Questions About Vietnam Nukes After Evidence of Previous Fakery
By Daily Bell Staff - July 31, 2016

Defending against the growing missile threat … Congress has a duty to bolster the U.S. air defense system … Both Iran and North Korea are rogue nations developing and testing new missile technologies at an alarming rate. Iran threatens U.S. forces and has missile technology to carry out those threats. North Korea has successfully tested missiles that can be fired from submarines and is threatening to use them. –Washington Times

Here is another article filled with apparently unverifiable assertions and demands regarding nuclear technology and the necessity for America to defend itself.

We’ve been documenting inconsistencies about the US nuclear program and asking where verification exists and how it was developed.

This Times article is a good example of assertions that are provided without evident factual support.

The columnist writing it has a past relationship with the American Enterprise Institute, a free-market facility well known for advocacy of various forms of military action and preparedness.


China has been building a world-class, blue-water navy to challenge the United States and power its aggression in the South China Sea. Russia is flexing its muscles, orchestrating attacks against its neighbors, working to weaken NATO, and advance its global expansion.

The importance of missile defense in this environment is clear. To protect ourselves from these growing threats, the United States must continue to invest in technological improvements to help our combatant commanders and warfighters protect against growing missile threats at home and abroad.

That is why it is critical that we continue to invest in, and modernize, proven upper-tier missile defense systems

From our reading we understand that the formations of Communist China and Red Russia HERE were least in part supported by US and London-City banking interests. The strategy was Hegelian; the intention to create a dialectic including a plentiful supply of enemies.

But our real question is how do we know that these terrible threats are all they are supposed to be?

We analyze elite dominant social themes and the “genocidal nuke” theme stands out as an especially effective one – if indeed it is

The Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks seem to be much different and initially less deadly than advertised, HERE. And we recently carried an article extensively documenting apparent fakery involving the Bikini Island nuclear tests HERE.

If one accepts the apparent fakery at Bikini Island, this raises further questions about the bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

In other words, if nuclear weapons existed prior to Bikini Island, why was  it necessary to add fakery to the Bikini Island tests?

Subsequent videos of nuclear tests also seem to have been faked, HERE and HERE. When exactly were nuclear weapons perfected?

And exactly how powerful are they?

We recently found this article posted at The National Interest, HERE: “US Air Force Tried Turning Lethal Nuclear Rockets Into Cluster Bombs.”

American pilots dodged deadly anti-aircraft guns and missiles throughout the Vietnam War. To deal with these and other threats, the U.S. Air Force built various cluster bombs, including repurposed nuclear rockets.

By 1967, enterprising airmen at Hill Air Force Base in Utah had converted AIR-2 Genies from atomic air-to-air rockets into a conventional weapon for blowing up targets on the ground. Instead of a 1.5-kiloton nuclear warhead inside each Genie, technicians packed the nose with tiny bomblets the size of hand grenades.

Retired McDonnell engineer Ron Downey posted the full document on his Aviation Archives blog. At the time of writing, Hill Air Force Base had not responded to our questions for additional historical information about the project.

This is somewhat surprising. Why would the Air Force take extremely expensive nuclear weapons and turn them into cluster bombs? Why not just convert the air-to-air nuclear weapons into air-to-ground nukes?

Was the Air Force unwilling to use ground-attack nukes for moral reasons? Or would such nukes not have proven as effective as nuclear weapons generally are thought to be?

In fact, the nuclear rocket program was extremely controversial, so much so that in the 1950s a single special test was held to reassure the public about the program and the “Genie” rockets named after a Walt Disney film, HERE:

Five Air Force officers—Col. Sidney Bruce, Lt. Col. Frank Ball, and Majors Norman Bodinger, John Hughes and Don Luttrell—volunteered to stand at ground zero when the Genie detonated. Public officials and the general public, they thought, would be reassured that nuclear air-defense weapons were threats to enemies alone.

Approval for the volunteer eyewitnesses came from the highest levels at the Pentagon. On July 19, 1957 the officers arrived in the Nevada desert, searching the sky. Bodinger narrated a minute-by-minute account into a tape recorder for later public consumption.

In addition to the five officers, there was cameraman George Yoshitake. He did not volunteer, but was sent as a member of the Lookout Mountain Photographic Laboratory, a then-secret Hollywood-based organization responsible for film and photo documentation of nuclear tests.

It is surprising that this sort of testing was accepted as legitimate, given the absence of the general public. Handpicked witnesses. a single army narrator and a special camera-man from “Lookout Mountain” comprise the “witnesses.”

The photo provided doesn’t look especially convincing, either. But the larger issues of access are the most questionable. We’ve previously pointed out that the Pentagon gave only a single reporter from the New York Times access to various historical elements of nuclear bomb testing and the subsequent Nagasaki detonation.

Then there is the issue of application. Around the world, there are tens of thousands of nuclear weapons, HERE. Yet never since Nagasaki and Hiroshima has a single one been used.

This is a record of restraint that surely must be unmatched in human history. Ordinarily sooner or later – and usually sooner – weapons once  constructed are utilized one way or another.

Conclusion: We’ve never stated that nuclear weapons are fake. But the questions surrounding US nuclear weapons and nukes in general are plentiful and compelling.

You don’t have to play by the rules of the corrupt politicians, manipulative media, and brainwashed peers.

When you subscribe to The Daily Bell, you also get a free guide:

How to Craft a Two Year Plan to Reclaim 3 Specific Freedoms.

This guide will show you exactly how to plan your next two years to build the free life of your dreams. It’s not as hard as you think…

Identify. Plan. Execute.

Yes, deliver THE DAILY BELL to my inbox!


Biggest Currency Reboot in 100 Years?
In less than 3 months, the biggest reboot to the U.S. dollar in 100 years could sweep America.
It has to do with a quiet potential government agreement you’ve never heard about.

Tagged with:
  • Rothbard

    Nuclear weapons are probably fake.

    • Mexicano

      I am pretty certain the early ones were due to the difficulties involved in their manufacture, but wonder if modern techniques and technologies have made their manufacture possible? Are they now ¨real¨?

    • sadstateofaffairs

      You have reminded me of something that happened 15 years ago. I had a co-worker who was previously some sort of NBC (Nuclear Biological Chemical) EMT (emergency medical tech) for the U.S. military in Korea. We were talking one time and he said that nuclear war would be a lot more survivable that people thought. He would not say anything further, but only that I should look it up.

  • smedley

    We approach the 71st anniversary of the atomic bombing of Japan this week and I agree, the questions DB poses are disconcerting. If the arms race has been a construct dialectic and baked into the global economy for decades, if not longer, one wonders where all the money has gone and how much effort must go into the manufacturing of enemies to justify all this military spending?

  • Praetor

    There are many questions here? Nukes where to be a deterrent to war.

    If you have nukes who would be crazy enough to go to war with a nuked up country or the very fact there are nukes on the planet would preclude, and avoidance of war, and more to a negotiated settlement.

    With a country having nukes, why would a country waste a dime on planes ships and tanks, just say you mess with us we blow you off the earth, if nukes are real, that is, and that seem to make more since.

    At this point, it all seems to be a delusional manipulation of the highest order!!!

  • alohajim

    The takeaway here is that the ‘leaders’, ‘authorities’ and ‘experts’ in governments around the world have been lying to their own people in order to serve and further their own interests. Even worse is academia, ‘teaching’ young people absolute, outright lies. Everyone supporting these lies is either willfully lying or perpetuating lies unknowingly and thus unwillingly. The small group of sociopaths with no conscience comprises the former group and they deserve our compassion and cannot be helped. The latter, far larger group are just regular decent human beings. These are the people that can be reached with the truth so that the One bank with all of its power and reach of dictating and controlling the human narrative collapses into its own bed of lies sooner rather than later. This just might be the best example of the phrase ‘the truth will set you free’.

    Rejoice! : Nuclear armageddon is a lie and will never happen, and governments, at every level have been lying to us for a very long time. Knowing this, it benefits the individual to do the exact opposite of what is being pushed and promoted. Here’s a short list, whatcha gonna do? : GMO’s, 2nd amendment, debt, consumption vs. savings, watching TV, msm vs. alternate media, common sense vs. government edicts, morality and ethics vs. human misery, globalism vs. local communities, growing food and catching water vs. being dependent on monopoly mega corporations, solar power on rooftops vs. giant solar farms owned by mega corporations, male/female vs. sexual perversion/confusion, local businesses vs. multinational mega corporations, stocks and bonds vs. precious metals. . . .

    It’s easy and liberating – vote with your wallet by starving and boycotting the One bank and all of its representations and vote with your mind by opting out.

  • spdlf

    Wow great article DB. That National Interest article has little info to go on with. Doesn’t sound legitimate to me that some ‘enterprising airmen’ would go on their own to dismantle nuclear tipped rockets with cluster munitions that their own tests showed weren’t working (they also had their own Lance tactical missile system in development around this time). In fact the article says at the end this whole story doesn’t appear in any official histories which is pretty suspect.

    Having Lookout Mountain involved pretty much seals it as this was (still is?) the premier propaganda facility in the US. Actually what did it for me was the picture of Robert Oppenheimer and Leslie Groves standing at ground zero wearing nothing but some white bags over their shoes. Its on the Trinity test page on Wikipedia. Seriously a 20kt bomb was supposed to explode just above their heads in that pic and all we see is some non-scorched debris and cracked clay, not to mention the random pictures of debris and hobos standing in the open desert being passed off as ‘evidence’ in the rest of the page. Every photo is suspect coupled with stories that sound like misdirection.

    For this nuclear hoax to really go on undetected for so long though would require participation at the highest levels of the international (deep) state, which means Russian and other powers’ nuclear tests need to be scrutinized as well. Going along with this theory leads to a thousands other questions surrounding geopolitics as well..

  • georgesilver

    “Conclusion: We’ve never stated that nuclear weapons are fake. But the questions surrounding US nuclear weapons and nukes in general are plentiful and compelling.”

    Please Daily Bell, Climb off the fence and say what you really suspect. Nuclear weapons do NOT work. You even almost say it yourself:- “This is a record of restraint that surely must be unmatched in human history”.

    The USA and NATO are happy to bomb countries back into the stone age without any moral constraint. So why not use nuclear weapons?

    There is also the argument that the USA/NATO doesn’t attack countries that have nuclear weapons because of retaliation. This also hokum. The reason is because if the nuclear country was flattened by bombing and didn’t retaliate then the hoax would be obvious.

    Look at Israel. Supposed to be brimming with nuclear weapons but never uses them. Why not? They are quite happy to use all other forms of armament.

    There is a small nuclear club which you can only join by invitation. It’s the Nuclear Armageddon Fear Club. Why do you think they let North Korea in? The Club likes to have a ‘deranged’ member to heighten the fear now and then.

    • Steve

      Cannot help but notice DB did not respond to your post.

      • Oh, come on. Our most important analysis ever? A little credit please.

  • wrusssr

    After the Hiroshima and Nagasaki “bombings” were sold to the public, the Korean war started. A UN “conflict” were were told. With MacArthur in charge. And there was a point in that “conflict” I’ve never understood. It was when China massed its Army along the Yalu River to invade South Korea. If ever there was a time and place to use nuclear weapons against and opposing force in the field, that was it. War over. MacArthur requested, we were told, and was denied, their use. Normally not worth a mention . . . except . . . if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were firebombed because of? . . . the same reason may have applied to MacArthur’s request.

  • thefinancedude

    the largest nuclear “accident site” is now planned to be the largest solar site in the world?

    add the lack of authentic filmed space flight, no satellites…no nukes…(from space either!) and what do we have? (who called nuclear energy an expensive way of boiling water? oh ya and he was a shill on top of that (inside out and upside down the WORLD madness is))…