STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
The Trillion Dollar Nuclear Weapons Fraud
By - April 15, 2016

John Kerry makes ‘gut-wrenching’ tour of Hiroshima peace park … First US secretary of state to visit atomic bomb memorial says site is ‘harsh reminder of threat of nuclear weapons.’ – CNN

Over the years, as we have helped debunk elite propaganda, from elaborate NASA hoaxes to vaccine cover-ups, it has occurred to us more and more strongly that something is wrong with at least parts of the “nuclear narrative.”

Take the latest developments. Kerry goes to Hiroshima (see excerpt above) to commemorate the war dead while the US focuses on a nuclear arsenal upgrade that will generate smaller and more efficient bombs at gargantuan expense.

Kerry won’t apologize for dropping the Bomb; and those running the nuclear arsenal upgrade surely won’t apologize for its complexity or cost.

The budget is apparently estimated to be $1 trillion and the program will run for three decades. But who is supervising? And who is providing the accountability?

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability has published “Trillion Dollar Trainwreck,” pleading for some sanity. Democracy Now just interviewed with the group’s leader Marylia Kelley.

Kelley makes some good points. The US military-industrial complex surely deserves scrutiny beyond what it is usually subject to. Do US congressmen just take the Pentagon’s word for it? It sometimes seems that way.

The threat of nuclear weapons is deeply embedded in our psyches. We make all sorts of personal and family decisions based on what we understand about them and about nuclear power in general.

Do we really have the facts? Once upon a time, we were confident about the pharmaceutical industry and its vaccine offerings. Today we are not.

One of the most prominent issues regarding the nuclear program is its secrecy. That secrecy goes all the way back to the beginning of the program in the 1940s.

In the US, we’ve read, revealing atomic information of any sort is punishable by death. If you are looking at this article, you’re in danger.

In Japan it was even illegal to question the official story about Nagasaki and Hiroshima. This was punishable by imprisonment and execution.

The secrecy has blurred the narrative for nearly 75 years. It even makes what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki difficult to determine.

Questions have been raised on numerous fronts regarding the twin bomb blasts – about shadows supposedly etched into streets and walls, for instance. Photographs seem to have been aggressively retouched to emphasize damage. US personnel reportedly stated they were asked to exaggerate the number of dead and wounded.

Even the story of the main witnesses to the blast, a group of Jesuits, has come under scrutiny. Somehow the group emerged, unscathed and un-irradiated after the bomb blast only a few blocks away. They later attributed their good fortune to the protection of the Virgin Mary.

The main alternative theory regarding Hiroshima and Nagasaki is that they were firebombed. How this would  have taken place without being noted – or noticed – is difficult to imagine. Yet, the damage to both small cities does seem to resemble firebombing. Wood buildings burned but stone and concrete ones did not. In Hiroshima both the hospital and the train station survived.

Is it necessary to fully resolve what actually happened so long ago? Perhaps out of decency, if nothing else, one ought not pursue it. But the questions that linger about Hiroshima and Nagasaki are representative of the larger issues surrounding “weapons of mass destruction” generally.

Are we really being told the truth? Can we fully trust the Pentagon or even Congress when it comes to these issues? For instance, how many weapons are there in the world – and how many actually work? Is there any way of knowing? North Korea has recently been in the news for claims that it has created various kinds of sophisticated nuclear weapons. North Korea can’t even feed its population. Who really knows if its claims are true?

Can we look to history for an answer? Unfortunately, many of the photos and films of US nuclear tests (in particular) that are now available on YouTube and elsewhere appear to have been faked. Is it possible the fabrications or exaggerations persist today?

True, the biggest US corporations provide the product and the Pentagon vouches for the quality. But this is the same Pentagon that can’t be audited because its accounting is dysfunctional. The same Pentagon that once announced it could not account for trillions in spending (right before 9/11).

Can US fedgov be trusted these days? Once it seemed so much better. In fact, we’ve commented in the past on the shrinkage of US federal government competence. The erosion of its apparent, aggregate brilliance.

After all, this is a government that participated in two of the most formidable breakthroughs in human history in three decades.

First the US federal government uncovered the secrets of the atom bomb, and nuclear power. Then, only three decades later, the US federal government sent astronauts all the way to the moon, not just once but many times. And nearly flawlessly.

Today, this same government cannot launch a health care website on time.

In some five decades, the US fedgov has gone from the single most brilliant entity that history has ever known to a dysfunctional failure.

This is truly a remarkable decline.

Years ago we predicted that the Internet would end in a “reformation” that would shake society in fundamental ways. Little did we understand the full import of what a Modern Reformation would entail.

Conclusion: Almost all we were taught in the 20th century seems in retrospect to include questionable or false elements. Thank goodness at the same time we became aware of Austrian economics and the subversive magnificence of “human action.” These days we take nothing for-granted. When it comes to government, one needs to “trust but verify.” This ought to apply to nuclear weapons and their programs as well.

Tagged with:
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • tom

    “Don’t believe anything. Regard things on a scale of probabilities. The things that seem most absurd, put under ‘Low Probability’, and the things that seem most plausible, you put under ‘High Probability’. Never believe anything. Once you believe anything, you stop thinking about it”.

    – Robert Anton Wilson

    • Quite so, tom, and denial of that and those facts is so very convenient as it allows for others to do exactly as they wish with a practical immunity without any responsibility for unintended consequences. This excerpt from a thread elsewhere presumably agrees with you and Robert Anton Wilson.

      The Inconvenient Truth is a Bugger to Counter when a Gem to Polish

      Some others would say it makes far too much sense for you to uncomfortably handle, MS.

      Do you deny you are very easily programmed by media to receive/believe what IT wants you to believe/receive, just as a dumb robot? …… http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2016/04/15/telco_proxies_go_crazy_over_cable_box_plan/

    • This is also saying truth is never in the model or in fact a conclusion or ‘see’ definition in fixed terms. Truth is in what purpose you use the model, or idea FOR.

      Your purpose is either aligned with who and what you feel and know yourself to be – or not. It is popular to blame ‘them’ for deceiving ‘us’. I suggest that there is a subscription of which we are not currently acknowledging. We do not recognize ourselves in the symptoms… as yet.

      When reality deconstructs as a result of a fundamental and pervasive dis-integrity – aka insanity of dissociation that depends on deceit to persist – the conflicted nature of the mind; of its concept-perceptions, communications and acts becomes intolerable – although cooking the frog slowly can invite oblivion quite painlessly, once it is induced or forced into ‘secure’ confinement.

      This is what ‘mind’ in the sense of persona was invoked to save us from – and yet the thing we thought to escape is in its very foundations and brings the fruit in accord with its roots no matter how well presented our personae might be.

      There are many polarities of mind-strategy – such as more intensely ‘controlling’ (limiting) consciousness so as not to feel the pain. The principle limiter of consciousness is fragmentation, division, conflict, and a deadening off of receptors to communication where such channels have been traumatized or burned or hollowed out from experience of denial, of treachery, betrayal, abuse and abandonment. The element of running away from our self is witnessed by restless thought, emotion or activity that has to maintain diversion from a lack of presence appreciation – indeed from a force of negative self-appreciation that will change your mind should you attempt to use your mind to ‘see’ why. It doesn’t ‘see’ anything but its own model of presumed reality. One has to pause the mind to relax or shift to a perspective in which to notice the mind-in-act. All else is conditioned ‘reality’.

      The reversal set the outer symptoms or form reflections of inner definition as the causes – while therefore denying the Causal aspect of Consciousness in which such definitions are thus effectively hidden and rendered ‘unconscious’ or indeed TABOO!

      If you break primary taboo your tribe, group, family, society will disown, invalidate, curse and reject you. EVERYONE learns tacity what is not allowed because fear and guilt teach them.

      The abandonment of reaction from any existing set of conditioned thinking is a willingness to wake up from the dream of the independent persona with which you may be equating your self rather than accepting and embracing as part of you that serves the purpose you now give it. With this comes the willingness to feel the pain of the underlying conflict rather than re-brand the belief in symptom-suppression as the necessary context of survival. But feeling into it in the purpose and willingness of healing and awakening active responsibility for consciousness – instead of ‘limiting’ control and outsourcing or deferring pain.

      The mind of generally mutually agreed definitions we call the world or reality is not inherently fixed – because what mind is – is inherently open as a medium of communication. “Judge not lest ye be judged” because what you use your mind for becomes the measure of your experience of it. Such experience conditions the subconscious to ‘fix’ belief in reactive strategies driven by guilts and fears including the power of denial. As is evident minds can seriously engage in questioning whether they exist. The power of the mind is in ANY belief accepted and acted from as true or in place of true.

      Actually once you believe something it becomes invisibly part of your thought – your world. The symptom of the articles and our age is one of reversal.

      Belief is not appropriate to things but to purpose. When you uncover the true within you it is not embodied in thought or form – IT IS YOU. Your life gives it form by acceptance that extends as belief in yourself as currently recognized, accepted and appreciated.
      It is not neccessary to actively believe in truth to experience it directly – but it is neccessary to pause or put aside – if only for a moment and belief that actively operates to deny it.

      On the principle that it takes one to know one, the self-judging can only ‘see’ others in the same lens and under the same conviction. Using this we can use our perceptions to ‘reverse engineer’ awareness of the mind from out which we act as if our own – and in that recognition, release self and other from definitions that are realized unfitting untrue or counter to who you prefer to be. Once a habit of thought is uncovered, it becomes a choice.

      Choosing has been falsely framed and sold as freedom when the range of choices makes no real difference because the real choice is framed out of the picture. This is where a denial consciousness has to open to recognize not merely its ‘choice’ but what it is choosing between. A real choice is between alternates that are tested for their nature and consequence and this means a true accounting of each. It could be said that the principle of necessary evil is that of sucumbing to the ‘devil we know’ of established and believed power, because we associate terror, pain and loss with the ‘unknown’.

      I suggest that it is what we have made of Life that terrifies us and not what it innately is. Of course we experience this under the narrative ‘what life has made of us’. Victimhood is not what it seems and beneath the face of any who treasure it for what it gives them is rage quick to strike out in righteouss hate if that face is in any way unveiled to its own participance.

      Perhaps survival never was part of the ‘plan’ in terms of a mutifaceted unfolding of rich experience – excepting as was neccessary to gather and grow the consciousness that must now metamorphose – that is yield to change that it is not accountable for or in control of. When we recognize our life we have a basis for surfing or uncovering the balance points amidst whatever moves within and without. When we insist on some other assertive or imposed narrative – it simply cannot serve but to take us ever more out of communication. If loss of consciousness is your choice – then keep thinking that you are what you think you are, or the feeling of being will weaken your resolve with recognitions that weaken the tower at its very foundation.

  • spdlf

    Thanks DB for this article.

    I’ve been reading a lot Miles Mathis’ work recently regarding various 20th century hoaxes. With what we know now its pretty hard not to come to the conclusion the last century was a manufactured nightmare and continuing to this day with false flags like 9/11 and fake events like Sandy Hook.

    By blood or by smoke and mirrors they will manipulate us.

  • alaska3636

    Here’s a good example of “trust but verify”:
    Adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College, Charles Leerhsen set out to write an update on the notorious baseball legend, Ty Cobb. As it turns out, the popular, and largely fictitious, perception of the ball player concealed an altogether decent and well-remembered man: not perfect, but not a monster.

    http://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/who-was-ty-cobb-the-history-we-know-thats-wrong/

  • Martin the American redux

    Thanks alot DB, now I’m still running scared. Just from something else.

  • Bruce C.

    In the case of the atomic bomb, I see it as a win-win for just about everybody. If the US never developed an “A-bomb” and therefore never dropped some on H. & N. isn’t that a good thing? Isn’t it better that the whole world backed off from using “real ones” subsequently because of their belief in the aftermath in Japan? Could not “just” catastrophic fire bombing been enough to make Japan surrender? After all, who would know what effects an A-bomb would have if it had never been deployed before? Maybe it WAS deployed and it simply had the effect of catastrophic fire bombing. Maybe the lack of radiation poisoning was because that’s not what happens in a real nuclear explosion despite the theory. Or, maybe what a nuclear explosion does is create a fire storm.

    As I recall, the main threat of nuclear weapons were not their individual and limited use but the possibility/probability of “mutual assured destruction.” I think that’s still the main fear. If the ME were turned into a glass parking lot, for example, wouldn’t the primary a priori concern be retaliation from some other country?

    Nuclear power is even harder to fake because the steam that drives the electrical generators has to come from somewhere, and all that nuclear waste has to come from something.

    Anyway, I like the idea of questioning everything. It’s fascinating to think that so much of what we learned and believe(d) is wrong, but also a little disconcerting.

    So, since we’re “questioning everything” for the moment, consider what I occasionally allude to from what I call “esoteric philosophy”. However, I’m not going to harp on individual belief experience this time. Instead I’ll offer an explanation of what happens on both an individual and mass scale when beliefs/knowledge begin to change. Realize that one’s experience includes one’s memory and the physical data around them. As beliefs change so does one’s memories and the physical data around one. It is theoretically possible, therefore, that as beliefs and knowledge have changed among the population that the memories and physical evidence of the past are changing too. That could explain the oddities and inconsistencies in the historical records, testimonies, and all the rest. In other words, what could have happened in the past may have actually happened, but so did other probable events simultaneously, and those other probabilities are what we are sensing now. We could be transitioning to a different probable development than one that involved the use of nuclear weapons.

    • alaska3636

      I think you would like the Egyptian numerology of Schwaller De Lubicz from the Temple of Man and the Sacred Science. Very interesting esoteric connotations. John Anthony West describes the philosophy well in the Serpent In the Sky, where he makes the case that water erosion provides proof that, at least, the Sphinx and Great Pyramids are tens of thousands of years older than currently understood.

      It has occurred to me that on the subject of questioning everything and esotericism, that the fossil history of man could well be the remnant of a greater civilization that was wiped out by some cataclysm. The rudimentary tools we see as our evolutionary past may just be evidence of a remnant rediscovering the tools of a destroyed civilization. There’s a young Earth and, I guess, an Ancient Man theory of the world!

    • Mary

      Bruce, it is not an exaggeration to say that the threat of world wide nuclear destruction created a hyper-fealty to the fed govt in US citizens. It is also true that those who consider organizing to reject the fed govt have prominently in their minds that if the populace gets “out of hand,” we would have to contend with nukes against the heartland. Clearly, these two facts, along with the psychological and somatic effects of worrying about nuclear terror could never be considered a “win-win” and to say so boggles my mind. And I haven’t even considered the vast economic dislocations caused by the relentless theft for the MIC, and the subjugation of whole populations of little brown people due to mere nuclear fear.

      I’ve been reading up on nukes and think this was the grand daddy of hoaxes. I suspect that with the war winding down, the usg stalled Japan’s surrender efforts to give the egg heads more time on the Manhattan project. When it was clear that nukes were an impossibility, they faked it. The scam worked so well, they went on to other hoaxes, especially the moon non-landing. Both of these hoaxes funded the MIC with a level of wealth beyond the dreams of Croesus.

      I suspect the HAARP is another hoax, implemented for the same reason, but I haven’t looked into it. Also, all this talk recently of aliens and anti gravity space ships, withheld ET tech, etc, sounds very dubious. I listened to some guy at a conference about space tech talking about aliens building shields around stars. I think this guy has read too many pulp sci fi books, or he’s a plant.

      Could I be wrong? You bet. But there’s gonna have to be hard evidence for me to come around. Fool me once, shame on you…

      • Whatever the veracity of any interpreted experience, which is ultimately between you and your true Source (and nothing really can come between unless you believe it and give it the power to do so), I see the increasing polarisation of the ‘dark and light’ and I mean that in terms of functional terms not value judgement.

        I recall Seth talking of serving the transition of a militant Muslim as the scene and set by which to bring a unified recognition to one who was polarized in form. For the underlying recognition is the correction or transcendence of form-based meanings – whose apparent fixity is reflecting inner needs or indeed inner convictions of guilt threat and need for defence – yes being acted out as an experience in time and space. Here we are – but where really is ‘here’. Perhaps that is all I will say now but we are not really in any thing but we define it so and spontaneously remap to validate and reinforce what we have accepted and shared.

        This forum being a ‘news commentary’ is predicated to focus on the ‘negative agenda’ which reinforces a belief in victim-hood and the struggle for power, concealment, subterfuge and deceit in which to abide until vengeance can come forth and abuse the abusers – or some other proxy scapegoat as if freedom waits on the world to re-align with the rules I gave it.

      • Bruce C.

        “Win-win” sounds flippant but what I mean is that isn’t or wouldn’t it be better that nuclear weapons aren’t possible (a hoax) than otherwise? Either way the MIC would have gained a windfall anyway, but wouldn’t it be better if such destructive weapons aren’t possible considering how the PTB think?

        Personally, I think claiming nuclear weapons and going to the moon are hoaxes is a conspiracy that I find hard to believe. The are just too many ways and means for that to have come out by now. I think instead people are losing faith in humanity (or something like that) and are disbelieving that “we” did achieve those “great” things at one time.

        On a lesser note, but as an example of what I mean, are the many videos of random people being asked really basic questions about things and most being “unbelievably” stupid or uninformed. Many people insist that those things are set ups and thus fake, perhaps unwilling to accept “the truth” that so many people can be that out of it.

        The same kind of psychological defense can occur on the “upside” too by denying greatness. There are all kinds of attempts to revise history cynically, and a classic example is how Christianity is attacked. Before you know it the history of man becomes one big one-dimensional fraud full of plagiarism, lies, hoaxes, deceit, etc.

        One more thing about nukes. I don’t think nuclear fission reactors are considered a fraud, and that involves controlled nuclear fission reactions, which is much harder to do than uncontrolled ones which is what an A-bomb explosion is. Supposedly there are H-bombs too which are uncontrolled nuclear fusion reactions, but we supposedly don’t have nuclear fusion reactors (yet) because we haven’t found a way to control fusion.

        Anyway, I understand your point that the MIC has taken advantage of both peoples’ fears (nuclear wars) and hopes (space travel and the serendipitous research discoveries) mainly for their gain but at our expense.

        Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

        • Mary

          Thank you, too, Bruce. Just wanted to say that apparently, the nuclear reaction requires a controlled environment to proceed. That’s why nuclear power works, but a bomb can’t. And they have not figured out fusion at all. That’s my VERY weak understanding.

          I need to do more reading.

          PS. And you’re right, thank God there aren’t nukes. 😉

  • Praetor

    Accumulated wisdom, to have wisdom, you must have knowledge and that knowledge must be based on truth. The priesthood of MSM has effectively demolished truth, which has made knowledge and the gaining of wisdom impossible. You could call MSM, Mr. Mix-a-lot, they mix in a lot of lies with a little truth.

    You repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. And Goebbels boss said, by the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.

    Always be hungry for the truth, knowledge and wisdom will be the reward. Wisdom is the ability to distinguish truth from lies!!!

  • Here’s an add to the mix: There are significant accounts of UFO activity around missile sites that have coincided with disabling missile launching capabilities.

    In the principle of being free to unfold our own choices but not free to choose to significantly deny others their own capacity, Humanity is free to destroy itself within a range of probable futures – but not via means that is destructive to other ‘civilisations’ that are part of the larger collective of which we have effectively forgotten at the level of the filtered consciousness we take as our reality.

    Of course the military personnel could be suffering hysterical delusions and the documentation falsified – but I have the sense that the power by which we are subjected is our own – but in ways we have given away under beliefs that are now invisible to us because they are called reality.

  • william beeby

    Why can`t the American people accept that they are by far the number one military country on the planet and have NOTHING to fear from anybody . If anyone says 911 was an attack from outside , the first one ever in history if so, then I contend that if it was it was NOT done by 19 arabs armed with box cutting blades only. Russia and China do not want war and are not being aggressive. In fact as most of us realise it is totally the other way around and the biggest threat to world peace is the USA. That`s not my opinion only but was the result of a world wide survey . Iran and North Korea a threat to America and world peace ? Don`t make me laugh . The only thing I agree with Trumpethead on is his policy of withdrawal and the long overdue breaking up of NATO. It is a very dangerous high stakes game that the American Shadow Government is playing and is a grave danger to us all.

loading