Britain backs renewal of Trident nuclear programme … Trident programme involves four new vessels at an estimated cost of $54bn over the next 20 years. British prime minister affirms she would order nuclear strike … Despite opposition from the pro-independence Scottish National Party (SNP) and some in the opposition Labour Party, parliament approved the Scottish-based nuclear-armed Trident submarines by 472 to 117 votes. – Al Jazeera
Why is Britain going to pay nearly $55 billion to “renew its ageing nuclear weapons system?”
It consists of four submarines with Trident missiles.
Why does it cost so much?
What are they doing?
Why isn’t it reported on in more detail?
It’s not a popular system. Naval nuclear weapons technician William McNeilly recently published an expose of it.
He documented 30 alleged safety and security flaws in an 18-page document: “failure to check ID cards, fire risks from rubbish, the flouting of safety procedures, and a cover-up of a collision with a French nuclear submarine.”
There’s certainly a lot of carelessness surrounding these devastating nuclear weapons.
For us, nukes resemble a dominant social theme. At least partial propaganda in other words.
Information that obviously makes people more fearful about the future – and more inclined to accept the technocratic construct of a globalist society.
For many years, talking about nuclear weapons in any detail in the US and Japan was punishable by death. The laws still exist though not enforced anymore.
These laws were passed right after the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings – as if to make sure people wouldn’t speak about the issue.
Nuclear weapons benefit the political class immensely. The average corrupt political sociopath is immediately ennobled.
One day he is trying to figure out how to embezzle a couple of extra illegal bucks from the taxpayer. The next, he is standing in a marble-lined hall and delivering a speech about how he will not under any circumstances authorize the “murder of millions” via the nuclear weapons under his control.
Or even worse, as Prime Minister Theresa May just did, he will say “yes” he is willing to authorize such murders.
In her first statement in parliament as prime minister on Monday, Theresa May said Britain needed to retain its nuclear deterrent, which had been an insurance policy for the country’s security for nearly 50 years.
May did not hesitate when a member of the opposition asked whether she would be willing to order a nuclear strike.
“Yes,” May said.
The nuclear debate has not traveled far since the beginning of July, 1946 when the famous Bikini Island nuclear tests began.
Two years ago, the controversial but prolific investigator Miles Mathis – an artist and mathematician – published a debunking HERE entitled, The Bikini Atoll Nuclear Tests were Faked.”
… For more proof, we can go to Google. You can get a picture of the Bikini Atoll today from Google Earth. That’s dated 2013, not 1945. We are told the locals can’t live there now because of radioactivity, but we see at least three proofs against that.
One, we see lots of plant life both on and offshore. Radioactivity affects plants just as it affects animals, so the island should be barren.
Remember, the Bikini Atoll wasn’t said to be blasted by only Able and Baker. It was blasted 23 times, including three of the biggest blasts ever from US testing: the 4.5 megaton Navajo and the 5 megaton Tewa, in 1956; and the 15 megaton Bravo in 1954.
The Bravo blast was also supposed to be many times hotter than the surface of the sun, but it seems the roads on the island were undamaged and natives furtively repopulated in 1968.
Mathis also says photos of the Russian Tsar Bomba that were taken 100 miles out, were faked. From all of this he deduces potential fakery not of testing but of the entire narrative of “nuclear weapons.” When we examined the Nagasaki and Hiroshima explosions, we also decided lies were being told.
Whatever happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki doesn’t confirm much that has been said about the two explosions. You can see a summary of the conflicting evidence HERE in a list format. It’s pretty comprehensive.
Here is direct testimony of some of the exaggerations that took place from Crawford Sams – (of the ‘Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission’):
The object of this instruction, called Letter of Instruction, was “You will play up the devastating effect of the atomic bomb.” All right? So I was the one who set the deadline this time. Anybody who had been in Hiroshima and died within six months, whether they got run over by a bicycle or whatnot, would be credited to the atomic bomb. …
When the bomb went off, about 2 thousand people out of 250 thousand got killed [in Hiroshima] – by blast, by thermal radiation, or by intense x-ray, gamma radiation. … You see, it wasn’t “Bing” like the publicity here [said]: a bomb went off and a city disappeared. No such thing happened. That was the propaganda for deterrent …
You don’t hear much about the effects of Nagasaki because actually it was pretty ineffective. That was a narrow corridor from the hospital … down to the port, and the effects were very limited as far as the fire spread and all that stuff. So you don’t hear much about Nagasaki.
Perhaps there were no nuclear bombs then and something else was used. Or perhaps nukes were (and are?) a good deal less powerful than portrayed. There are many videos on Youtube portraying nuclear test fakery. The debunking is increasingly extensive: HERE and HERE.
We’ve been apparently lied to about vaccines, global warming and the efficacy of central banking, just to name a few globally disseminated elite themes. Is it not possible we’ve been lied to about elements of nuclear weapons info?
Please spread the word if you too have questions. Maybe the “nuclear meme” can be subject to more intensive reporting.
Conclusion: And here was our conclusion at the time, which still stands. “The entirety of the Cold War, including the ‘arms race’ and the ‘space race’ all have elements of directed history. In other words, they are not what they seem. They are what authorities wish us to believe. While here at DB we have never written that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not bombed with nukes, we do have grave reservations about the narrative.”