Japan Was Nuked - No 9.0 Earthquake (???)

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by zatara

 

Truth can be strange. 'tis true.

But when making such incredible statements as "Japan was nuked. No 9.0 earthquake". Shouldn't one have something like, oh I don't know, incredible evidence? Nor should one ignore all the evidence that points to the fact that it was indeed a massive earthquake. Nor ignore the evidence, or lack thereof, that no nuclear explosion, other than the reactor itself, took place.

Not to mention, the anti-Israeli agenda of the website.

Sorry. One doesn't get to make up ones own truth.

You are right...without a doubt.

second line

Originally posted by ScepticDebunker
It wasnt a nuclear bomb...there would be nothing standing

Not if it was detonated underwater off the coast.

Not that I know this is what happened or have any proof, but it's also what Benjamin Fulford said. Benjamin Fulford is an extremely individual whether you believe him or not. He was able to bag an interview with David Rockefeller in Japan, and that's not something any loony can accomplish. He used to work for Forbes too.

reply to post by DragonRain311


holy crap your right. i just realized that....weird (i live outside of toronto)

Originally posted by Jassu

Originally posted by DragonRain311
reply to post by gekados

 

This may be slightly off topic, but I noticed something peculiar in the last few weeks, I have not seen a truly blue clear sky in months, I see the blue but it is almost like it is being covered by a thick fog, I live in London Ontario but the thing is that I have seen clear blue skies here before. (I only moved here 8 months ago) This is definitely troubling.

I live in Sudbury Ontario and although i have seen blue skies the weather has been a bit strange. Not necessarily hotter or colder but we are experiencing an extreme in storms. This may be just the time of year but its been a little more violent then years passed.




I don't believe this nuke nonsense though (unless it was covertly detonated underground, which wouldn't make much sense.) I remember the day it happened i did nothing but watch videos out of Japan of the quake and tsunami.

You know how many folks are saying that their weather has been crazy...I have friends all over the world and they all say the same thing.

I am too lazy to search for it in the 900+ pages of the main Fukushima thread right now, but it was discussed there, and Stuxnet, etc. was also implied in it. I am sure you will find it if you do a search on Fukushima and Stuxnet.

Well, if it was a submerged nuclear bomb and not an earthquake, that completely
blows out of the water (pun intended) the Elenin alignment theory for the cause of the earthquake.
Which must leave alot of people scratching their heads.

This should be in HOAX!
2nd

I agree with the lack of blue skies and the puffy white clouds of summer. Just a strange "haze" which many people around me have even noticed.

Fukushima... I think is more than we are being told. If it was a nuke underwater I believe it would cause a tsunami. If it was a nuke, are they not speaking out because they are afraid of more?

Here is an article with VERY VALID POINTS IMO saying it was only a 6.7 EQ ______beforeitsnews/story/691/448/Japan_Earthquake_Registered_Only_6.67_-_Nuclear_Induced_Tsunami_-_Japan_Offers_Iran_Enriched_Uranium_-_An_Act_o f_War_-_Japan:_Knife_At_Its_Throat.html

and also saying nukes in the plant caused the explosions

Reactor 4 is building 7, demolished by explosives. [爆発物によって破壊された] 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

That the destruction of the facility is so severe it could only have been accomplished with nuclear weapons. [核兵器?] 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 hydrogen blew the place apart (still many times beyond impossible, even if sealed off), it should be laying around in large pieces, with very little dust. Dust is much of what you see in the wreckage at Fukushima.

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.

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?

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 damage 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.

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!!.

The link again ______beforeitsnews/story/691/448/Japan_Earthquake_Registered_Only_6.67_-_Nuclear_Induced_Tsunami_-_Japan_Offers_Iran_Enriched_Uranium_-_An_Act_o f_War_-_Japan:_Knife_At_Its_Throat.html

Originally posted by BlastedCaddy

Originally posted by Jassu

Originally posted by DragonRain311
reply to post by gekados

 

This may be slightly off topic, but I noticed something peculiar in the last few weeks, I have not seen a truly blue clear sky in months, I see the blue but it is almost like it is being covered by a thick fog, I live in London Ontario but the thing is that I have seen clear blue skies here before. (I only moved here 8 months ago) This is definitely troubling.

I live in Sudbury Ontario and although i have seen blue skies the weather has been a bit strange. Not necessarily hotter or colder but we are experiencing an extreme in storms. This may be just the time of year but its been a little more violent then years passed.




I don't believe this nuke nonsense though (unless it was covertly detonated underground, which wouldn't make much sense.) I remember the day it happened i did nothing but watch videos out of Japan of the quake and tsunami.

edit on 7-6-2011 by BlastedCaddy because: (no reason given)

You know how many folks are saying that their weather has been crazy...I have friends all over the world and they all say the same thing.

edit on 7-6-2011 by BlastedCaddy because: Trigger happy and lost in the heat. These pretzels are making me thirsty.

I can see why there are such replies. But being someone who has always looked at the sky, and being in the Canadian National Capital area, I have noticed that SOMETIMES, there seems to be a bit of a grey-ish tone to a big clear sky. My ex-gf and I were discussing this the other day. A lot of factors could influence this, but then again, its enough to notice.

Could it be caused by what the OP is saying, I don't think. But the posters from Ontario are not that far off with what they are saying.

Those who are trying to debunk a 'conspiracy' by ridicule, are ridiculous themselves. Strong minds and powerful hearts are not impressed by childish mumbling.

If you want to debunk this guy's article then please come with some VALID points, as he did. You are not allowed -by my standards- to say 'impossible', 'crazy', 'nonsense', 'fake', etc. just because it's your opinion. Every opinion is just as good as the next one until we know something for sure.

This guy presented his personal opinion in a very coherent and documented way. I think he is up to something.

The video is not mine, I've just uploaded on my YouTube account, as I use YT for education purposes (just like everyone should). I simply spread whatever I find interesting. So stop pretending to be wise by figuring out a nickname that was never intended to be hidden.

Putting aside all the nonsense in most of the comments, I found some very interesting comments. I think we have a solid base for a constructive conversation.

Please allow me to post the questions in a separate reply.

Wisdom and Love to all!

reply to post by seagull


Yes, brother. In my opinion there is a good probability that a 'small' nuclear warhead did all this, because it was detonated inside a nuclear reactor.

The consequences are visible worldwide. Three reactors melted down in the meanwhile, spreading radioactive clouds all over the planet. They will continue to burn for many months to come and the disaster's proportions are beyond imagination at this point. I really don't wanna say 'I told you so'.

I don't know who is directly responsible for all this, but it perfectly suits the elite's plan.

Peace!

reply to post by Jassu


Dear friend, I would like to see some pictures. There is someone else who says the same thing (he lives outside Ontario).

In my city rain haven't stopped the entire Spring, a thing that never happened before. In the past 2 weeks we had 2-4 days of rain/week.

In a city 200km from here they had 10-15cm of snow last month, even though they usually had 30*C temperatures until now...

reply to post by gekados


The explosion that "supposedly" did all this occured after the earthquake, because of damage sustained during the 'quake.

Altering the facts to fit your hypothisis isn't going to make it true.

reply to post by ScepticDebunker


I am talking about the ones with human casualties, specifically, there has to be an effect on the fabric of consciousness, and you can imagine what kind of "link" an atomic bomb would created when it is detonated over civillians.

Additionally, in terms of the question posed in this forum, nukes are detonated above the ground for maxiumum effect, the bombs did not actually hit the ground.

As an addition addition - essentially, when the Earth crosses the path in the galaxy where the nuke was detonated, there will be a gateway that other beings can use to access Earth.

Originally posted by ScepticDebunker
Its your video, its YOUR Youtube account your linking to.......its YOUR conspiracy, you have 0 proof.

It wasnt a nuclear bomb...there would be nothing standing

No. Everything would, since the nuke in his theory was under the water... in the ocean, that has the highest contamination of radiation parts per million in the area. The above ground nukes in this conspiracy were 1,000 pound tactical nukes... which bear an amazing similarity when compared to tactical nuke testing...

We aren't talking hiroshima here.... we will likely never drop a bomb that big again. Ever.

Also, you propose that if for some reason this theory (or any theory by any means) were to be true, that if he was the one who championed the cause, he's not allowed to link back to his own work?

So in other words, if it was my Theory, and I linked back to his work -- it would be more credible?

What kind of logic is this... You must be disinfo agent, or just super naive/mass media sheep.

Also, he claimed it to be a theory. You can't look for proof when analyzing a theory. He didn't say fact, did he? He used circumstantial evidence to build his case... it's more of a macro view that says "This is what it looks like" than it is saying "This is the truth." I tend to find this theory MORE than plausible.

Even if it's not true, it's a very believable narrative. He has stumbled acrossed a Plot, with a clear Motive, Identified the aggressor, and tied it all neatly together using the motive.

This could be a book, or a movie -- or a series, or a video game it's such a good narrative.

Originally posted by gekados
reply to post by seagull

 

Yes, brother. In my opinion there is a good probability that a 'small' nuclear warhead did all this, because it was detonated inside a nuclear reactor.

The consequences are visible worldwide. Three reactors melted down in the meanwhile, spreading radioactive clouds all over the planet. They will continue to burn for many months to come and the disaster's proportions are beyond imagination at this point. I really don't wanna say 'I told you so'.

I don't know who is directly responsible for all this, but it perfectly suits the elite's plan.

Peace!

Yeah, and here is the proof of what they have been doing. Just found it yesterday by doing my homework. Nuclear Tsunamis-Weapons of Mass Destruction. Link here:

www.reformation.org...

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by gekados

 

The explosion that "supposedly" did all this occured after the earthquake, because of damage sustained during the 'quake.

Altering the facts to fit your hypothisis isn't going to make it true.

Wrong. You didn't read his thesis very well. He proposed that an underwater nuke(covert) was lit as a retaliation for Japan offering to enrich uranium for Iranians. The Tsunami and the shock of the underwater bomb caused the 6.0 earthquake... then to make the situation worse they set off a tactical gun type nuke in the power plant which caused the total meltdown of all 3 reactors. His theory on how the nuke was placed in the power plant is also very plausible.

This fits perfectly with the events that took place. He didn't alter it to fit his narrative at all, you just didn't read very well.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I second this..

Don't know what to say about this one yet.
A lot of attacking though.
Somebody must be on to something.
But who?

@stardust1955: Thank you for that wonderful link! The article is well made.

@Laokin: Even before I created my ATS account I knew for sure that my articles or other interesting articles that I'll post will be attacked especially by 'disinformation agents'. My plan was not to accuse them of anything, but simply demote their unfounded claims.

It's just like David Icke says: First, they ignore you, thinking you will simply go away unnoticed, later they aggressively attack you with ridicule and your claims with disinformation.

Thank you for seeing things like they are & having the courage to speak your mind.

Peace to all!