If Aussie reporter Joe Vialls was right that a “clean” underground MICRO-NUKE caused 2005 Beirut explosion, was he was also right that MICRO-NUKES blasted Central London TWICE - Baltic Exchange 1992 & Bishopsgate 1993? What about 1996 Docklands & 1996 Manchester blasts?
I discuss evidence that Vialls - writing just days after 2005 blast that killed fmr PM Rafik Hariri & destroyed much of downtown Beirut - was on right track in asserting an underground "clean" micro-nuke was cause of the explosion in this long thread
Back in 1993 Vialls thought it strange THREE quite similar "mega-blasts" - 1992 Baltic Exchange & 1993 Bishopsgate & 1993 WTC - should happen in just over a year: all detonated in high-profile business districts, no scorch marks & Richter-scale shocks
"Independent explosives experts in Australia" confirmed for Vialls NO WAY a bomb - reportedly detonated in parked garbage truck at Bishopsgate - could have blasted the huge crater in the road. Bomb either dropped from aircraft or buried in advance, "garbage truck" merely decoy
Indeed "chilling" eyewitness reports of ground shock, "a brilliant white flash" & "a tall vertical column of smoke" from range of more than 3 miles away led Vialls to think Baltic Exchange bomb might well be "nuclear"
Vialls believed "considerable evidence indicating strongly that small nuclear devices" like SADM with yield as low as 10 tons TNT "detonated at or below street level" responsible for BOTH London "mega-blasts." Vialls noted at time he wrote this, info on SADM still classified.
Vialls also got suspicious seeing on London TV "team of experts entering the [Baltic Exchange] blast area wearing full nuclear protective clothing" & ITN World News feature (May 1993) on terrorist "dirty bombs" wch Vialls took as a cover story in case radioactivity discovered
Vialls knew such "mega-blasts" far exceeded capabilities of any existing, known "terrorist" organization like IRA. He reported in US much talk of Mossad involvement but Vialls suggested could be any of dozen countries w/grudge agst NWO if able to buy or manufacture micro-nukes
Nine years later Joe Vialls' investigation of 2002 Bali bombing revealed how by 1981 "top-secret projects" initiated in US & Israel able to develop smaller & lighter "stealth" SADMs "invisible" to Geiger counters but Vialls doesn't say whether he thinks used in London bombings
So how does Vialls’ argument that “small nuclear devices...detonated at or below street level" caused both London "mega-blasts” measure up 25+ yrs later? I’d say pretty well! Indeed we can go farther & say it applies as well to similar 1996 Docklands & Manchester bombings.
Much evidence confirms Vialls' assertion NO WAY explosives in back of large truck could have blasted large craters. Largest US bombs don't even blast craters when detonated just a few ft off the ground! Here's 10,000 lb M121 exploding 3 ft before nose hits ground. NO CRATER!
Vialls in 2004 article revealed when US Special Forces loaded two light trucks with 1000 lb ANFO each & then filmed detonation w/high-speed cameras, the film showed a clear air gap between vehicle chassis & the road in both cases
I should add there is no way a "truck bomb" can blast a crater UNLESS the truck has a nuke onboard! Because a nuke if powerful and/or low enough can certainly blast a crater! See Table 2.
The explosion most comparable to a "truck bomb" - the Jangle Sugar test (Nov 1951) w/uranium Mk-6 fission device sitting on the surface of NTS desert alluvium (Height of Burst = 3.5 ft) w/yield 1.2 kt TNT - blasted a crater 17 ft deep & 90 ft wide
Rather than blast a "conventional crater", what large aboveground nonnuclear bombs like M121 generally do is simply "compress" the soil, creating a shallow & wide "compression crater", in the case of M121 less than 1 foot deep.
All four major English 1990s bombings left large craters although there seems to be confusion over dimensions. E.g., Vialls reported this Bishopsgate crater was 40 ft deep x 60 ft wide. A police officer said 10 ft wide x 15 ft deep. Newspapers reported 15 ft wide w/no depth.
So what kind of "crater" should we have expected fm 1990s "IRA truck bombs"? "Official" story goes all four were "homemade" explosives prepared by Provisional IRA South Armagh Brigade using 500-1500 kg ANFO or NH4NO3/sugar blend ignited by Semtex, stacked on large truck beds
To make the case why ALL the "official" stories are WRONG it is sufficient to examine just one - Bishopsgate - in which reportedly a 1 tonne ANFO bomb smuggled into England was placed in this stolen Iveco tipper truck disguised under a layer of tarmac
Already there is something quite funny about this story. Why would terrorists steal such a huge truck for such a small bomb that a one-ton heavy duty truck could handle? (The figure says 1 ton of TNT but dimensions exactly that of 1 tonne ANFO bomb 3.5 ft x 3.5 ft x 3.5 ft)
For comparison purpose, cratering studies convert any High Explosive or Nuclear Explosive into tons of TNT equivalent. For HE, multiply tons of explosive by its RE factor. Thus one can pretty straightforward determine 1 tonne (1.1 ton) of ANFO equals .81 tons TNT equiv.
Another strange thing abt Bishopsgate is that, when Andy Oppenhemier - the so-called CBRNE expert who wrote the "definitive" book on these IRA bombs in 2008 - did the calculations, he came up with 1,200 kg (1.3 tons) TNT equiv.
Huh? ANFO more powerful than TNT? But Oppenheimer then does something INSANE transforming his 1,200 kg TNT equiv ANFO bomb into "Bishopsgate - A 1-Kiloton Bomb" "the equivalent explosive power of a small tactical nuclear weapon (‘mini-nuke’) – but without the radiation”!
For this OUTRAGEOUS statement, Oppenheimer's endnote cites "Various personal scientific sources" but only mentions by name LANL & Home Office pamphlet, ‘Business as Usual: Maximizing Business Resilience to Terrorist Bombings, case study Bishopsgate’
Oppenheimer was also undoubtedly responsible for slipping into 2005 Jane's Intelligence Digest article on Korean nukes that Bishopsgate 1,200 kg TNT equiv bomb was "a conventional version of a low-yielding nuclear weapon." How could NO ONE have called Oppenheimer out on this?
Seemingly the first to call out Oppenheimer on his "1-kt Bishopsgate bomb" were Wikipedia editors(!) for "1993 Bishopsgate bombing" article for whom Oppenheimer's book & Jane's made absolutely no sense on this. A kilogram is NOT equal to a ton!
Oppenheimer clearly knew diff btwn a 1-tonne ANFO bomb & 1-kiloton "mini-nuke" so what was he on about? Was he trying to do an end run around Joe Vialls? Well I don’t think Oppenheimer’s audience was actually anybody who would've ever heard of Vialls & his London micro-nukes.
Oppenheimer’s audience was avg person interested in learning why "IRA truck bombs” so devastating. Anyone familiar w/Bishopsgate damage would certainly have no trouble believing explosion as powerful as what they imagine a 1-kt "mini-nuke" could wreak - WITHOUT THE RADIATION
Oppenheimer's work actually fits nicely into a #psyop that I believe has been going on since at least as far back as 1970 Sterling Hall bombing to convince the world that ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3) can have the devastating power of a small tactical nuke - WITHOUT THE RADIATION
This ANFO #psyop kicked into high gear in 1990s w/Baltic Exchange, Bishopsgate, Docklands & Manchester ANFO bombings in England 1992-96 as well as Oklahoma City ANFO bombing in 1995
28/ https://twitter.com/drbairdonline/status/1096388224405127168
Oppenheimer further contributed to the ANFO #psyop in referring to the 1996 Docklands (aka Canary Wharf) ANFO bombing as "The IRA's 'Hiroshima'" & the 1996 Manchester ANFO bombing as "A True 'City Destroyer'"
This #psyop w/ammonium nitrate (ANFO sans fuel oil) now playing the role of NUKE WITHOUT THE RADIATION continues to play out today, revealed in utter absence of discussion in MSM & "so-called Alternative Media" over what caused 2020 Beirut explosion
30/ https://twitter.com/drbairdonline/status/1292464143954350080
That’s said, I still believe the best way to counter disinfo is by questioning everything & looking for contrary evidence wch I think shows no way ANFO could cause such destruction, best explained by an ACTUAL "mini-nuke" - albeit one w/o kind of radiation popularly expected
The easiest but still quite precise way to determine the explosive yield of a bomb is through the study of any crater left behind. I discuss the techniques of analyzing craters in more detail in this thread.
32/ https://twitter.com/drbairdonline/status/1292849675444211713
So using Fig 4.3 what kind of crater should we have expected from the Bishopsgate explosion? Firstly, I assume a "truck bomb" Height of Burst (HOB) = 4.8 ft [distance fm surface to bottom of truck bed] + .5 (3.5) [dist fm bottom to middle of 1-tonne cube of ANFO] = 6.55 ft.
Assuming yield 0.81 tons TNT equiv [1 tonne ANFO @ RE=0.74] that explosion in desert alluvium & similar media only produces a "compression crater" 0.46 ft deep. Upping yield to Oppenheimer's 1,200 kg (1.3 tons) only increases depth to 0.55 ft. NOT what we saw at Bishopsgate!
How about Oppenheimer's "1-Kiloton Bomb" @ HOB=6.55 ft? Now we're talking! Using Fig 4.3 that size bomb would have blasted a "conventional crater" 7.3 ft deep. Indeed that Scaled HOB is very close to 1.2 kT Jangle Sugar (pt #11) which blasted a 17 ft deep crater @ HOB=3.5 ft
Unfortunately, however much Andy Oppenheimer might wish it, there is NO WAY a 30-ton Iveco tipper truck could possibly carry 1 kT TNT equiv of even the most powerful chemical explosive! The only kind of 1 kT TNT bomb that could fit into this truck is a NUCLEAR bomb!
However, the Bishopsgate perps would likely NOT have opted for an aboveground nuke b/c it would be very hard to disguise the intense fireball that X-rays from even the most sophisticated 3rd-generation MRR nuke would produce if detonated aboveground. Cf. Jangle Sugar (left)!
Although Joe Vialls reported that at the time of 1992 Baltic Exchange explosion there was an eyewitness report from three miles away of “a brilliant white flash”, there are no other similar reports from the other 3 mega-blasts.
What we do see in photos & videos from the mega-blasts like this fm 1996 Manchester doesn't look like a "brilliant white flash" you would see from 3 miles away - although I I think there is something strange abt this video b/c you don't see the blast doing any actual damage!
If the Manchester video is of the "big" blast it could be we are seeing a "micro-nuke" buried just below the surface wch greatly cuts down on the "flash" - as can be seen in this video of the Johnnie Boy test (July 1962) w/0.5 kT yield @ HOB = -2 ft
If the "micro-nuke" was buried just below surface, yield would have to be much less than 1 kT else would result in crater much deeper than Bishopsgate's. Altho no consensus over how deep that crater was, I'll just note a 20-ton nuke @ HOB=- 3ft would blast a 12-ft deep crater
The similar depths of craters of the other 3 English "mega-blasts" suggests similarly sized ~20-ton TNT equiv nuke buried just below surface, suggesting a nuclear device akin to a Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM) that was designed in 1960s for 10 ton to 1 kT range
I concluded similarly 10-20 ton nuke buried below street responsible for 2005 explosion that destroyed much of downtown Beirut, seconding Joe Vialls reporting at the time of the explosion
Both Joe Vialls & I also fundamentally challenged the #ANFOPsyop asserting PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for ANFO to do the things attributed to it. We concluded if only a nuke could blast the craters & cause mega-blasts seen in England & Beirut – then it must be a nuke! #NuclearDuck
As to that robotically repeated question, “So if it’s a nuke, where’s the radiation?”, we both concluded the world had been #psyoped since Hiroshima to believe ANY nuclear bomb would be as catastrophic as the above-ground, very dirty gun-type U-235 fission #LittleBoy bomb
The idea of a relatively “clean” nuke (i.e., nuke with no residual radiation) is completely unthinkable to people, ignorant as they are of the fact from beginning, US, USSR & other nuclear powers were working hard to minimize residual radiation in their nukes
While the #ANFOPsyop is pretty easy to refute if people are open-minded enough to actually think about it, unfortunately the #RadiationPsyop is much more difficult because key info is top secret. We only get driblets from various official & anonymous sources.
But for physicist Heinz Pommer, who has done much investigation into 3rd-generation nuclear weapons as part of his research into what destroyed the WTC on 9/11, these driblets led him to conclude that Minimum Residual Radiation (MRR) weapons have been around since 1980
My research (see thread) into MSM sources seconded Pommer, Lawrence Livermore in 1970s developed a “Reduced Residual Radiation (RRR) Bomb” aka "blast bomb" that “dramatically reduces fallout” to replace US stockpile of ADMs, confirmed by DOE in 2001
49/ https://twitter.com/drbairdonline/status/1293531463955038210
I reported additional findings in this short thread including a 1982 article by Andre Gsponer showing the Reduced Residual Radioactivity (RRR) weapon (aka MRR weapon) was designed to minimize EMP (electromagnetic pulse) as well as radioactivity
Vialls goes further stating in his 2002 Bali article that by 1981 “top-secret projects” initiated in US & Israel able to develop smaller & lighter “stealth” SADMs (aka “Dimona micro-nukes”) “invisible” to Geiger counters
One last interesting sidebit to close this thread. In this video taken at exact time as the Bishopsgate bombing, the narrator says "Interference on our mini-camera in the control room gives the first warning of our next incident." Is this EMP?
You can follow @drbairdonline.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: