i'm curious, Kenneth: Does Akio Nakatani ~ the author of "Death Object: Exploding the Nuclear Weapons Hoax" ~ explain what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
If he does, can You summarize it in two or three sentences? Thank You. jeff
Other authors have been to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They were likely destroyed by firebombing like so many cities in Germany. If they were destroyed by what we have been taught are nuclear weapons, how is they have both recovered to be thriving cities? Mustard gas and napalm are what Michael Palmer thinks were used. https://archive.org/details/Hiroshima_revisited
How many planes on how many missions would it have taken to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki with napalm and mustard gas?
And how would that not have been noticed by somebody on the ground in either of those two cities?
Did the citizens of Dresden know by direct experience that what was happening to them involved lots and Lots of aircraft and even more bombs? Would the people in all the Japanese cities firebombed [Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka, Kobe, Yokohama, and Kawasaki] know that?
If they did, then why wouldn't the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have noticed all those planes and bombs, as well? Why did all they experience was a massive, sudden explosion with no sign of any kind of enemy aircraft anywhere?
I am not going to answer your unanswerable questions. You can research for yourself if you wish. If not, anything I say won't be accepted by you anyway would it.
Your tactic is just like those who believe in the heliocentric model and when challenged, want proof of the geocentric model so they can deny it without actually doing any investigation of the heliocentric model for themselves..
Why do You dismiss those questions as "unanswerable"?
Or is that just another unanswerable question?
In any event: Having studied and come to understand both the Geocentric and Heliocentric Models as i have, may i suggest that You come up with different analogy?
I have studied them both as well. If you believe the heliocentric model, we won’t get anywhere as a serious investigation of the heliocentric model proves it was a lie, just like the nuclear hoax.
Given that neither the Earth nor The Sun is the center of The Universe. the simple fact of the matter is that both the Geocentric and Heliocentric Models were wrong.
So what Cosmological Model does the "Nuclear Hoax" image?
The Yanks were worried that the Russians would take Japan (they were sweeping the Island heading to the capital quickly). SOUND FAMILIAR - man on the moon nonsense ?.
Japan were already going to surrender and "give up"; so why the so called "nukes" ?
Are You saying that the destructions of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not caused by Atomic Bombs? Then exactly what were they destroyed by?
And i believe that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ~ AFTER the Japanese were ready to surrender ~ was a very direct message to the USSR, which had just taken over control of Eastern Europe, which it just liberated from the Germans.
And also to serve notice to Stalin to not even think about putting Communists in power in Southeast Asia, which had been similarly liberated from Japan, and was in the process of being handed back over to France.
As i just pointed out: How many Germans in all those fire-bombed cities did not see and/or hear ~ and thus know ~ that they were being bombed by masses of enemy aircraft?
Try reading the two books I posted here and come to your own conclusions. As far as the fire bombings, how many Americans know how many German cities were illegally firebombed by the Allies? Even fewer know the story about the Eisenhower death camps, another illegal act to murder German POWs via starvation. https://www.bitchute.com/video/T0wwGf55Bm9b
At that time, NO Americans knew about the firebombings of either Japan or Germany; except the people who were actually ordering, organizing, supplying, and actually doing it.
In military parlance it's termed a "Need To Know."
And at that point in the War, the American People had no need to know about the details and specifics of American firebombing of the enemy Nations of Germany and Japan.
And were Americans the ONLY ones who murdered enemy POWS by starvation? Or exposure? Or torture? Or firing squad?
i'd be very surprised if they were. And would not believe anybody who claimed they were.
The reason for keeping Americans ignorant of the fire bombings is intentionally murdering citizens is prohibited by the Geneva Convention. It would have raised inconvenient questions about the illegal tactics being used at home.
Need to know or need to cover up the crime? You like to take liberties with your language.
The Holocaust never happened. The Allies destroyed the German railways which prevented food and medicine from reaching the work camps at the end of the war. Typhus and starvation were what killed the concentration camp inmates, not intentional murder.
When ~ either before, during, or after World War II ~ did the American Government EVER show any concern about the Geneva Convention and murdering civilian non-combatants, let alone POWs?
And if the destruction of the German railway system was what killed all those folks in all those German concentration camps, what killed all those Jews and other Deplorables from 1933 until the Allies started destroying that system in 1942-43? Or were they doing just fine until the Allies stepped in.
And finally: If the Holocaust "never happened" ~ just like the atomic bombings in Japan never happened ~ did World War II actually happen? How about Pearl harbor?
Or was that faked too?
Maybe all them Jap Zeroes were really American planes camouflaged to look Oriental, eh?
Whatever it was, it got FDR and America's nascent Military Industrial Complex exactly what it wanted: The US in a Global War.
That's the ONLY way the US got out of its "Great Depression." Roosevelt's New Deal had little, if anything, to do with that.
And "Need To Know" is not my language. That is the language and one of the basic operating and operations principle of Every Government and their Military on this Planet.
And has been since the beginning of Government, their Militaries, and of War.
I understand where you are going with this, but before the conversation gets deeper... please just look up the "HALF LIVES" of the materials used in the alleged nuclear bombs.
1. About 64 kilograms of >>>>>> highly-enriched uranium <<<<<<< was used in the bomb which had a 16 kiloton yield (i.e. it was equivalent to 16,000 tonnes of TNT). It was released over Hiroshima, Japan's seventh largest city, on 6 August 1945.
2. The fissile material for the Nagasaki bomb was >>>>>>> plutonium-239 <<<<<<<<<<<. The plutonium core was divided into two hemispheres, each less than a critical mass, surrounded by explosive charges. These chemical charges compressed the plutonium into a single, extremely dense supercritical mass.
Please just take 10 mins to look up what and how long the half lives are AND how anyone could survive living there now.
Oh yes - Hiroshima does not have harmful radiation levels today. The residual radiation from the bomb decayed quickly after the explosion, and the city has since maintained radiation levels comparable to natural background radiation elsewhere.
...
PS Think I am responding to wrong person, if so apologies.
i'm not sure if You're responding to me Bob - Enough, but here's my response to You: i refer to the following as my source; what. may i ask, is Yours?
And again, if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not hit by atomic bombs, what destroyed them? Or were they never really destroyed?
FACT CHECK: HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI HIT BY NUCLEAR BOMBS IN 1945, RADIATION DISSIPATED [EXTRACTS] by Reuters Fact Check 082823
...”A Facebook video with the text “Hiroshima and Nagasaki were never nuked” points to the fact that the two cities are thriving today and asserts that lingering radiation should have made them uninhabitable for centuries (link).
However, most of the radiation released in the mid-air blasts in 1945 never made it to the ground, according to scientists, and what did was mostly short-lived, decaying not long after the explosions.
The post suggesting that the two Japanese cities were never bombed surfaced in August 2023 around the 78th anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings and the release of the film “Oppenheimer”, which tells the story of the bombs’ creation (link).
Both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were designed to detonate thousands of feet above the ground, leveling buildings for miles with the force of the explosion itself and the resulting fires. But the intense radiation released by the blasts caused the majority of immediate deaths through radiation burns and radiation poisoning, according to the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF), a U.S.-Japanese research organization focused on studying long-term health effects in survivors of the 1945 blasts (www.rerf.or.jp/en/faq/).
Because of the altitude of the detonations, most of the radiation from the explosions did not even reach the ground in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Jeffrey Hart, RERF’s chief of public relations and publications, said in an email.
“Because the burst heights of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were at 600 meters in the air and 503 meters, respectively, most of the radiation (90%) was pulled up into the atmosphere,” Hart said.
RADIOACTIVE DECAY
THE CIRCULATING VIDEO STATES, “PLUTONIUM 239 HAS A HALF-LIFE OF 24,110 YEARS AND URANIUM 235 HAS A HALF-LIFE OF 703 MILLION YEARS, IN THEORY MAKING BOTH HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI UNINHABITABLE FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS,” HOWEVER, THIS MISREPRESENTS THE NATURE OF RADIOACTIVE DECAY, according to Derek Haas, an associate professor in the Nuclear and Radiation Engineering Program at the University of Texas at Austin.
“Rate of decay is inversely proportional to half-life, so something with a long half life, it’s not very radioactive,” Haas said in a phone interview.
Emphasizing the distinction between the radiation released by the blasts themselves, and radioactive materials that would have fallen to the ground and contaminated the area, Haas said that what reached the ground would have included “a mix of fission products and some leftover material from the bomb itself.”
The isotopes that would have caused the most harm include iodine 131, which has a short half life and is very dangerous, he said. “But the most dangerous ones would have decayed with hours.”
“If you look at all the radioactivity at one day, it’s decayed by factor of 100,000; at 10 days by a factor of 1 million; at 10 years, it’s gone down by a factor of 1 billion.”
Today, the city of Hiroshima explains on its website, the city’s level of radiation is “on a par with the extremely low levels of background radiation (natural radioactivity) present anywhere on Earth” and has no effect on humans (link).
So isn't the major fear of nukes the threat of lasting radiation? If no radiation, how are the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki different from the firebombing of other cities in Japan and Germany?
Based on the books I have posted here, there were no nukes used. No nukes would also be a reason for no radiation would it not? Reuters seems to have come up with an excuse to give us as to why there is no radiation. I don't buy it, but if you have an emotional desire to believe in nukes, I can't convince you otherwise. I choose to think logically and rationally with as much information as I can get my hands on.
Roger. i figured that out about five minutes ago. While my cognitive functioning hasn't decreased to the level of Biden or Trump, it certainly ain't what it used to be.
I have posted about this topic on this channel several times in the past and no one picks it up. My objective was to get a conversation started which it seems has worked this time. Except of course with you. All you have to do is criticize my posting as spam so you have an excuse not to engage.
Nukes do not exist, but you can choose to live in fear. That is you choice. Others are interested in learning the truth of the matter.
"I have posted about this topic on this channel several times in the past and no one picks it up."
Maybe the reason for that is the fact that you post it several times in the same thread.
I am 100% certain the victims of the two bombs that were dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki would beg to differ as far as your claim that nukes do not exist.
"...., but you can choose to live in fear. That is you choice."
After I learned the truth about the plandemic I will never again fall for the MSM's gaslighting about anything.
The victims in Hiroshima and Nagasaki died of something. Just like the victims of Dresden Germany. Can they tell the difference, or do they believe what they are told. You can read the books or not. If not your opinion may be based on BS.
Edit: ...., but then again why? If you think it's so important for me to read something, why don't you give me the most important paragraph in the thing?
Picture this: It's like me giving you a link to the library of congress, and telling you to read it. ....., because the truth is there, man. Don't waste my fucking time.
Nuclear Weapons do not exist.
Do not fear them.
https://archive.org/details/8d-0de-2
i'm curious, Kenneth: Does Akio Nakatani ~ the author of "Death Object: Exploding the Nuclear Weapons Hoax" ~ explain what happened at Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
If he does, can You summarize it in two or three sentences? Thank You. jeff
Other authors have been to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They were likely destroyed by firebombing like so many cities in Germany. If they were destroyed by what we have been taught are nuclear weapons, how is they have both recovered to be thriving cities? Mustard gas and napalm are what Michael Palmer thinks were used. https://archive.org/details/Hiroshima_revisited
How many planes on how many missions would it have taken to destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki with napalm and mustard gas?
And how would that not have been noticed by somebody on the ground in either of those two cities?
Did the citizens of Dresden know by direct experience that what was happening to them involved lots and Lots of aircraft and even more bombs? Would the people in all the Japanese cities firebombed [Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka, Kobe, Yokohama, and Kawasaki] know that?
If they did, then why wouldn't the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have noticed all those planes and bombs, as well? Why did all they experience was a massive, sudden explosion with no sign of any kind of enemy aircraft anywhere?
Does Palmer answer that question?
Rather than ask me, why don't you read books and try to discern the answer for yourself?
In the mean time, have a look at this...https://archive.org/details/BitChute-ZZoHhowAcq9I
Instead of avoiding my questions, why don't YOU answer them, instead of fobbing me off to some book or two?
I am not going to answer your unanswerable questions. You can research for yourself if you wish. If not, anything I say won't be accepted by you anyway would it.
Your tactic is just like those who believe in the heliocentric model and when challenged, want proof of the geocentric model so they can deny it without actually doing any investigation of the heliocentric model for themselves..
Why do You dismiss those questions as "unanswerable"?
Or is that just another unanswerable question?
In any event: Having studied and come to understand both the Geocentric and Heliocentric Models as i have, may i suggest that You come up with different analogy?
I have studied them both as well. If you believe the heliocentric model, we won’t get anywhere as a serious investigation of the heliocentric model proves it was a lie, just like the nuclear hoax.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLoeKBeKeoPx5quWw74GYIJjVQY4hAxbkf
Given that neither the Earth nor The Sun is the center of The Universe. the simple fact of the matter is that both the Geocentric and Heliocentric Models were wrong.
So what Cosmological Model does the "Nuclear Hoax" image?
The nuclear hoax is like the Big Bang. Fairy tales.
You have a valid question.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki - seen the cities now; HOW ?.
https://www.thetimes.com/world/article/hiroshima-today-the-perfect-modern-city-where-peace-is-a-complex-legacy-cnz6lqv9n
https://www.discover-nagasaki.com/en/featured-topics/aboutnagasaki
...
I have not read the link yet, so just my view.
The Yanks were worried that the Russians would take Japan (they were sweeping the Island heading to the capital quickly). SOUND FAMILIAR - man on the moon nonsense ?.
Japan were already going to surrender and "give up"; so why the so called "nukes" ?
Ever seen the Nalpalm clouds ? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE13QLZJgNQ
OH BUT WAIT... the cancer caused by any survivors....
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7917541/
https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics-for-the-uk#heading-Zero
FEAR and of course the Yanks landed, walked on the moon.
Are You saying that the destructions of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not caused by Atomic Bombs? Then exactly what were they destroyed by?
And i believe that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ~ AFTER the Japanese were ready to surrender ~ was a very direct message to the USSR, which had just taken over control of Eastern Europe, which it just liberated from the Germans.
And also to serve notice to Stalin to not even think about putting Communists in power in Southeast Asia, which had been similarly liberated from Japan, and was in the process of being handed back over to France.
Michael Palmer believes the nukes were faked using napalm and mustard gas. https://archive.org/details/Hiroshima_revisited
Few people seem to understand how many German cities were totally destroyed using firebombs. It wasn't just Dresden and Berlin.
As i just pointed out: How many Germans in all those fire-bombed cities did not see and/or hear ~ and thus know ~ that they were being bombed by masses of enemy aircraft?
Try reading the two books I posted here and come to your own conclusions. As far as the fire bombings, how many Americans know how many German cities were illegally firebombed by the Allies? Even fewer know the story about the Eisenhower death camps, another illegal act to murder German POWs via starvation. https://www.bitchute.com/video/T0wwGf55Bm9b
At that time, NO Americans knew about the firebombings of either Japan or Germany; except the people who were actually ordering, organizing, supplying, and actually doing it.
In military parlance it's termed a "Need To Know."
And at that point in the War, the American People had no need to know about the details and specifics of American firebombing of the enemy Nations of Germany and Japan.
And were Americans the ONLY ones who murdered enemy POWS by starvation? Or exposure? Or torture? Or firing squad?
i'd be very surprised if they were. And would not believe anybody who claimed they were.
The reason for keeping Americans ignorant of the fire bombings is intentionally murdering citizens is prohibited by the Geneva Convention. It would have raised inconvenient questions about the illegal tactics being used at home.
Need to know or need to cover up the crime? You like to take liberties with your language.
The Holocaust never happened. The Allies destroyed the German railways which prevented food and medicine from reaching the work camps at the end of the war. Typhus and starvation were what killed the concentration camp inmates, not intentional murder.
Again, if you want to know the details, I point you to holocausthandbooks.com.
When ~ either before, during, or after World War II ~ did the American Government EVER show any concern about the Geneva Convention and murdering civilian non-combatants, let alone POWs?
And if the destruction of the German railway system was what killed all those folks in all those German concentration camps, what killed all those Jews and other Deplorables from 1933 until the Allies started destroying that system in 1942-43? Or were they doing just fine until the Allies stepped in.
And finally: If the Holocaust "never happened" ~ just like the atomic bombings in Japan never happened ~ did World War II actually happen? How about Pearl harbor?
Or was that faked too?
Maybe all them Jap Zeroes were really American planes camouflaged to look Oriental, eh?
Whatever it was, it got FDR and America's nascent Military Industrial Complex exactly what it wanted: The US in a Global War.
That's the ONLY way the US got out of its "Great Depression." Roosevelt's New Deal had little, if anything, to do with that.
And "Need To Know" is not my language. That is the language and one of the basic operating and operations principle of Every Government and their Military on this Planet.
And has been since the beginning of Government, their Militaries, and of War.
You asked: "Hiroshima and Nagasaki - seen the cities now; HOW ?."
What about Hiroshima and Nagasaki ~ becoming and being first late-20th and now 21st century modern cities ~ has You puzzled?
I understand where you are going with this, but before the conversation gets deeper... please just look up the "HALF LIVES" of the materials used in the alleged nuclear bombs.
1. About 64 kilograms of >>>>>> highly-enriched uranium <<<<<<< was used in the bomb which had a 16 kiloton yield (i.e. it was equivalent to 16,000 tonnes of TNT). It was released over Hiroshima, Japan's seventh largest city, on 6 August 1945.
2. The fissile material for the Nagasaki bomb was >>>>>>> plutonium-239 <<<<<<<<<<<. The plutonium core was divided into two hemispheres, each less than a critical mass, surrounded by explosive charges. These chemical charges compressed the plutonium into a single, extremely dense supercritical mass.
Please just take 10 mins to look up what and how long the half lives are AND how anyone could survive living there now.
Oh yes - Hiroshima does not have harmful radiation levels today. The residual radiation from the bomb decayed quickly after the explosion, and the city has since maintained radiation levels comparable to natural background radiation elsewhere.
...
PS Think I am responding to wrong person, if so apologies.
i'm not sure if You're responding to me Bob - Enough, but here's my response to You: i refer to the following as my source; what. may i ask, is Yours?
And again, if Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not hit by atomic bombs, what destroyed them? Or were they never really destroyed?
FACT CHECK: HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI HIT BY NUCLEAR BOMBS IN 1945, RADIATION DISSIPATED [EXTRACTS] by Reuters Fact Check 082823
...”A Facebook video with the text “Hiroshima and Nagasaki were never nuked” points to the fact that the two cities are thriving today and asserts that lingering radiation should have made them uninhabitable for centuries (link).
However, most of the radiation released in the mid-air blasts in 1945 never made it to the ground, according to scientists, and what did was mostly short-lived, decaying not long after the explosions.
The post suggesting that the two Japanese cities were never bombed surfaced in August 2023 around the 78th anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings and the release of the film “Oppenheimer”, which tells the story of the bombs’ creation (link).
Both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were designed to detonate thousands of feet above the ground, leveling buildings for miles with the force of the explosion itself and the resulting fires. But the intense radiation released by the blasts caused the majority of immediate deaths through radiation burns and radiation poisoning, according to the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF), a U.S.-Japanese research organization focused on studying long-term health effects in survivors of the 1945 blasts (www.rerf.or.jp/en/faq/).
Because of the altitude of the detonations, most of the radiation from the explosions did not even reach the ground in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Jeffrey Hart, RERF’s chief of public relations and publications, said in an email.
“Because the burst heights of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were at 600 meters in the air and 503 meters, respectively, most of the radiation (90%) was pulled up into the atmosphere,” Hart said.
RADIOACTIVE DECAY
THE CIRCULATING VIDEO STATES, “PLUTONIUM 239 HAS A HALF-LIFE OF 24,110 YEARS AND URANIUM 235 HAS A HALF-LIFE OF 703 MILLION YEARS, IN THEORY MAKING BOTH HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI UNINHABITABLE FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS,” HOWEVER, THIS MISREPRESENTS THE NATURE OF RADIOACTIVE DECAY, according to Derek Haas, an associate professor in the Nuclear and Radiation Engineering Program at the University of Texas at Austin.
“Rate of decay is inversely proportional to half-life, so something with a long half life, it’s not very radioactive,” Haas said in a phone interview.
Emphasizing the distinction between the radiation released by the blasts themselves, and radioactive materials that would have fallen to the ground and contaminated the area, Haas said that what reached the ground would have included “a mix of fission products and some leftover material from the bomb itself.”
The isotopes that would have caused the most harm include iodine 131, which has a short half life and is very dangerous, he said. “But the most dangerous ones would have decayed with hours.”
“If you look at all the radioactivity at one day, it’s decayed by factor of 100,000; at 10 days by a factor of 1 million; at 10 years, it’s gone down by a factor of 1 billion.”
Today, the city of Hiroshima explains on its website, the city’s level of radiation is “on a par with the extremely low levels of background radiation (natural radioactivity) present anywhere on Earth” and has no effect on humans (link).
Full article at https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/hiroshima-and-nagasaki-hit-by-nuclear-bombs-in-1945-radiation-dissipated-idUSL1N3A9220/ ; EMPHASIS added.
Not sure as I am having trouble following this thread and "who is who" for some reason... but I do not believe in them (as simple as I can be).
So isn't the major fear of nukes the threat of lasting radiation? If no radiation, how are the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki different from the firebombing of other cities in Japan and Germany?
Michael Palmer visited Hiroshima shortly after the end of hostilities. https://archive.org/details/Hiroshima_revisited
Based on the Reuters article, that apparently depends upon where those nukes are detonated: on the ground or at altitude.
Based on the books I have posted here, there were no nukes used. No nukes would also be a reason for no radiation would it not? Reuters seems to have come up with an excuse to give us as to why there is no radiation. I don't buy it, but if you have an emotional desire to believe in nukes, I can't convince you otherwise. I choose to think logically and rationally with as much information as I can get my hands on.
And so do i choose to think that way, Kenneth; and employ the same strategy and tactics.
And i guess my "emotional desire to believe in nukes" is at about the same level of intensity as Yours NOT to believe in them.
i'm not going to waste any further of Your or my time trying to make those apparent "emotional desires" come to some sort of an agreement.
Have a great day. jeff
A rational person does not believe in stories that have no evidence to support them. And truth does not fear investigation.
Thank God you stated it, as I am always mocked when I state it and have become bored of saying it now.
Cheers for the link and remember the World is a stage and we are just witnessing the latest act in the show; with most having gobs open in awe.
Fear is their greatest weapon. confusion is number 2.
Posting the same link repeatedly in the same thread (four times so far) equates with spam.
Roger. i figured that out about five minutes ago. While my cognitive functioning hasn't decreased to the level of Biden or Trump, it certainly ain't what it used to be.
I have posted about this topic on this channel several times in the past and no one picks it up. My objective was to get a conversation started which it seems has worked this time. Except of course with you. All you have to do is criticize my posting as spam so you have an excuse not to engage.
Nukes do not exist, but you can choose to live in fear. That is you choice. Others are interested in learning the truth of the matter.
"I have posted about this topic on this channel several times in the past and no one picks it up."
Maybe the reason for that is the fact that you post it several times in the same thread.
I am 100% certain the victims of the two bombs that were dropped over Hiroshima and Nagasaki would beg to differ as far as your claim that nukes do not exist.
"...., but you can choose to live in fear. That is you choice."
After I learned the truth about the plandemic I will never again fall for the MSM's gaslighting about anything.
The victims in Hiroshima and Nagasaki died of something. Just like the victims of Dresden Germany. Can they tell the difference, or do they believe what they are told. You can read the books or not. If not your opinion may be based on BS.
Instead of repeatedly posting the same link and the same comment you would be better served by explaining what I am looking at here.
https://im.indiatimes.in/facebook/2015/Aug/blast_1439277792_1439277805.jpg
I wrote this a few articles back.
https://kenkrypto.substack.com/p/nuclear-fears?r=4qa41
I will read it tomorrow.
Edit: ...., but then again why? If you think it's so important for me to read something, why don't you give me the most important paragraph in the thing?
Picture this: It's like me giving you a link to the library of congress, and telling you to read it. ....., because the truth is there, man. Don't waste my fucking time.