards from a trade on the floor of the Chicago Board Options Exchange. The trader is linked to a brokerage firm. The brokerage firm received the order to buy that ‘put’ option from either someone within a brokerage firm speculating, or from one of the customers,” said Randall Dodd of the Economic Strategy Institute.
U.S. investigators want to know whether Osama bin Laden was the ultimate “inside trader” — profiting from a tragedy he’s suspected of masterminding to finance his operation. Authorities are also investigating possibly suspicious trading in Germany, Switzerland, Italy and Japan.
On September 29, 2001, the San Francisco Chronicle pointed out:
“Usually, if someone has a windfall like that, you take the money and run,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Whoever did this thought the exchange would not be closed for four days.
“This smells real bad.”
***
There was an unusually large jump in purchases of put options on the stocks of UAL Corp. and AMR Corp. in the three business days before the attack on major options exchanges in the United States. On one day, UAL put option purchases were 25 times greater than the year-to-date average. In the month before the attacks, short sales jumped by 40 percent for UAL and 20 percent for American.
***
Spokesmen for British securities regulators and the AXA Group also confirmed yesterday that investigations are continuing.
The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of the options.
***
Last weekend, German central bank president Ernst Welteke said a study pointed to “terrorism insider trading” in those stocks.
The Chronicle illustrated the story with the following chart:
mn airlinestock SEC: Government Destroyed Documents Regarding Pre 9/11 Put OptionsOn October 19, 2001, the Chronicle wrote:
On Oct. 2, Canadian securities officials confirmed that the SEC privately had asked North American investment firms to review their records for evidence of trading activity in the shares of 38 companies, suggesting that some buyers and sellers might have had advance knowledge of the attacks.
*** FMR Corp. spokeswoman Anne Crowley, said her firm — which owns the giant Fidelity family of mutual funds in Boston — has already provided “account and transaction” information to investigators, and had no objection to the new procedures announced yesterday. Crowley declined to describe the nature of the information previously shared with the government.
So the effort to track down the source of the puts was certainly quite substantial.
What were the results and details of the investigation?
Apparently, we’ll never know.
Specifically, David Callahan – executive editor of SmartCEO – submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the SEC regarding the pre-9/11 put options.
The SEC responded:

This letter is in response to your request seeking access to and copies of the documentary evidence referred to in footnote 130 of Chapter 5 of the September 11 (9/11) Commission Report. ***
We have been advised that the potentially responsive records have been destroyed.
If the SEC had responded by producing documents showing that the pre-9/11 put options had an innocent explanation (such as a hedge made by a smaller airline), that would be understandable.
If the SEC had responded by saying that the documents were classified as somehow protecting proprietary financial information, I wouldn’t like it, but I would at least understand the argument.
But destroyed? Why? (See Afterword for additional details.)
Not the First Time
This is not the first destruction of documentary evidence related to 9/11.
I wrote in March:
As I pointed out in 2007:

The 9/11 Commission Report was largely based on a third-hand account of what tortured detainees said, with two of the three parties in the communication being government employees.
The official 9/11 Commission Report states:
Chapters 5 and 7 rely heavily on information obtained from captured al Qaeda members. A number of these “detainees” have firsthand knowledge of the 9/11 plot. Assessing the truth of statements by these witnesses-sworn enemies of the United States-is challenging. Our access to them has been limited to the review of intelligence reports based on communications received from the locations where the actual interrogations take place. We submitted questions for use in the interrogations, but had no control over whether, when, or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting.
In other words, the 9/11 Commissioners were not allowed to speak with the detainees, or even their interrogators. Instead, they got their information third-hand.
The Commission didn’t really trust the interrogation testimony. For example, one of the primary architects of the 9/11 Commission Report, Ernest May, said in May 2005:
We never had full confidence in the interrogation reports as historical sources.
As I noted last May:

Newsweek is running an essay by [New York Times investigative reporter] Philip Shenon saying [that the 9/11 Commission Report was unreliable because most of the information was based on the statements of tortured detainees]:
The commission appears to have ignored obvious clues throughout 2003 and 2004 that its account of the 9/11 plot and Al Qaeda’s history relied heavily on information obtained from detainees who had been subjected to torture, or something not far from it.
The panel raised no public protest over the CIA’s interrogation methods, even though news reports at the time suggested how brutal those methods were. In fact, the commission demanded that the CIA carry out new rounds of interrogations in 2004 to get answers to its questions.
That has troubling implications for the credibility of the commission’s final report. In intelligence circles, testimony obtained through torture is typically discredited; research shows that people will say anything under threat of intense physical pain.
And yet it is a distinct possibility that Al Qaeda suspects who were the exclusive source of information for long passages of the commission’s report may have been subjected to “enhanced” interrogation techniques, or at least threatened with them, because of the 9/11 Commission….
Information from CIA interrogations of two of the three—KSM and Abu Zubaydah—is cited throughout two key chapters of the panel’s report focusing on the planning and execution of the attacks and on the history of Al Qaeda.
Footnotes in the panel’s report indicate when information was obtained from detainees interrogated by the CIA. An analysis by NBC News found that more than a quarter of the report’s footnotes—441 of some 1,700—referred to detainees who were subjected to the CIA’s “enhanced” interrogation program, including the trio who were waterboarded.
Commission members note that they repeatedly pressed the Bush White House and CIA for direct access to the detainees, but the administration refused. So the commission forwarded questions to the CIA, whose interrogators posed them on the panel’s behalf.
The commission’s report gave no hint that harsh interrogation methods were used in gathering information, stating that the panel had “no control” over how the CIA did its job; the authors also said they had attempted to corroborate the information “with documents and statements of others.”
But how could the commission corroborate information known only to a handful of people in a shadowy terrorist network, most of whom were either dead or still at large?
Former senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, a Democrat on the commission, told me last year he had long feared that the investigation depended too heavily on the accounts of Al Qaeda detainees who were physically coerced into talking ….
Kerrey said it might take “a permanent 9/11 commission” to end the remaining mysteries of September 11.
Abu Zubaida was well-known to the FBI as being literally crazy. The Washington Post quotes “FBI officials, including agents who questioned [alleged Al-Qaeda member Abu Zubaida] after his capture or reviewed documents seized from his home” as concluding that he was:

[L]argely a loudmouthed and mentally troubled hotelier whose credibility dropped as the CIA subjected him to a simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding and to other “enhanced interrogation” measures.
For example:

Retired FBI agent Daniel Coleman, who led an examination of documents after Abu Zubaida’s capture in early 2002 and worked on the case, said the CIA’s harsh tactics cast doubt on the credibility of Abu Zubaida’s information.
“I don’t have confidence in anything he says, because once you go down that road, everything you say is tainted,” Coleman said, referring to the harsh measures. “He was talking before they did that to him, but they didn’t believe him. The problem is they didn’t realize he didn’t know all that much.”
***
“They said, ‘You’ve got to be kidding me,’ ” said Coleman, recalling accounts from FBI employees who were there. ” ‘This guy’s a Muslim. That’s not going to win his confidence. Are you trying to get information out of him or just belittle him?‘” Coleman helped lead the bureau’s efforts against Osama bin Laden for a decade, ending in 2004.
Coleman goes on to say:

Abu Zubaida … was a “safehouse keeper” with mental problems who claimed to know more about al-Qaeda and its inner workings than he really did. ***
Looking at other evidence, including a serious head injury that Abu Zubaida had suffered years earlier, Coleman and others at the FBI believed that he had severe mental problems that called his credibility into question. “They all knew he was crazy, and they knew he was always on the damn phone,” Coleman said, referring to al-Qaeda operatives. “You think they’re going to tell him anything?”
ACLU, FireDogLake’s Marcy Wheeler and RawStory broke the story yesterday that (quoting RawStory):
Senior Bush administration officials sternly cautioned the 9/11 Commission against probing too deeply into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, according to a document recently obtained by the ACLU.
The notification came in a letter dated January 6, 2004, addressed by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and CIA Director George J. Tenet. The ACLU described it as a fax sent by David Addington, then-counsel to former vice president Dick Cheney.
In the message, the officials denied the bipartisan commission’s request to question terrorist detainees, informing its two senior-most members that doing so would “cross” a “line” and obstruct the administration’s ability to protect the nation.
“In response to the Commission’s expansive requests for access to secrets, the executive branch has provided such access in full cooperation,” the letter read. “There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross — the line separating the Commission’s proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government’s ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks.”
***
“The Commission staff’s proposed participation in questioning of detainees would cross that line,” the letter continued. “As the officers of the United States responsible for the law enforcement, defense and intelligence functions of the Government, we urge your Commission not to further pursue the proposed request to participate in the questioning of detainees.”
Destruction of Evidence
The interrogators made videotapes of the interrogations. The 9/11 Commission asked for all tapes, but the CIA lied and said there weren’t any.
The CIA then destroyed the tapes.
Specifically, the New York Times confirms that the government swore that it had turned over all of the relevant material regarding the statements of the people being interrogated:
“The commission did formally request material of this kind from all relevant agencies, and the commission was assured that we had received all the material responsive to our request,” said Philip D. Zelikow, who served as executive director of the Sept. 11 commission ….
“No tapes were acknowledged or turned over, nor was the commission provided with any transcript prepared from recordings,” he said.
But is the destruction of the tapes — and hiding from the 9/11 Commission the fact that the tapes existed — a big deal? Yes, actually. As the Times goes on to state:

Daniel Marcus, a law professor at American University who served as general counsel for the Sept. 11 commission and was involved in the discussions about interviews with Al Qaeda leaders, said he had heard nothing about any tapes being destroyed. If tapes were destroyed, he said, “it’s a big deal, it’s a very big deal,” because it could amount to obstruction of justice to withhold evidence being sought in criminal or fact-finding investigations.
Indeed, 9/11 Commission co-chairs Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton wrote:

Those who knew about those videotapes — and did not tell us about them — obstructed our investigation.
The CIA also is refusing to release any transcripts from the interrogation sessions. As I wrote a year ago:

What does the fact that the CIA destroyed numerous videotapes of Guantanamo interrogations, but has 3,000 pages of transcripts from those tapes really mean?
Initially, it means that CIA’s claim that it destroyed the video tapes to protect the interrogators’ identity is false. Why? Well, the transcripts contain the identity of the interrogator. And the CIA is refusing to produce the transcripts.
Obviously, the CIA could have “blurred” the face of the interrogator and shifted his voice (like you’ve seen on investigative tv shows like 60 Minutes) to protect the interrogator’s identity. And since the CIA is not releasing the transcripts, it similarly could have refused to release the videos.
The fact that the CIA instead destroyed the videos shows that it has something to hide.
Trying to Create a False Linkage?
I have repeatedly pointed out that the top interrogation experts say that torture doesn’t work.
As I wrote last May:
The fact that people were tortured in order to justify the Iraq war by making a false linkage between Iraq and 9/11 is gaining attention.
Many people are starting to understand that top Bush administration officials not only knowingly lied about a non-existent connection between Al Qaida and Iraq, but they pushed and insisted that interrogators use special torture methods aimed at extracting false confessions to attempt to create such a false linkage.
Indeed, the Senate Armed Services Committee found that the U.S. used torture techniques specifically aimed at extracting false confessions (and see this).
And as Paul Krugman wrote in the New York Times:
Let’s say this slowly: the Bush administration wanted to use 9/11 as a pretext to invade Iraq, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. So it tortured people to make them confess to the nonexistent link.
[A]ccording to NBC news:
  • Much of the 9/11 Commission Report was based upon the testimony of people who were tortured
  • At least four of the people whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report have claimed that they told interrogators information as a way to stop being “tortured.”
  • One of the Commission’s main sources of information was tortured until he agreed to sign a confession that he was NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO READ
  • The 9/11 Commission itself doubted the accuracy of the torture confessions, and yet kept their doubts to themselves
In fact, the self-confessed “mastermind” of 9/11 also confessed to crimes which he could not have committed. He later said that he gave the interrogators a lot of false information – telling them what he thought they wanted to hear – in an attempt to stop the torture. We also know that he was heavily tortured specifically for the purpose of trying to obtain false information about 9/11 – specifically, that Iraq had something to do with it.
***
Remember, as discussed above, the torture techniques used by the Bush administration to try to link Iraq and 9/11 were specifically geared towards creating false confessions (they were techniques created by the communists to be used in show trials).
***
The above-linked NBC news report quotes a couple of legal experts to this effect:
Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, says he is “shocked” that the Commission never asked about extreme interrogation measures.
“If you’re sitting at the 9/11 Commission, with all the high-powered lawyers on the Commission and on the staff, first you ask what happened rather than guess,” said Ratner, whose center represents detainees at Guantanamo. “Most people look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a trusted historical document. If their conclusions were supported by information gained from torture, therefore their conclusions are suspect.“…
Karen Greenberg, director of the Center for Law and Security at New York University’s School of Law, put it this way: “[I]t should have relied on sources not tainted. It calls into question how we were willing to use these interrogations to construct the narrative.”
The interrogations were “used” to “construct the narrative” which the 9/11 Commission decided to use.
Remember (as explored in the book The Commission by respected journalist Philip Shenon), that the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission was an administration insider whose area of expertise is the creation and maintenance of “public myths” thought to be true, even if not actually true. He wrote an outline of what he wanted the report to say very early in the process, controlled what the Commission did and did not analyze, then limited the scope of the Commission’s inquiry so that the overwhelming majority of questions about 9/11 remained unasked (see this article and this article).
***
As constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley stated:
[The 9/11 Commission] was a commission that was really made for Washington – a commission composed of political appointees of both parties that ran interference for those parties – a commission that insisted at the beginning it would not impose blame on individuals.
Other Obstructions of Justice
[Other examples of obstructions of justice include the following:]
  • The chairs of both the 9/11 Commission and the Joint Inquiry of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees into 9/11 said that government “minders” obstructed the investigation into 9/11 by intimidating witnesses
  • The 9/11 Commissioners concluded that officials from the Pentagon lied to the Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements
  • Investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House. As the New York Times notes:
    Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence . . . * * *
    The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.
    In his book “Intelligence Matters,” Mr. Graham, the co-chairman of the Congressional inquiry with Representative Porter J. Goss, Republican of Florida, said an F.B.I. official wrote them in November 2002 and said “the administration would not sanction a staff interview with the source.” On Tuesday, Mr. Graham called the letter “a smoking gun” and said, “The reason for this cover-up goes right to the White House.”
We don’t need to even discuss conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11 to be incredibly disturbed about what happened after: the government’s obstructions of justice.
Indeed, the 9/11 Commissioners themselves are disturbed:
  • The Commission’s co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”

  • The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – said “At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”
Afterword: Footnote 130 to chapter 5 of the official 9/11 Commission Report states:

Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options- investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price-surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10-highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous. Joseph Cella interview (Sept. 16, 2003; May 7, 2004; May 10-11, 2004); FBI briefing (Aug. 15, 2003); SEC memo, Division of Enforcement to SEC Chair and Commissioners, “Pre-September 11, 2001 Trading Review,” May 15, 2002; Ken Breen interview (Apr. 23, 2004); Ed G. interview (Feb. 3, 2004).
Did the Commission have full access to information regarding put options? Was the Commission misled, as it was on other issues? Was evidence destroyed or fabricated? We will never know, as the underlying documents have – according to the SEC – been destroyed.                  http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/06/sec-government-destroyed-documents-regarding-pre-911-put-options.html
Posted by at No comments:

Fukushima - Top Secret film reveals ‘manmade’ Tsunami's - False Flag Operation


Operation Wigwam [1], Operation HARDTACK I & II [1a][1b] and Operation Crossroads [1c] are prime examples of how easy it is to detonate tsunami making bombs from deep under the ocean’s surface.  My reason for including these operations is to perhaps help silence those critics who say it’s impossible to create ‘manmade’ earthquakes or tsunamis.   These operations prove the technology has long been here to help Mother Nature along, - such as that of the Pacific Ring of Fire where large numbers of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions occur in the basin of the Pacific Ocean.  But with the following tests, tsunamis were part of the outcome, and the Ring of Fire had nothing to do with it.  Operation HARDTACK Military Effects Studies Part II: Underwater Tests [1958], Department of Defence [DoD] documentary film, Lookout Mountain Laboratory USAF. [1a][1b]

Operation Hardtack, Military Effects Studies, Part 2 - High Altitude Studies (1958)

Operation HARDTACK

We've clearly been lied to about about 9/11, and it appears Japan's Fukushima Disaster is their 9/11, as a scientifically backed analysis of what took place over that period, certianly seems to confirm we do indeed have another False Flag Operation like so many of the past.  The above once Top Secret film reveals the USA were able to create manmade Tsunami's over 60 years ago.
     Below is an amazing link [1b] that provides the original documentary film footage that unwittingly reveals and actually shows alongside with the narrator [Ray Walston was a high profile Hollywood personality to be credited with top secret security clearance to document nuclear weapons development for the U.S. military.], who confirms that following on from ‘two underwater tests’ as part of Operation HARDTACK I, - that the sea levels rose by ‘twice their height’, in one case by 12ft and the other by an incredible 22ft.  You can see many trees being washed away and some around 30ft in height confirms how high the sea levels were, as the tsunami raged and steam-rolled into land. 
     Licence holders of this film from 1958 say it was carefully sanitised by nuclear weapons experts and DoD officials to remove secret information, and it’s quite possible the remaining footage shows more inland shots, and the obvious devastation the tsunamis must of caused, - though because the islands were uninhabited, there were not the normal properties, people, boats or cars etc., to be affected, killed or damaged. 
     It’s truly remarkable that we are able to witness this evidence firsthand, it’s almost an honour, - and only possible thanks to http://www.atomicforum.org, who have made it possible for all the world to see and prove, - that yes indeed ‘man can make tsunamis’, despite the corrupt Alpha, Delta Kappa like scientists, or magazines like Poplar Mechanics, New Scientist and academic tools such as the Encyclopaedia Britannica etc. telling us it’s not possible, - this film footage is a huge middle finger to the lot of them.
     I urge you to view this ‘top-secret’ film that as I say has been sanitised with secret portions removed, after the complete version was locked away for decades in top secret vaults, and where the uncensored version remains to this day. - Do it now before the film is pulled off the website and no longer available, there’s a link on the http://www.atomicforum.org website that will allow you to forward it via email to others.
     The purpose of this documentary film was to report the results of nuclear weapons detonations experiments applied under an overall joint task force operation codenamed Operation HARDTACK I.  Carefully screened members of only applicable committee members of Congress saw this film report, as well as need-to-know employees of the DoD and appropriate executives of the White House. [1b]
     Operation Wigwam involved suspending a Mark 90 Betty nuclear bomb given the nickname “Betty”, from a 2,000 feet [660 meters] cable from under a barge.  ‘Betty’ was10ft 2in in length, with a diameter of 2 ft 7.5 in and a weight of 1,243 lb, and it carried a Mark 7 nuclear warhead with a yield of 5-10 kilotons.  A six-mile tow line connected a fleet tug, the Tawasa, and the shot barge itself. Suspended from the tow lines of other tugs were three miniature unmanned submarines named “Squaws”, each packed with cameras and telemetry instruments.  It was conducted between Operation Teapot and Operation Redwing on the 14th May 1955, about 500 miles southwest of San Diego, California.  6,800 personnel aboard 30 ships were involved in Wigwam, which was carried-out to determine the vulnerability of submarines to deeply-detonated nuclear weapons, and to evaluate the feasibility of using such weapons in a combat situation. [2][3][4]
     Operation HARDTACK I & II [1a] was a series of 72 nuclear tests conducted by the United States in 1958. Hardtack I was carried out in the Pacific Ocean, at Bikini Atoll, Enewetak Atoll, and Johnston Island. 
     Operation HARDTACK I consisted of 35 nuclear tests conducted at the Pacific Proving Ground between 28th April and the 18thAugust 1958.  These tests included balloon, surface, barge, underwater and rocket-borne high-altitude tests. The first test, Yucca, was a nuclear device attached to a helium balloon launched from the USS Boxer near Enewetak Atoll.
     However it’s the second part of Operation HARDTRACK that I’m concentrating on, as it consisted of the underwater tests named Wahoo and Umbrella.  Wahoo was detonated in the deep open ocean southwest of Boken Island, and Umbrella inside the western end of the lagoon at Enewetak, these are the two tests that; “resulted in the sea-levels surrounding these islands by 12ft and 22ft respectively.” 
     The purpose of these tests was to improve the understanding of the effects of underwater explosions on Navy ships and material, and in regards to being able to create tsunamis, was I think just an accidental occurrence following such experiments, that were continuations of earlier underwater testing that included Operation Crossroads at Bikini in 1946, and the already mentioned Operation Wigwam off the US West Coast in 1955[4].
     Operation Crossroads also consisted of two detonations, each with a yield of 23 kilotons: Able was detonated at an altitude of 520 feet [158 m] on 1st July 1946; Baker was detonated 90 feet [27 m] underwater on 25th July 1946.  A third burst, Charlie, planned for 1947, was cancelled primarily because of the Navy’s inability to decontaminate the target ships after the Baker test.  The Crossroads tests were the fourth and fifth nuclear explosions conducted by the USA following the Trinity test and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 
     It part of the report, it states water rushing back into the space vacated by the rising gas bubble started a “...tsunami-like water wave which lifted the ships as it passed under them”.  At 11 seconds after detonation, the first wave was 1,000 feet [305 m] from surface zero and 94 feet [29 m] high.[5] By the time it reached the Bikini Island beach, 3.5 miles [6 km] away, “...it was a nine-wave set with shore breakers up to 15 feet [5 m] high, just tossed landing craft onto the beach and filled them with sand.” [5] It was also the case that; “There was no mushroom cloud; nothing rose into the stratosphere.”
     There were many tests and experiments being carried out during the 50’s, such as Operation Teapot [6], Redwing [7][7a], Plumbbob [8] and Operation Castle [9][9a] which was a USA series of high-energy [high-yield] nuclear tests by Joint Task Force SEVEN [JTF-7] at Bikini Atoll beginning in March 1954.  It followed Operation Upshot-Knothole [10] and preceded Operation Teapot. 
     I’m not saying these kinds of bombs would or have been used for creating any earthquakes or tsunamis, as particularly the majority of these ‘nuclear test’ of the 1950’s took place above – on land, as opposed to that of Operation Wigwam that was detonated 2000ft, and Operation HARDTACK [1a] 3000ft under the ocean’s surface.  
    To use some of the kinds of bombs that were used in them days, would leave obvious telltale signs, i.e. a fuck-off sized mushroom cloud visible from outer space.  Yet this isn’t necessarily so with underwater explosions, as what you tend to get is a massive raised curtain of water and not a mushroom cloud of smoke, as above says; “...nothing rose into the stratosphere.”
  And incredibly another interesting detail that the Operation HARDTACK Underwater Tests1958 film footage [1b] reveals, is that in just 12 minutes following detonation, virtually all traces of an explosion were gone. 
     Let’s not forget the Pacific Ocean is the largest on the earth, as it extends from the Arctic in the north to the Southern Ocean in the south, bounded by Asia and Australia in the west, and the Americas in the east.  At 63.8 million square miles, [165.2 million square kilometres], in area, it covers about 46% of the Earth’s water surface and about one-third of its total surface [11].  
     Strategically position and denoted, then even a 2000lb bomb would be like a pimple of an elephants arsehole, - and even if you could at all see into the distance, then if anything it would be more reminiscent to a neighbour having a ‘Barbie’, than that of a massive bomb be denoted thousands of feet below the ocean’s surface.   
     In Operation Crossroads it states: “By the time the Wilson cloud vanished, the top of the column had become a ‘cauliflower,’ and all the spray in the column and its cauliflower was moving down, back into the lagoon. Although cloudlike in shape, the cauliflower was more like the top of a geyser where water stops moving up and starts to fall.”  And as I’ve already noted: “There was no mushroom cloud; nothing rose into the stratosphere.”
      The Ring of Fire is a fantastic Johnny Cash song, and is also the name a 40,000 km [25,000 mile] horseshoe shape, that’s associated with a nearly continuous series of oceanic trenches, volcanic arcs, and volcanic belts and/or plate movements.  The Ring of Fire has 452 volcanoes and is home to over 75% of the world’s active and dormant volcanoes.  About 90% of the world's earthquakes and 80% of the world's largest earthquakes occur along the Ring of Fire.  The next most seismic region [5–6% of earthquakes and 17% of the world’s largest earthquakes] is the Alpide belt, which extends from Java to Sumatra through the Himalayas, the Mediterranean, and out into the Atlantic.  The Mid-Atlantic Ridge is the third most prominent earthquake belt. [12]
      And as I’ve mentioned before, imagine lowering and depositing or whatever other ways you want to, something like a 2,000lb bomb, - or the necessary required size, - into an oceanic trench, volcanic arc, belt or crevice.  There are course various other ways and methods this type of operation could be carried out, you might for example only wish to create a tsunami as opposed to an earthquake.  Now bring these kinds of bombs inland, deep underground in other well known volcanic trenches, arcs and belts, fault-lines, crevices and craters etc., and you can create huge mountainous mudslides, landslides and or course flooding. 
     We should also consider how much more advanced technology has become over the 53 plus years and since they last experimented with these operations.  Remember how big and cumbersome the first mobile telephones [the ‘brick’] and computers were, - and now look at them. 
     As what these tests and experiments did unobtrusively yield, - was that it soon showed us what man is truly capable of, - and when in the right environment, scaled up or down in size, - and with the conditions ideal, these kinds of bombs can be used to help and assist to trigger-off another series of events; i.e. earthquakes, floods, landslides and the ‘proven’ tsunamis.  
     Huge dams, miles deep mines, and gigantic open-pit quarries almost the scale of the Grand Canyon have all been forged and ripped out of the earth’s surface, and in certain regions around the world.  All this and much more is easily achieved, and with the right technology and equipment in the wrong pair of hands, - then anything is possible, - such as the sudden appearance of a sinkhole [13], that can vary in size from 1 to 600 meters [3.3 to 2,000 ft] both in diameter and depth, and in your own back yard!
     In light of disturbing WikiLeaks cables, thousands of Bangladeshi took to the streets again on March 28th as part of a decade-long battle to halt a devastating British-owned open-pit coal mine, the world will not only be watching whether Bangladesh’s government will honour a coal ban agreement from 2006 or resort to violence.  American and worldwide human rights and environmental organisations will also be questioning why the Obama administration is covertly pushing for Bangladesh to reverse course and resist an internationally condemned massive open-pit mine that will displace an estimated 100,000-200,000 villagers and ravage desperately needed farm land and water resources.
A closer look at the Fukushima Disaster
Jim Stone, who is a freelance blogger wrote the following back in May 2011, there is a lot more information available on his wbsite and the link is below.  The following photographs are from the same website and here it is verbatim other than I’ve corrected a few typos or spelling mistakes and it’s in English spelling, as it's been originally translated from Japanese.
     Finally a scientifically backed analysis of this End Game Operation called false flag Fukushima Disaster: Quote: NEW INFO: Japan offered to enrich uranium for IRAN!
*Note - The following text comes direct from Jim Stone's website and doesn't fit well here in the blog due to it's massive size.  This is only part of his work, and I advise you to use the link to view it properly.  You may be able to alter the size of your screen so will be able to view it here.  By clicking on some photos, it my give you a magnify glass option so you can enlarge them.
     This is a massive report. If you have troubles understanding it, just look at this picture of the vanished reactor, THIS picture of the destroyed facility and this picture, of Magna BSP's camera. Then scroll down to the photos of the NON EXISTENT quake damage and seismic charts which prove there was no 9.0 and therefore the very real tsunami could not have been natural. The fact that what happened in Japan did not occur naturally has been very well documented by a skilled investigator, who spent hundreds of hours getting to the bottom of this story.
Chart prepared by Erol Kalkan, Ph.D. USGS, Official Release. 米国地理院公式発表エロール・カルカン博士作成
     Outside of the tsunami, the quake which supposedly hit Sendai with many times the power of the one in Kobe, did not destroy a single building there.
     Sendai was only 48 miles from the epicenter of this "9.0" which would have devastated everything in an area 1,000 miles across if it was real. All of Japan would be toast. Try to find a photo of seismic damage in Sendai. I challenge you. Try to find it in any of the coastal cities, as little as 25 miles from the "epicenter". I looked for 5 hours, and except for some tanks that fell at a brewery not a single one exists. No pictures of collapsed skyscrapers or high rises equals NO 9.0. You will not find a single skyscraper photo where the windows got broken either. You will find no downed power poles, no flipped over cars, no uprooted trees, no derailed trains (except for one the tsunami hit), and the road damage is typical of even a 5.0. You will not find pictures of a single damaged multi story building or even a structurally damaged wood framed house outside the tsunami zone. In Sendai the quake messed up grocery stores and kitchens and that really is about it.
     And now, I will say it like I knew it had to be. I believe the phony 9.0 story was used as seismic cover for a tsunami nuke, which produced the tsunami of a 9.0 when detonated in the Japan trench (where no earthquakes of significance happen) as punishment for Japan offering to enrich uranium for Iran. The rest of the story, the concealment, is black ops. Bet on it. In the tsunami videos, the tsunami rips through pristine and undamaged cities, where business as usual is obvious and the tsunami is an ambush; not 9.0 earthquake ravaged debris. The quake is a paper thin story taped together by the undeserved trust of a gullible public. And the stories? The CIA did not hire a million people last year for nothing. If there is evidence of a 9.0 SHOW ME. A 9.0 will devastate an area over 1,000 miles across.That is how big a 9.0 is. The entire nation should be in ruins, especially judging from the damage the 6.9 Kobe quake did, and no where, no where outside the tsunami zone in the entire country is there a single damaged multi story building, a single collapsed bridge, a single structurally damaged wood framed house, or skyscraper. If a picture exists that can be definitively pinned to this quake, show me. The only collapsed structure in all of Japan was an old welfare shelter near station MYG004, the true epicenter.


     So it started a 6.8, then got upgraded to a 7.9, then got upgraded to an 8.4, then got upgraded to an 8.8, then got upgraded to a 9.0, and had the epicenter put out in the ocean. Now many are saying it was a 9.1 which would bump up MYG011's number to 1200 from 1070, and it is all based on tsunami effects, not seismic data.
     The following seismograms clearly show epicenters from 3 separate small quakes all occuring simultaneously. This is what would be expected of an attack, rather than a natural occurence.

     It took them three hundred years and trillions of dollars to build a theatre of darkness, yet the light of only one match can burn it down. Do not let this light go out. Archive and POST!
Jim Stone, Freelance Journalist, Updated Wednesday, Dec 28, 2011
This is a massive report. If you have troubles understanding it, just look at THIS picture of the vanished reactor, THIS picture of the destroyed facility and THIS picture, of Magna BSP's camera. Then scroll down to the photos of the NON EXISTENT quake damage and seismic charts which prove there was no 9.0 and therefore the very real tsunami could not have been natural. The fact that what happened in Japan did not occur naturally has been very well documented by a skilled investigator, who spent hundreds of hours getting to the bottom of this story.
NEW INFO: Japan offered to enrich uranium for IRAN!
     HERE ARE THE LINKS: Ynet news... Inside Japan News Network...The New American...Rianovosti news...Hindustan Times...Zee News
     AND FOUR MONTHS LATER, THE DIMONA DOZEN SHOWED UP WITH A REALLY FANCY CAMERA!!
This report uses classified leaked high resolution photos of the destruction of Fukushima originally posted on Pink Tentacle to support its claims.They are,
1. Reactor 3 is completely missing, which means the press and anyone who has claimed anything about pressures, temperatures, containment, ect about reactor 3 after March 14 are lying and people need to pay attention to it, because failure of the public to realize the massive extent of the lies about what is going on there will leave the door open to a repeat event.
2. Reactor 4 is Building 7, demolished by explosives. Reactor 4 had been defueled and was undergoing replacement of it's internal stainless steel shroud, yet blew it's containment anyway. That is the FINAL smoking gun, an empty reactor is inert, and cannot produce an explosion, yet one happened at 4 that was so powerful it destroyed the structure leaving it in danger of falling over. Overheated open fuel pools cannot produce hydrogen because in an open fuel pool the water boils off at 100 Celsius, and won't be present in pressurized form at 2,000 degrees Celsius to liberate it's hydrogen by losing it's oxygen to the zircon cladding in the fuel rods. The rods will prefer the free oxygen in the air and burn long before attempting to claim the oxygen in whatever humidity there might be. Because fuel rods only contain 20 percent fissionable material, they also cannot produce the "prompt criticality" "The most qualified nuclear engineer in the world" Arnie Gundersen has spoken of. I got to the bottom of the Arnie Gunderson story, and added the results of that investigation further down the page. He has been put on a pedastal and pumped up enormously by a press that wants a misleading story, all the while he is a despised outcast of the greater engineering community. The explosion at #4 was flatly impossible absent the use of an explosive device, and as a result the disaster at Fukushima is FAR FAR WORSE than ANYTHING Gundersen is willing to say. Gundersen is towing the line and hiding the true magnitude of what happened there because if it became widely known serious questions would be asked. When have you heard Gundersen talk about a totally missing reactor?
Reactor 4's dome was removed for defueling. Drone photos prove it. This dispels the rumors surrounding unit 4's explosion. Some people have said that this reactor was secretly in operation to enrich plutonium. This photo proves it was disassembled for shroud replacement as stated. Tepco is going out of it's way trying to explain the explosions, especially at reactor 4, because they did indeed occur, so an explanation is needed. As a result, they are giving reasons that cannot happen, just to say something. They need to see this post and get the Arava perspective(Arava is a district surrounding Dimona).
3. That the destruction of the facility is so severe it could only have been accomplished with nuclear weapons. Hydrogen produces a non-ideal subsonic explosion. It cannot turn concrete into dust. It can produce high pressures if sealed off, but the metal roof on all the reactor containments should have provided the relief and been the only thing destroyed. It takes a high intensity explosive to strip concrete off rebar, a blast wave many times faster than supersonic. This means that whatever happened at Fukushima did not have blast characteristics that fit the "official" story. If you missed it in the high resolution photo of the destroyed facility, I took a car that was laying around in the remains and placed it on top of one of the blown away walls at reactor 3, which clearly gives the reference that the walls had support columns at least 15 feet thick. Fukushima was built with the Mark 1 containment design, but beyond Mark 1 standards which was a common upgrade(reference is the included photos, it is obvious). It is true that gas explosions can be very destructive, but only in facilities that were not designed to handle them. Even the basic mark 1 containment was many times beyond capable of withstanding the worst hydrogen blast.
4. That nuclear weapon(s) were placed inside of the reactor containment(s) disguised as security cameras installed under contract this year by Arava based security firm Magna BSP (Arava is a district around Dimona, not a city.) Their "security cameras" weighed over 1,000 pounds and were the size and shape of gun type nuclear weapons.The reason Magna BSP gave for the odd shape, enormous weight, and giant proportions of their cameras was that they were stereoscopic. They have creatively called them bi-scopic so when you search on google their monstrous cameras are the only thing that comes up (outside of Dj lighting and a gun scope) Try it. Type "Biscopic camera" into google images,(without the quotes) it's a hoot! This helps marketing I guess. The need for such a large stereoscopic camera could be plausible at an airstrip, where the camera would need depth perception out miles, but not indoors where focal lengths are short. Other manufacturers have units appropriate for indoor focal lengths which are only twice the size of ordinary monocular security cameras. Depth perception going out miles could also be accomplished with two separately mounted cameras weighing only a few pounds; the giant thousand pounder is a dead giveaway. Magna does make passive radar systems which require a large body, but the owl could accomplish it's claimed function with two small lightweight cameras (5 or so lbs, not tiny) and the processor in a modern laptop. Why this giant thing? note - a not yet produced graphical model is what you see most on Google, the ones produced thus far are ugly boxes.
. . . . . . . . . .9/11, 4/11, 3/11? see a pattern? Let's not see a 6/11. Your time and effort in spreading the word may really make a difference.
     Due to the many positive e-mails about getting the truth out, rather than hold back I am going to put the original information back. It follows below.

The quake was not what we were told.

In fact, the quake was a bold faced lie, packing a political agenda. There is even more proof now, and it goes beyond the linked Japanese chart. This original seismic data is the smoking gun, however, I have something better. I finally suppressed the urge to vomit and analyzed the lies told by the USGS, and from them wrote this sad, sad story about how it really was, not what you will see in the video. Keep in mind that precise top speeds of flying debris cannot be determined with accuracy, but this story will at least be close to the numbers put out by the USGS.
The people in the newsroom did not die, this story is what would have happened if the USGS charts were true.
Meet Atsuo, Airi, and Akiyoshi. They were all the best and most dedicated people at the NHK newsroom, in Sendai Japan. Akiyoshi loved Airi, and Atsuo was the one who introduced them. Unfortunately, all 3 died in the quake. Akiyoshi got a severe cut and bled to death when he hit a display screen behind him at 44 miles an hour, and was then thrown out through a hole in a collapsed wall. Airi followed pretty much the same path, and died beside him in the rubble. Atsuo flew through the open door behind him, then crashed through a window and was crushed when he landed in a massive seismic crack in the road, which closed in on him. Others in the newsroom died also, but I never thought up names for them. At least, according to the official USGS charts. The laser printer was never found, but the table it was on ended up on top of the rubble, smashed to pieces, where one of the few survivors used a piece of the metal frame to splint his broken leg.

     The video below is the one I pulled the frames out of for the sad, sad story. It is a video of a newsroom at the hardest hit area in Japan, and it SAYS IT ALL. This is when the quake was happening live. They are alarmed there is an earthquake, but most people stay seated in their chairs.
     Some people even keep typing on their computers as the quake happens. - Also, note that most of the stuff stays on the desks, at the end, a laser printer is still sitting on a cheap table, ect. some things fall but things return to normal quickly, all the while the English announcer is reading a script of devastation with all the pep of some paid fool who does not believe what he is saying in a cheezy infomercial. The quake was significant, but only in a 6.0 sense, as recorded by the seismographs. This is important footage, because it proves the earthquake measured at a 6.8 was an instrumentation based richter reading. Confusion between the Shindo and Richter scale is being used to cover this up .I chose this video because it's location is documented to have been the worst affected, and was recorded in a news room with a known fixed location.
     This video gets deleted off youtube occasionally, if it does not work check back later and I might have re-linked it.
     Remember that this video is proof of what really went on. This means there never were significant aftershocks, never was a natural tsunami, and if they lied about that, what else? This video is pivotal and vital to exposing the truth. Sure there was a quake, but at this newsroom it was not much over a six if it even was a six. I chose this video because the news room is within eyeshot of station MYG012, which was used by the USGS to make these graphs which represent an 8.8, as was stated in this (English) newscast and was probably used as a guide to fudge the lie due to the closeness of the newsroom to the seismic station. Looking at these charts, it is super easy to get a rough guess at how fast people would have flown. 44MPH to the North, and 28MPH to the East. Those are not precise numbers but the charts are proven wrong by the video because according to the charts people should have entered uncontrolled flight. Here is the full chart put out by the USGS Of course, they offer no reading from MYG011, which was closest to the 9.0 "epicenter" by a long shot, because it only got a 5.63's worth of shaking. I will do that work for them. That map is below.
     I challenge ANYONE to send me pictures of this quake showing me devastation in an area not hit by the tsunami. All we have, all the pictures are tsunami damage. Let's see pictures of quake damage. The Kobe quake was a 6.9/7.2 depending on source. That makes this quake, at a 9.0 100X as powerful. Sendai was near the epicenter and would have been devastated if it really happened. Look at the earthquake photos of damage from the Kobe quake, and try to find ONE THING SIMILAR in SENDAI. Just try. They do not exist. Outside of the tsunami, the quake which supposedly hit Sendai with many times the power of the one in Kobe, did not destroy a single building there. Sendai was only 48 miles from the epicenter of this "9.0" which would have devastated everything in an area 1,000 miles across if it was real. All of Japan would be toast.
     Try to find a photo of seismic damage in Sendai. I challenge you. Try to find it in any of the coastal cities, as little as 25 miles from the "epicenter". I looked for 5 hours, and except for some tanks that fell at a brewery not a single one exists. No pictures of collapsed skyscrapers or high rises equals NO 9.0. You will not find a single skyscraper photo where the windows got broken either. You will find no downed power poles, no flipped over cars, no uprooted trees, no derailed trains (except for one the tsunami hit), and the road damage is typical of even a 5.0. You will not find pictures of a single damaged multi story building or even a structurally damaged wood framed house outside the tsunami zone. In Sendai the quake messed up grocery stores and kitchens and that really is about it.

And now, I will say it like I knew it had to be;

     I believe the phony 9.0 story was used as seismic cover for a tsunami nuke, which produced the tsunami of a 9.0 when detonated in the Japan trench (where no earthquakes of significance happen) as punishment for Japan offering to enrich uranium for Iran. The rest of the story, the concealment, is black ops. Bet on it. In the tsunami videos, the tsunami rips through pristine and undamaged cities, where business as usual is obvious and the tsunami is an ambush; not 9.0 earthquake ravaged debris. The quake is a paper thin story taped together by the undeserved trust of a gullible public. And the stories? The CIA did not hire a million people last year for nothing.
     If there is evidence of a 9.0 SHOW ME. A 9.0 will devastate an area over 1,000 miles across.That is how big a 9.0 is. The entire nation should be in ruins, especially judging from the damage the 6.9 Kobe quake did, and no where, no where outside the tsunami zone in the entire country is there a single damaged multi story building, a single collapsed bridge, a single structurally damaged wood framed house, or skyscraper. If a picture exists that can be definitively pinned to this quake, show me. The only collapsed structure in all of Japan was an old welfare shelter near station MYG004, the true epicenter.
     Take a look at these frame captures, and ask a question - Why is no one trying to run? Why are the cars all just parked peacefully as the tsunami arrived? Why was there no warning? Why did the tsunami sirens only go off after the tsunami arrived? Could it be that the people and the governement had not felt a significant earthquake and did not measure one either?

Question: Why are none of the roads packed with people trying to flee the approaching tsunami?

     Could it be that the people and government were not expecting one? Tsunami sirens blare only when it arrives, rather than 40 minutes before, which is how much warning they would have had if a real quake in the ocean had been detected. Consider that. Parking lots full of cars, everyone at work, no one trying to leave. AMBUSH!!.
When people keep typing at their keyboards during the quake, it's obviously not what we were told.
RUSH UPDATE, May 28 2011
     When reviewing the seismic data for the supposed 9.0, I knew there were instead 3 small simultaneous inland epicenters. This made me suspicious right from the start that the quake was artificially triggered and used as seismic cover for a tsunami bomb. But I needed a reason to believe an artificial quake could have been done. I suspected that either Japan was testing nukes and Israeli intelligence was onto it and used the tests as the "start of clock" for their operation, or Israel managed to smuggle nukes into lava tubes and tunnels far underground to trigger earthquakes and contain the blasts. So I was hunting for tunnels and lava tubes near each of the three epicenters, and wanted to find them before writing this into this report. As it turns out, I did not need to. This military briefing with Secretary of Defense William Cohen, dated all the way back to 1997! shows that even then, Cohen knew about EM weaponry that could trigger quakes and set off volcanoes. I have ignored everything regarding this subject, I thought it was the realm of kooks. I thought EM weaponry would be effective in weather modification only, but I am not going to argue with the Secretary of Defense. There are obviously then, energy technologies which have never been publicized, such weaponry would need far more energy input than the electrical grid could provide. And the systems Cohen spoke of in 1997 would be outdated now.
Cohen stated: "Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that's why this is so important. - William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense, April 28, 1997. Left unsaid by William Cohen is that such systems would be developed by DARPA and owned by America first!
I would expect with 14 years of advancement that these technologies could now trigger devastating earthquakes in non-seismic zones.
The following picture is the strongest reading for this quake on any seismogram anywhere in Japan. This was before the lie machine got running smoothly. Early on there were a few sputters and this REAL chart got out. As you can see on this chart, it was a 6.67 on the Richter scale, (not shindo scale, confirmed by PGA reference) This would fit in with NO structural damage in Sendai and the level of shaking in the video

     This quake was initially asessed a 6.8, and the seismic data will show anyone the epicenter was inland, not at sea. So it started a 6.8, then got upgraded to a 7.9, then got upgraded to an 8.4, then got upgraded to an 8.8, then got upgraded to a 9.0, and had the epicenter put out in the ocean. Now many are saying it was a 9.1 which would bump up MYG011's number to 1200 from 1070, and it is all based on tsunami effects, not seismic data.
     The following seismograms clearly show epicenters from 3 separate small quakes all occuring simultaneously. This is what would be expected of an attack, rather than a natural occurence.

One problem with people grasping how big a 9.0 is, is exponential charts which will hide how much energy is really being released behind confusing gradient marking. To answer the need for clarity, I got out the calculator and produced a chart that shows you how big a 9.0 earthquake is on a linear scale. Make sure you expand and scroll it, it is 5,000 pixels tall. Due to its large verticle height it opens on the left side of the screen and is almost invisible until you expand it. Confusion over how GIANT a 9.0 really is has helped the elite scammers enormously in their lie. There is simply no way much of anything will remain standing, yet as the tsunami rolls in . . . . . .
And now, I will bite. This is what I did not want to publish, but I know it has to be true. Call this creative journalism, because I never called Netanyahu, but here is the most rational conclusion I can draw, based on all info gathered so far including the original not faked seismic data.
I honestly believe Japan is being held a nuclear hostage. It all makes sense.
1. Japan offers to enrich uranium for Israel's GREAT SATAN, Iran
2. Immediately, Israel sets up front companies masquerading as security companies, and one of them succeeds in getting a security contract at a Japanese nuclear facility. 4 months later the Dimona Dozen shows up, and under the cover of a security contract gets unlimited access to the heart of Fukushima. They plant the virus, install real cameras outside the facility, and functional poorly disguised nuke cameras inside the facility. In addition to this, they install an unauthorized data connection to allow control of all the guts of the facility via the virus. (they admitted to this connection, as discussed later on this page)
3. After installing Stuxnet and the nukes they scram
4. Israel waits for one of the many natural quakes in Japan to provide cover for a tsunami bomb, and they already have it at the bottom of the Japan trench. VLF communications are established with the bomb to penetrate the water. David in Dimona gets seismic reading from Japan. 6.67 in progress, BOOM. (new evidence shows the quake most likely was not natural)
Tsunami comes in, swamps stuxnet infected power plant, direct video feed from legitimate cameras security company installed gets to David via totally unauthorized channel, and David knows just when to cut the generators off. Others on the team do all they can to counteract measures taken by the employees at fukushima, who are unaware an attack is taking place and do not understand why everything is going crazy
5. Israeli Prime Minister calls Japan, and says TAKE THAT for offering help to Iran, and ya know, there are FIVE MORE NUKES in the ocean off the coast of Japan, and we are going to set those off and destroy your coastal cities if you do not forget that 6.67, and say it was a 9 to cover for tsunami effects. AND NOW we are going to make your people DEMAND you move away from nuclear power so you can NEVER threaten us like that again. We are BLOWING UP FUKUSHIMA DIIACHI and you are going to go along with whatever story we tell you to. SO THERE!!
6. David and his pals close ALL valves to the reactors via the remote data link they admitted to installing, and put them full throttle, to melt them down while the virus keeps control room readouts displaying false info, like nothing is going on even though the place is coming apart. After enough mayhem ensues to provide plausibility, they set off planted nukes and blow the place sky high.
And even if the quake was real, there are nukes that can reach an 8.4. Close enough. Though I have yet to work out the final details, I probably have enough to hang them because:
1. I got the real seismic data that proves beyond a doubt the quake is not what we were told and was in fact an inland 6.8, (calculated higher than the seismogram due to the triangulated true epicenter being a little higher) which would get noticed but not feared in quake ridden Japan.
2. Numerous referenced sources prove Stuxnet really was written by Israel
3. Japan really did offer to enrich Uranium for Iran, and Israel has been documented to have attempted to destroy the reactor in Iran, and probably did. Japan contributing to Iran's nuclear future would make them just as much an enemy to Israel as Iran. Israel would want them taken out.
4. It is documented that a team from Israel, with a history consisting only of working in Israeli defense, got unlimited access to a Japanese nuclear facility, which then went boom
5. Reactor 4 had been defueled and proven disassembled, and therefore no explosion there was possible. What should have happened at reactor 4, if anything at all? the fuel pools should have melted down and caught fire once the water boiled off from lack of recirculation AT Worst, and badly contaminated the containment structure, NOTHING ELSE. NO explosions, NOTHING ELSE. Reactor 4 is building 7, PERIOD. Why did an explosion there happen that was so severe it blew the outer containment walls (4 feet thick) and inner containment walls that were much thicker? Reactor 4 is reportedly now in danger of falling over. HOW?
6. The Japanese government is going along with the story of a scientifically proven false 9.0. There is a reason, and my guess is that Israel has made threats to wipe out Japanese coastal cities with additional tsunamis if the government of Japan speaks a word of what went on, there should be no reason for Japan to go along with this other than a continued threat.

     Is it not interesting this "quake" reportedly happened at the bottom of the Japan trench, which would be perfect for hiding an atomic bomb blast?

     Is the Department of Homeland Security trying to keep American industries (and nuclear facilities) in the dark about Stuxnet? After Fukushima fell victim to unwary operators, I would think such a conference would be a TOP priority here! The genie is out of the bottle. It is a fact that the writers of Stuxnet intend to use it. So cancelling a well researched conference about the vulnerabilities of the Siemens SCADA system to Stuxnet in the name of "keeping hackers from getting info" seems to me like an effort to keep the threat alive. Ignore the fluff at the beginning, and read the "About TakeDownCon" summary near the bottom so you know what they actually cancelled rather than settle for the no-panic fluff at the beginning. This is SERIOUS. I fear that by the time the Hacker Halted conference happens in October, the summer of disaster may have passed. And if it has not, I bet any discussion of Stuxnet at Hacker Halted will also be cancelled. Stuxnet is too good a toy for a very powerful group to let go of. Something is fishy here.
Other publications picked up this story now, and are poo pooing the issue into the ground. They are obviously attempting to morph responsibility for Stuxnet style attacks away from Israel so that they can regain cover and use the weapon as a false flag tool to destroy internet freedom. This is where they are going to go with this - count on it, and when the disasters happen there will be a cozy blanket of lies shielding Israel from all blame. Never forget, THIS IS THEIR BABY, NEVER FORGET. Prior to them doing this, WE NEVER HEARD OF IT.
About "prompt criticality" - As it turns out, Arnie Gundersen, mister "prompt criticality" with regard to the massive explosion at #3 is very poorly credentialed. His crowning achievement was playing with a 100 watt open water tank reactor in a classroom for a short period of time.
Fuel rods are only 20 percent fissionable, sometimes even less, and until you reach over 90 percent purity in U238 and about 70 percent purity in Plutonium NO "prompt criticality" is possible in ANY case no matter how much of it you have laying around. Furthermore, even with 100 percent pure material you need a precision trigger slamming or crushing material together to get a detonation. Even if 100 percent pure material is slammed together at high speed, if it is not done right you will get only a nuclear "sputter" that pushes the pieces apart, and no detonation. Nukes are hard to do! Why have so many of us seemed to have forgotten that nuclear detonations are hard to accomplish? The "prompt criticality" in spent fuel story is something I would have expected to hear from an Ewok praying to a gold robot. I can't believe even a scammer would have the guts to suggest it, let alone allow it to be spread around in his name. For an explanation for the explosions, just look at the cameras the Dimona Dozen brought in. If someone is waving a degree as an anchor for this "prompt criticality" bull hockey, remember that there is such a thing as a paper trained idiot and if you look into Gundersen's background you will discover he is barely that, with his ONLY hands on experience outside a classroom being an intern at a nuclear facility two years before he got his degree!
If the mainstream media wanted the facts, why did they pick this guy? Because he said what they wanted, truth be damned.
"We at Vermont Yankee are well acquainted with Arnie and his exaggerations. He plays to a public and a legislature that has zero knowledge of nuclear power or engineering and is willing to accept any negative claim as truth." And since he gave an impossible "prompt criticality" explanation which diverted attention away from the only real explanation for the magnitude of the explosion at #3 - a nuke, they gave him a ton of air. Enough said.
The article about Fukushima follows; Fukushima was impossible. The swamping of the external generators by the tsunami was irrelevant, because the real emergency backup systems are driven by steam from the reactors themselves. No electricity is needed to operate three separate emergency systems at each reactor, each of which will keep a reactor safe even if only one works. Interesting it is then that all 9 non electrical backup systems across the three fueled reactors failed. This is technically impossible outside of willful intent, and was likely the result of a Stuxnet attack.
Stuxnet was designed specifically to target Siemens SCADA controllers and is most effective at tampering with fluid control systems. The centrifuges it attacked in Iran were ideal. So are the fluid control systems at a nuclear facility. Oil refineries are equally at risk, Stuxnet is most dangerous when affecting a system which needs to control the flow of any liquid, be it hydraulic, for cooling, or combining chemicals. Stuxnet is documented to have been produced by the Israeli Defense Forces, for the purpose of destroying any industrial system that can be destroyed by improper fluid flow.
Magna BSP, a Dimona based company with no history outside of IDF contracts prior to Fukushima has a suspiciously short domain history despite a 10 year claimed history. Magna BSP had a full time internet linked two way connection to the Fukushima reactor room(s) all the way through the disaster. They told TEPCO about that connection on March 15 (after everything blew sky high) via an article printed in the Jerusalem Post. Why did Manga BSP wait until everything was blown sky high to tell Tepco the data link existed, and then did not tell them face to face? I find it hard to believe that TEPCO would not have been interested in viewing a reactor that was about to explode. It seems impossible that Tepco would not have wanted to view the reactor, and probably did not ask because the link was kept a secret. It is a simple fact that internet connections are never allowed inside a reactor's containment. The connection was mentioned in the Jerusalem Post AFTER the destruction was finalized.
Stuxnet has two modes, random and administrative. It can be administered to optimize the damage and can also transmit setup information and industrial system information to a remote computer. Once installed on the host system via a flash drive it causes that system to violate it's normal security protocols and internet administration becomes possible if a connection exists. Tampering is not visible on the control room readouts, because Stuxnet learns what "normal" looks like and keeps the temperature, pressure, and other readouts within normal limits so that the operators are oblivious to the destruction happening in secret. Stuxnet appeared in Japan in June of 2010, shortly after Magna BSP arrived. Remote administration mode can be adjusted on demand to suit any need. No doubt the people at Fukushima sat there in idle mode thinking all was well until something screamed or went boom and at that point it would be too late to do anything other than cry.
I am a lifer in the types of control systems Fukushima and it's clone, TVA owned Browns Ferry have. BOTH have been upgraded to modern Siemens controllers running the Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system Stuxnet was designed to attack; upgrades are the norm in any major facility. On many blogs people say the controls were old and therefore Stuxnet immune; they are out of touch or have no knowledge of industrial control systems. I actually ferreted it out.
And now I will explain in detail why the problems before the explosions had to be sabotage
The diesel generators were not out in the open as we were led to believe, they were in fact located in the basements of the turbine buildings which were sealed off and never significantly flooded. One of them stayed running the entire time, but the electrical switch gear attached to it disconnected it for an unexplained reason which made it useless. Each of the backup generators at Fukushima were capable of running 14,000 households each, which means they had to be over ten megawatts each. It is obvious then that Fukushima was set up to survive on only ONE of 13 backup generators, and ONE did keep running. One would be many times larger than needed to run last ditch backup systems at all reactors, but would not keep business as usual. But that is not the real story, which is that even others which were high and dry stopped as well.
I hypothesize that the ONE generator that kept running was kept as a lone reserve, never hooked up to a SCADA controller. Why did the switch gear disconnect a working generator? That is the type of thing Stuxnet was designed to do. On top of these things, emergency generators arrived on scene within 9 hours, before anything bad happened at all but were not able to provide power because the switch gear would not let them. This deceptively written report from the World Nuclear Association contains all this information, but it is presented in a way which will cause you to overlook these things if you are not careful while reading it. This report contains accurate information presented in a very misleading way, which will protect the liars who wrote it - they actually did speak the truth here but in a way it would be missed by virtually anyone. Study the facts presented here with the full ramifications of those facts in mind, not their shallow misleading conclusions.
From this report you can get:
1. The generators never got submerged - you have to connect the dot between them being in a contained area and the tsunami thereby not being able to get to them. Some water got into one of the the turbine buildings where several were located and flooded the lowest point in that building to a depth of 4 feet, which means that even if the generators were on the floor at the lowest point they likely would not have been swamped because they are too big - the water would not get past the footings. Perhaps a one megawatt generator would have swamped; certainly not one of the big diesels, which were, according to this report enough to run 14,000 homes each. In addition to this, there were several generators in a second location that never got flooded at all. One of these generators kept running but was not able to get power into the facility because the switchgear prevented it.
2. You have to have watched the robot videos, which clearly show the switch gear that malfunctioned after the tsunami never got wet - there was a non tsunami reason for the failure. Also look at the high resolution photos referenced below. There is no switch gear for the diesel generators outside the facility, it is all indoors in areas higher than the water got. Remember that there was no emergency when the off site generators arrived, which means that they could work efficiently to get things up and running. With my experience in this area, Assuming it DID get soaked, a complete replacement of high capacity switch gear should only take an afternoon if done with an emergency attitude. A truck mounted crane or a forklift does all the heavy lifting and the stuff is modular. In every major facility there are spares galore. It is not that hard to make the terminations. A worst case scenario could have been addressed before things went horribly awry, that is, unless a virus did not let the new switch gear activate either. It would take days to conclude a virus was messing things up. You would not expect that. I am sure there is a LOT we never heard about.
3. That batteries held, leaving only a one hour gap in time where there was no power present to run things before adequate off site power drove into the facility on the road all nice and ready to hook up, but was denied to by switch gear which this report says was swamped but that is likely an assumption because swamped switchgear could have been replaced even before the batteries died. The fact that the offsite generators were able to be driven into the facility also proves that other lies told about the earthquake in general - employees leaving only to find cracks in the road so bad they had to walk home; Why? Why lie like this? AT LEAST this report has some modicum of honesty.
4. You have to look at the chart that shows the thermal output of the reactors 8 hours after the earthquake, which is when the batteries running the electrical cooling pumps died, the output at that time was less than 20 megawatts from each reactor, which means that they would not have had troubles before the off site generators were hooked up to restore power if it was not denied by what I suspect was stuxnet infected switch gear. The real critical time is in the first 3 hours after shutdown.
5. Reactor 3 exploded entirely, yet this reactor had the most functional backup systems. At least this report says the explosion remains "unexplained". Perhaps those who wrote the report should take a look at this for an answer.
6. The reactors are stated to be an "early 1960's design" apparently to mislead people into believing they were outdated even when installed. This was not the case. Their design was an early 60's concept but in fact a late 60's design, and since installation takes years, what more could you expect in the early 70's? The reactors were in fact a very safe design. This report at least states that the facility was very well updated. Identical reactors at TVA owned browns ferry have been certified safe and licensed to operate through the year 2035. These reactors were also converted over to run the Siemens Scada system. The reactors at Fukushima were not garbage. The fastest cars in production still function on a late 1800's concept.
I hypothesize that the situation at Fukushima is not being properly assessed by facility controllers because STUXNET is STILL giving false readings to the control panels, readings which obviously have to be false because they show containment pressure when confidental leaked photographs prove beyond a doubt no containment exists AT ALL at reactor 3. There is not even a reactor there.
This report is perfectly inaccurate with regard to reactor 3 containment. Perhaps the people who wrote this report have not actually looked at the facility or seen the confidential photographs.
This report supports what I have said here entirely. It was written by an experienced reactor operator. I found this on May 10. I was absolutely right!
Each reactor has 8 separate emergency backup systems, each capable of saving the reactor on it's own. Three are designed to function perfectly if all power is lost and even the generators fail. Fukushima did not need any electrical systems operating AT ALL to keep itself from blowing up, when power is lost steam from the reactors is automatically diverted from the generator turbines to two totally separate steam turbines connected to totally separate water pumps needing only reactor steam to power them. Even that backup system has dual redundancy, only one of the two is needed for the job. But the valves which have to activate to re-divert the steam, all 6 valves on a total of 3 fueled reactors, eventually failed to. At reactors 1 and 3 these systems worked, but switched off at reactor 1 within an hour and off at reactor 3 after running for more than two days. No one has been able to explain why these systems switched off all by themselves, when they need a powered command to switch off. At reactor 2 they were never allowed to activate. This can only happen if the control system tells them to shut off or stay off, absent intervention from the controller they automatically and seamlessly switch cooling modes to passive rather than electrical.
Some readers may remember that the real issue at Fukushima was malfunctioning valves, and the need to get someone past the radiation to open them. These are the valves that were spoken of. Because Stuxnet kept the readouts normal, no one knew this system did not function until major problems happened as a result flooding the area where the valves are with radiation. This prevented last ditch efforts (running and cutting the wires). One automatic valve jamming and mechanically failing would be a surprise,6 failing can only be sabotage.
In addition to this, another completely independent separately piped backup with an entirely different electronic decision tree which injects borated water at a pre charged 3,500 PSI into the reactor to irrevocably shut down all chain reactions (reactor rebuild required) also simultaneously failed at all 3 fueled reactors. The borated water systems have explosive operated valves so reliable that even one out of 3 failing would be a ten thousand to one possiblity, if that. The reliability of the borated water systems is technically theoretically assured. All three failing at the same time at Fukushima can only mean sabotage.
High pressure in all of the reactors proves the quake did not damage any of the infrastructure at fukushima because any leaks would have let the pressure go. In addition to this, the seismic readings at Fukushima were 6.07 Fukushima was designed to handle being at the epicenter of an 8.
The media keeps harping about how all the water went away. It only did because these three backup systems were prevented from cooling the reactor which caused the water to boil off and never be replaced. High pressures were talked about constantly in the press; This means beyond a doubt that all 6 steam powered backup systems were intact, and all 3 borated water systems were intact also because if they were not the pressure would have escaped through them. Absent emergency backup control power keeping the virus alive; (control power Magna BSP admitted was there the whole time by mistake when they said their cameras and supporting computers captured the explosions and maintained a data link) the valves which control these systems would have opened when the generators failed and there would have been no disaster. 3 worst case scenarios where all 9 automatic valves across 9 separate emergency backup systems are held shut by the controller when no power should have been present to prevent them from activating can only mean sabotage.
A historical perspective of Fukushima shows the hydrogen blasts were bogus.
Hydrogen blasts could not have damaged Fukushima so badly, this is a media fed lie. If hydrogen gas alone mixed with air could produce blasts strong enough to blow reactor containment buildings to pieces, which are among the strongest structures on earth (exceeded in strength only by ones like Hoover Dam,) then hydrogen gas filled bombs would be the prime military option. In reality, the Three Mile Island incident proved hydrogen ignition in open air after reactor meltdown is likely to only scare employees, while causing no damage at all to the facility, as was the case there. It is extremely important to know the differences between the boiling water reactor design and the design of Chernobyl. At Chernobyl, a hydrogen blast DID cause destruction of the facility, but it was because the reactor design caused hydrogen and oxygen at a perfect ratio to ignite at thousands of PSI inside the reactor pressure vessel. That's a big difference from hydrogen alone igniting in relatively oxygen starved open air at one atmosphere (14.5 PSI). The difference would be similar to the difference between a small firecracker and a case of dynamite; there were many orders of magnitude lower blast potential at Fukushima.
Just to be absolutely safe after the Three Mile Island incident, many nuclear facilities installed hydrogen hard vent stacks hooked directly up to the relief valves on their reactors, and Fukushima was one of them. This was to prevent a hydrogen buildup in the containment building in the event of a core meltdown, which caused a minor explosion at Three Mile Island. These stacks are the tall white towers you see in the photographs of Fukushima, and they are effective in getting rid of hydrogen buildup, are directly piped, and vent completely outside. "Hard piped" means that the electrical failures would have had nothing to do with the blasts, because a hard vent is exactly that - no fan needed at all because the system is sealed. Even if the hard piping at all 3 fueled Fukushima reactors failed entirely, it should not have been any worse than Three Mile Island which did not have any hard venting to begin with. While hydrogen venting might be a problem if it ignited, it would not mean the death of a facility. It makes no sense that at Fukushima we got a nuclear weapon style mushroom cloud far in excess of the highest yield conventional bomb.
What then, caused the explosions? The containment walls were at their thinnest points in the lowest allowed General Electric design a minimum of 4 foot thick steel reinforced concrete, were likely to be a minimum of 8 feet thick, and were totally blown away. All concrete was stripped from the rebar, which was left dangling. Reactor 3 vanished entirely,as seen in the classified photo used to compare the destruction to the diagram and reactor 4 appears to have been blown to pieces as seen in this classified photo The yellow dome which should be sitting on top of reactor 4 can be clearly seen on the wrong side of the containment building. This type of destruction is is indicative of hard weaponry in use; a hydrogen air mix will not do that. Reactors are not made out of tinfoil. On top of this, there was no potential for an explosion at reactor 4 at all, it had been defueled. SO WHAT, PRAY TELL, BLEW IT APART? That's the dirty question no one is asking - how did that happen?
To give you an idea of how big the reactors at Fukushima were, look at this. It's the top of the same make and model at Fukushima's American twin, TVA owned Brown's Ferry, and it is only the top. The yellow dome sits above this, and is even bigger. (here the yellow dome has been removed for refueling). over 150 feet of reactor sits below that cap. Hydrogen will not vaporize that, which appears to be what happened to #3, only a nuclear weapon would. Reactors are about 14 digits beyond incapable of going supercritical even with a complete core meltdown. The reactors did not explode, something placed in their vicinity did.
Magna BSP had access to the reactors at this facility. They were based in Dimona, which is a military base that manufactures nuclear weapons. Stuxnet was made in their yard. They are stated to be a military company.
There is extremely strong evidence that Dimona based Magna BSP placed nuclear weapons at the exploded or vanished reactors at Fukushima, possibly hidden inside one of their unbelievably GIANT stereoscopic cameras. These cameras were installed inside the reactor containment of Fukushima reactor 3 under the cover of a security contract in the year prior to the disaster. These cameras are identical in size and appearance to a gun type nuclear weapon. Since previous hydrogen explosions at boiling water reactors have never caused any sort of damage to equipment or buildings, even during complete meltdowns, it begs the question how on earth one at reactor 3 produced a mushroom cloud. Three Mile Island sits in the evidence pool against what we have been told about Fukushima. History does matter.
One problem with the reporting in the mainstream media is that it failed to convey just how massive and strong the containment structures really were, as seen in this classified photo. A hydrogen explosion would only blow the sheet metal off the steel framed roof if it even did that, at Three Mile Island the hydrogen ignition did nothing at all. It just scared employees. Another thing the reporting failed to convey is the gravity of the disaster. Compare the containment diagram to the remains of reactor 3. It is painfully obvious that many tons of highly radioactive plutonium in the containment pools is nowhere to be found, the entire floor they were on is completly gone. We are getting lied to.
That was a LOT more than a hydrogen blast, and as a result there are thousands of pounds of plutonium scattered everywhere. TEPCO was ridiculed for initially stating that the radiation from the facility was "immeasurable". I think they at first told the truth. Now they have this story about the Fukushima 50. Is it in fact a "wag the dog"? No one could be there and live. Why is remote controlled heavy equipment doing the cleanup? The official story is hydrogen blasts, not nukes, so the story line has to at least be within the far outer limits of what a hydrogen blast could actually accomplish; not missing reactors and entire fuel pools blown away.
I suggest you ponder the pictures and materials presented and reach your own conclusion. A government issued training manual for the reactors at Fukushima is here
Now that Osama, who has been dead for 10 years is officially dead, Al Quaida is going to use a nuke, so they say; I strongly urge you to consider this article if a nuke actually does go off somewhere or if other nuclear facilities start acting like Fukushima.
The only reason I believe the management at Fukushima is not telling it like it really was is because victim status has been so well asserted by the ethnic group in question that it is career suicide to point the finger at them, even when they try to kill you. I find it interesting that all 12 Non Japanese employees of Magna BSP returned to Israel a week before the tsunami . . . . .
I might have understood the need for Stuxnet if it's use would have ended with Iran. Unfortunately that does not appear to be the case. I do hope this article breaks their toy.
For those of you who are reluctant to re-post this because the wording is too strong, I ask you to consider this;
The real answer came out of Fukushima. We have a member of the international community which has already done horrendous damage to a very advanced and (presently) innocent civilization and we simply cannot continue to tolerate it. Consider what ignoring this will cost you. Are you prepared to have a major disaster at the convenience of the couch; because you sat there watching TV rather than dragging your butt over to the computer to at least spread the word? Are your video games, ball games, 4x4 and porno really worth continuing to lose everything for? Is your religion going to keep you silent as well? We really need a serious wake up call. Please let this post be it, rather than some other unforseen disaster.
     Thank you to the many readers who pointed out flaws, gave tips, and suggested clarifications, you studied this indeed! My thanks also goes out to the radio hosts who have had me on the air and invited me to appear to discuss this subject. BTW, this article was written via code entry, without spell check. Consider that.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
These references included as e-mail compatible links.
Free copy of Trapped in a Masonic World in PDF format. – ‘Warning Over 18yrs Only’ – do share; http://m.friendfeed-media.com/d00495e5f7afc74daa5a6a521aada39c9c52315e
The Cause; http://www.causes.com/causes/643665-ban-members-of-secret-societies-from-serving-in-our-government-and-their-related-bodies/actions
www.threemileisland.org/science/what_went_wrong/index.html
www.defense-update.com/products/m/magna.htm
www.jimstonefreelance.com/turbine.jpg
www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/8326274/Israeli-security-chief-celebrates-Stuxnet-cyber-attack.html
www.english.pravda.ru/history/22-02-2011/116985-Israeli_general_boasts_authoring_Stuxnet-0/
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/8326387/Israel-video-shows-Stuxnet-as-one-of-its-successes.html
www.reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whois_nic=magnabsp.com&type=domain
www.magnabsp.com
www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=212168
www.infosecisland.com/blogview/12628-Japans-Nuclear-Crisis-Stuxnet-and-SCADA-Defenses.html
www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T101004003493.htm
www.jimstonefreelance.com/door.jpg
www.jimstonefreelance.com/borated.jpg
www.news.discovery.com/earth/2011/03/12/fukushima-zoom.jpg
www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/03/25/25climatewire-us-experts-blame-fukushima-1-explosions-and-19903.html?amp=&pagewanted=all
www.jimstonefreelance.com/reference.jpg
www.jimstonefreelance.com/containment.jpg
www.jimstonefreelance.com/reactorlid.jpg
www.pcworld.com/article/224811/fukushima_daiichi_workers_clear_debris_by_remote_control.html
www.jimstonefreelance.com/03.pdf
www.jimstonefreelance.com/core.jpg
www.jimstonefreelance.com/camera.jpg
www.rense.com/general93/hid.htm
www.pinktentacle.com/2011/04/high-resolution-photos-of-fukushima-daiichi/ (source of high resolution photos)

    
    Fukushima Source: http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/fukushima.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exract from Trapped in a Masonic World;
[1] Operation Wigwam Test Report, DTRA (PDF)
[1a] Operation HARDTACK Military Effects Studies Part II: Underwater Tests (1958), Department of Defense documentary film, Lookout Mountain Laboratory USAF.
[1b] http://www.archive.org/details/OperationHARDTACK_UnderwaterTests1958
[1c] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Crossroads#cite_note-70       
[2] Chuck Hansen, U. S. Nuclear Weapons: The Secret History (Arlington: AeroFax, 1988) ISBN 0517567407
[3] The Nuclear Weapons Archive
[4] "United States Nuclear Tests, July 1945 through September 1992 (DOE... (pdf). U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office. 2000. http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_209_REV....
[5] Glasstone, Samuel; Dolan, Philip (1977), The Effects of Nuclear Weapons (3rd ed.), U.S. Government Printing Office: 1977 O-213-794, http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/articles/effects/, retrieved 2009-12-16
[6] Operation Teapot: Defense Technical Information Center. Exercise Desert Rock VI. Oper...
[7] Defense Department film giving technical results of Redwing blasts
[7a] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Redwing
[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Teapot
[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Plumbbob
[9a] Downloadable/Streamable Declassified Film: Military Effects Studies...
[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Upshot-Knothole
[11] ^ Pacific Ocean". Britannica Concise. 2006. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc
[12] "Ring of Fire - Pacific Ring of Fire". http://geography.about.com/cs/earthquakes/a/ringoffire.htm.
[13]   ^ http://www.state.tn.us/environment/tdg/maps/pdf/sinkhole.pdf
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)