The Wisconsin State Journal betrays The State of Wisconsin

Jim Fetzer

When The Wisconsin State Journal (19 August 2016) published an article by Mark Sommerhauser, who claimed that there is no evidence of the theft of elections in Wisconsin, as Roger Stone had claimed in a recent piece in The Hill (16 August 2016), I was incensed because there is a mountain of proof not only of election theft in Wisconsin but that it has happened here five times, including Scott Walker's recall election, his reelection against Mary Burke, and the recent primary pitting Ted Cruz against Donald Trump, to which Stone had drawn attention in his article, which the WSJ dismissed:

I knew this to be the case from my previous collaboration with Richard Charnin, who is a brilliant statistician and the author of two books on the theft of elections using electronic voting machines, where we had published "Voter Fraud vs. Election Theft: Scott Walker's Wisconsin Reelection" (10 July 2015), which documented the theft with a series of graphs that prove it. I had hoped writing to the reporter who had published a false denial with copies to the publisher and senior editors at the WSJ, something would come of it. Apparently, the publisher cares no more about the truth than his reporter, who, in my view, deserves to be fired. The Journal is betraying the State of Wisconsin!

Here is the letter I sent:

James Fetzer jfetzer@d.umn.edu	Aug 25 (9 days ago)
to msommerhauser, wsjcity, wsjopine, mbeck, pbrinkman, mdefour, ghesselberg, jhumenik, smilfred, mpitsch, jsmalley, Mitch

Mark,

Your article, "Walker: 'Sideshow' focus hurts Trump", includes the provably false claim that allegations of the theft of as many as five Wisconsin elections using voting machines "are not supported by evidence". But that is simply wrong. 

I sent a letter to the editor, which the paper has yet to publish, presumably on the ground that the theft of elections in Wisconsin does not matter to anyone here. After all, while Scott Walker is gutting the state, who should give a damn?

​

The article I cite, "Voter Fraud vs. Election Theft: Scott Walker's Wisconsin Reelection", can effortlessly be found on the internet. Apparently, no one at The Wisconsin State Journal cares enough to bother to verify what I am reporting here, which is an abdication of the responsibility of the paper to the citizens of the state, not to mention dedication to truth!

​

So apparently there IS evidence of the theft of Wisconsin elections using voting machines, which I cite in the article based upon Richard Charnin's brilliant research, as an expert statistician who has published two books on the theft of elections using voting machines. There are multiple graphs there and citations of his more extensive research on this matter.

When Roger Stone makes an effort to bring this to the attention to the public, you abuse your position to dismiss his piece either without doing any research to confirm or disconfirm it or by deliberately distortion the facts. The state is undergoing a wrecking operation because Walker and his Republican cronies know they are immune from being removed from office. 

Not only are you massively derelict as a reporter but, along with the WSJ itself, a disgrace and a discredit to Wisconsin.

You deserve to be fired!

Jim

James H. Fetzer, Ph.D.

McKnight Professor Emeritus

University of Minnesota Duluth

http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/

Editor, moonrockbooks.com

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus on the Duluth Campus of the University of Minnesota Duluth.

AMERICA NUKED ON 9/11: Targeting a book to promote 9/11 research

Jim Fetzer

The Cambridge University Press journal, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, became an instant sensation by publishing target articles on specific, well-defined subjects and inviting experts from around the world to post critical commentaries about it, which has resulted in significant advances in research. During the 9/11 Truth Teleconference on 31 August 2016, I proposed that the new book about 9/11,

which has 15 contributors, might serve a similar purpose and thereby similarly significantly advance 9/11 research. Here are some of the important reasons to believe that we ought to adopt that suggestion.

The book is divided into 28 chapters, where the core falls into 8 sections that, in reverse order, focus upon "9/11 Limited Hangouts", "The Myth of Nanothermite", "The 9/11 Crash Sites", "The Pentagon: What didn't Happen", "New York was Nuked on 9/11", "What happened on 9/11", and "9/11: Who was responsible and why", Parts I and II, with three chapters each. It has a Preface and a Prologue as well as an Epilogue and an Afterword with an Index. Softcover, 458 pages, 338 photos, priced low at $20.

There are three major groups in 9/11 research--A&E911, which supports the use of nanothermite and focuses on Building 7; Judy Wood and DEWs, which promotes Directed Energy Weapons and no planes theory; and Scholars for 9/11 Truth, which advances the use of mini or micro nukes to blow apart the Twin Towers and likewise contends that none of the official 9/11 aircraft actually crashed on 9/11. The contributors explain why A&E911 is right about Building 7 but wrong about nanothermite and why Judy Wood and DEWs is right about no planes but wrong about DEWs.

Because the arguments and evidence presented are specific and detailed, the book facilitates a level of intellectual engagement that is missing from most discussions about 9/11. In relation to nanothermite, for example, three chapters explain that it is a law of materials science that, in order for an explosive to blow apart a material, it must have a detonation velocity equal to or greater than the speed of sound in that material. The speed of sound in concrete is 3,200 m/s; in steel, it is 6,100 m/s; but the highest detonation velocity attributed to nanothermite in the scientific literature is only 895 m/s. And the three chapters in the book that make these points were originally published in 2011--over 5 years ago!

The Latest from A&E911

That makes it obvious that those who want to defend the use of nanothermite in the destruction of the Twin Towers need to explain what else was used to bring that effect about. While it is certainly true that something else could have been added to make it explosive, A&E911 has been reluctant to say what that something else could have been. The same, of course, could be said of toothpaste, which is also non-explosive but could be made explosive by adding an explosive to it. After all these years, it is not unreasonable to expect that A&E911 should have an answer to that question. But that does not seem to be the case. Here is a report about the state of its research on 9/11, which has just appeared:

While the article presents proof that the "official narrative" of 9/11 cannot be sustained, it does not advance anything that has not been widely known with the 9/11 research community in the past. If you compare these propositions with my own "20 reasons the 'official account' of 9/11 is wrong", for example, you can see that the latest from A&E911 does not significantly advance our knowledge and understanding beyond what was available then, where "20 reasons" was originally published on 9/11 of 2011! Surely we should be able to expect more from an organization that has such a high profile and tends to consume the attention of the public and media. Just compare their respective contents:

Judy Wood and DEWs

Indeed, some might be tempted to argue that the earlier article covered more ground that the latest from A&E. But Judy Wood and DEWs have not been doing any better. Consider, for example, that a review of her book, WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? (2010), which I originally published on 20 May 2012, was subsequently downgraded from 5-star to 3-star on the basis of research presented during The Vancouver Hearings, which were held in June 2012. It has been subject to attack around 7,500 times now. But denouncing evidence of the use of nukes does not explain it away, where Judy has displayed the unscientific attitude of ignoring it. A scientist would instead take into account new evidence not previously considered and adapt their theory appropriately by accepting hypotheses that had been previously rejected, rejecting hypotheses previously accepted, leaving others in suspense:

The point is that the specificity of the arguments presented in this new book make it possible to make advances by citing specific propositions that are laid out in detail with the evidence supporting them, which enables those who disagree to explain what they have wrong and how we know. Otherwise, we are left in the muddle of having to deal with distorted versions of those arguments, which do not come to grips with the evidence and leaving issues hanging. That was exhibited perfectly during the 9/11 Truth Teleconference, when Adam Ruff and Wayne Costa challenged my explanation of how we know that this was a nuclear event, which were nice illustrations of the point that I am making here.

Objections raised during the call

I observed that the conversion of material into very fine dust and the vaporization of 60-80,000 tons of steel are indicative of the use of nukes as well as the destruction of the buildings to or even below ground level. Wayne Costa replied that elements "that shouldn't be there" does not take into account that some of those elements could have been present because of naturally occurring concentrations of those elements or from other sources. That sounded persuasive but, as the book explains, they would not have been there in the quantities discovered and the correlations between them had this not been a nuclear event. There would have been less likelihood of misunderstanding using the book as a basis.

Adam Ruff contended that there would have been no reason to use nukes because everything that was done could have been done with nanothermite and explosives. Ruff said that there was "a giant pile of debris", but ignored the point that there was no massive stack of debris in the towers' footprints! Comparisons with Building 7 are instructive here, because experience with controlled demolitions have shown that they leave a stack of debris equal to about 12% of their original heights. At 47 floors, WTC-7 left just that residue in a stack of debris 5.5 floors high. But that was not true of the Twin Towers, which, had they been demolished as Ruff suggests, should have left debris piles 14-15 floors high but did not:

Compare the debris from WTC-7 (left) with that from WTC-1 (right), which should have been more than twice as high.

Indeed, while it is appropriate to describe the destruction of WTC-7 as a "controlled demolition", it is not appropriate to use the same phrase for the Twin Towers, which were "demolitions under control" but lacked the characteristics of controlled demolitions. The reason for having to have used a novel technique for their destruction appears to have been to protect the bathtub, which was an enormous dike within which the towers were constructed to protect them from Hudson River water. Had the bathtub been breeched, it would have flooded beneath lower Manhattan, the most valuable real estate in the world, including the subway and PATH train tunnels, which they wanted at all cost to avoid.

The use of mini or micro nukes, which have dialable radii and can be directed upward, means that the destruction of the Twin Towers qualified as the use of "Directed Energy Weapons", which, according to Judy Wood, are devices that provide far more energy than conventional and can be directed. Set at 100' in the core columns, they would have had a diameter of 200' for buildings that were 208' on a side. Their use enabled the destruction of both buildings from the top down in an effort to simulate collapse. But they were being blown apart in every direction and converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust. And this appears to be how it was done as the USGS dust studies substantiate.

Other arguments could be made, of course, including that the final spire of the North Tower seems to run counter to the use of nukes. But even at Hiroshima, the scaffolding of a lone church remained after the enormous blast had done its damage. And these were mini or micro nukes, whose use has also been confirmed by the debilitating medical maladies incurred by first responders and residents of the area, which include non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, esophageal, prostate and blood and plasma cancers at rates far above normal, which Jeff Prager was among the first to point out and where recent estimates have placed the number affected at close to 70,000.

For those who regard characterizing A&E911 and Judy Wood and DEWs as "limited hangouts", the argument is straightforward. We have three major problems to solve about 9/11: the WHO, the HOW and the WHY. Both of those organizations only address the HOW and refuse to explain the WHO or the WHY. That is simply absurd for 9/11 Truth organizations. Only Scholars for 9/11 Truth addresses all three. AMERICA NUKED ON 9/11: Compliments of the CIA, the Neocons in the DOD and the Mossad (2016) lays out the evidence in detail. But we make no claims to infallibility--and the best test of the validity of our case is critical attempts to refute it, which can be accomplished if we make this book the target for scrutiny and criticism and thereby advance the cause of exposing 9/11 Truth.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth and the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.

Academic Freedom Conference II: Are there limits to inquiry?

Jim Fetzer and Stephen Francis are very pleased to present:

Academic Freedom Conference (Taped Saturday, 27-28 August 2016)

ACADEMIC FREEDOM CONFERENCE II:
Are there Limits to Inquiry?

Should faculty be restrained from or even punished for investigating

complex and controversial events of enormous political significance?

ACADEMIC FREEDOM CONFERENCE II: 

Are there limits to inquiry?

AFC II: Introduction: James H. Fetzer

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

AFC II: Session 1: Francis A. Boyle, Ph.D., noted Professor of

International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law,

earned his  A.B. in Political Science from Chicago, J.D. from

Harvard Law School and his A.M. and Ph.D. in Political Science

also from Harvard University.

AFC II Session 2: Stephen Francis proposed the first Academic

Freedom Conference on 26 April 2014, held on the campus of the

University of Illinois-UC, where he earned a degree in sociology.  He

promotes the exercise of critical thinking and unconventional thought.

AFC II Session 3: What happened to "9/11 in the Academic Community"?

AFC II Session 4: Nick Kollerstrom, Ph.D., an historian of science and

the leading expert on the 7/7 London bombings, had his appointment

at University College London terminated for undertaking scientific

research on World  War II that undermines widely-accepted accounts.

WITHIN THE ACADEMY

AFC II Session 5: Sterling Harwood, J.D., Ph.D., professor of

philosophy and attorney-at-law, has published on the moon landing

hoax, Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing, including exposing the

role of Snopes.com in misleading the public regarding those events.

AFC II Session 6: Darrell Hamamoto, Ph.D., Professor of Asian

American Studies at the University of California, David, has published

extensively on the representation of Asian Americans in films and on

TV, especially in relation to political issues and freedom of expression.

AFC II Session 7: Kevin McDonald, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology

at Cal State-Long Beach (retired), has 8 books on evolutionary theory

and has focused on group selection and the significance of different

strategies of adaptation and on social and personality development.

SOME SPECIAL CASES

AFC II Session 8: "False Flags: From 9/11 to Sandy Hook and Beyond"
                             

AFC II Session 9: Preston James, Ph.D., a social psychologist

from a Big Ten University, will address the importance of academic

research in an era dominated by propaganda from the mass media,

where academicians are failing to expose state-sponsored terrorism.

AFC II Session 10: Jim Fetzer, Ph.D., a philosopher of science, has

edited a series of books that investigate the moon landing hoax, the

atrocities of 9/11, the death of Sen. Paul Wellstone, the FEMA drill at

Sandy Hook, the fakery in Boston, and other major state deceptions.

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.

Paul Craig Roberts — Trump vs. Hillary: A Summation

 Paul Craig Roberts

August 25, 2016 | 

Note: I just heard a NPR report that young people were deserting the Republican Party, had turned leftwing and were flocking to Hillary. So now in America the leftwing candidate is a warmonger and agent of Wall Street! Amazing.

Trump vs. Hillary: A Summation

Paul Craig Roberts

The US presidential election this November will tell whether a majority of the US population is irredeemably stupid. If voters elect Hillary, we will know that Americans are stupid beyond redemption.

We don’t know much about Trump, and anti-Trump propaganda rules in the place of facts.

But we know many facts about Hillary. We know about her violation of classification laws and the refusal of the Democratic administration to do anything about it. The Democrats prefer to control the White House than to enforce the law, another nail in the coffin in which the rule of law in the US lies.

We know from their words and deeds and material success that the Clintons are agents for Wall Street, the Big Banks, the military/security complex, Israel, agribusiness, and the extractive industries. Their large personal fortune, approximately $120 million, and the $1,600 million in their foundation, much of which came from abroad in exchange for political favors, attests to the unchallengable fact that the Clintons are agents for the oligarchy that rules America, indeed, that rules the American Empire from Australia and Japan, through North America and Western and Eastern Europe to the Russian border.

We know that Hillary, like Bill, is a liar.

We know that Hillary is a warmonger.

We know that Hillary made the most irresponsible statement ever uttered by a presidential candidate when she declared the President of Russia to be the “new Hitler,” thereby raising tensions between the nuclear powers to a higher level than existed during the Cold War.

We know that Hillary is allied with the neoconservatives and that her belief in the neocons’ ideology of US world hegemony is likely to result in war with Russia and China.

All we know about Trump is that the oligarchs, who sent America’s jobs overseas, who flooded the country with difficult-to-assimilate immigrants, who destroyed public education, who bailed out Wall Street and the “banks too big to fail,” who sacrificed American homeowners and retirees living on a fixed income, who intend to privatize both Social Security and Medicare, who have given the public killer cops, relentless violations of privacy, the largest prison poplulation in the world, and destroyed the US Constitution in order to increase executive power over the American people, are violently opposed to Trump. This opposition should tell us that Trump is the person we want in the Oval Office.

Some claim that it is all a charade and that Trump is playing a role in order to elect Hillary. American politics are so corrupt that anything is possible. However the ruling elites and their puppets seem to be genuinely concerned about Trump’s challenge to their control, and they have united against Trump. They have used their money to buy up “progressive” websites paid to bring the print and TV anti-Trump propaganda onto the Internet, thus joining the Internet presstitutes with the print, TV, and NPR whores who are working overtime to demonize Trump and to elect Hillary.

The entire power structure of our country is behind Hillary. Both Democratic and Republican political establishments and both ideologies, neoliberals and neoconservatives, are united behind Hillary.

How much more evidence do Americans need in order to know that a vote for Hillary is a vote for their own emasculation?

Apparently, Americans remain captives of their insouciance. According to news reports, a majority of voters still haven’t a clue about the consequences of voting for Hillary. Polls report that Hillary is well in the lead. Are these real polls or just another presstitute lie to discourage Trump supporters? Why vote when they have already lost?

The propaganda assault against Trump, vicious as it was, did not succeed during the Republican primary. Despite the media condemnation of Trump, he swept the other Republican candidates aside effortlessly.

The current media demonization of Trump might fail as well. Indeed, it is so transparent that it could elect him.

All that is required is for enough Americans to awake from their insouciance to recognize that it is the enemies of their own lives, their own living standards, and their own liberty who are violently opposed to Trump.

If Americans cannot reach this realization, they have no future, and neither does the planet Earth.

The ruling oligarchy hates Trump because he disavows war with Russia, questions the purpose of NATO, opposes the offshoring of Americans’ jobs, and opposes the uncontrolled immigration that is transforming the United States into a multi-cultural entity devoid of unity. The oligarchs are replacing the United States with a Tower of Babel. Oligarchic power grows exponentially among the disunity of diversity.

In other words, Trump is for America and for Americans.

This is why the oligarchs and their whores hate Trump.

The imbecillic Americans who vote for Hillary are voting for war and their own immiseration.

Possibly, a vote for Trump is the same. However, in the case of Trump we do not know that. In the case of Hillary we most certainly do know it.

Of course, it could matter not how Americans vote. Those who program the electronic voting machines will determine the vote, and as the establishments of both political parties totally oppose Trump, the programmed machines can elect Hillary. We know this from our electoral history. The US has already experienced elections in which exit polls show a winning candidate different from the candidate selected by the electronic machines that have no paper trail and no way of affirming the vote.

If Hillary gets into the Oval Office, nuclear war is likely before her first term is over. A vote for Hillary is a vote for nuclear war.

If you look at the forthcoming election realistically, you have no alternative but to conclude that the entirety of the presstitute media and American Establishment prefers the risk of nuclear war to the risk of losing control of the government to the voters.

That Americans permitted the rise of unaccountable power tells us all we need to know about the dereliction of duty of which United States citizens are guilty. The American people failed democracy, which requires accountable government. The American government has proven that it is not accountable to the US Constitution, to US statutory law, to international law, or to voters.

If the result of Americans’ dereliction of duty is nuclear war, the American people will be responsible for the death of planet Earth. One would hope that with responsibility this great on their shoulders, the American people will reject the unequivocal war candidate and take their chances on holding Trump accountable to his words.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts' latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West, How America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order.

Russia: Evidence Proves US, UK And Israel Orchestrated 9/11 Attacks

The 9/11 attacks on New York & Washington DC were committed by traitors within the US, UK and Israeli governments.

Posted on March 1, 2016 by Sean Adl-Tabatabai in News, US // Comments (54)

A retired officer specialising in Israeli counter intelligence has claimed that nuclear devices were used on 9/11 – and were a modified version of the W-54 artillery shells that were provided to the Israeli’s between 1988 and 1998 from US stockpiles. 

According to the Russian insider – chemical analysis done on the fallout at ground zero has identified the chemical/radiation footprint of the warheads used in the attacks as being of US/Israeli origin.

Usapoliticstoday.com reports:

All plutonium based warheads have a chemical fingerprint that can identify the type of design and where the PU was made and how old it is. This was the 9/11 blackmail on Bush 1 and 2, the illegal transfer of surplus US nuclear weapons to the Israelis and why the continued cover up, along with the stolen gold and stock fraud that was going on Wall Street etc. According to file ENW57.pdf on page 66. (Editor’s note: Document received and confirmed)

Only a 2 kiloton device was needed to drop the buildings. A 2 kiloton device will produce a fireball of apx 150 to 200 feet in diameter at over 4000 degrees Centigrade. [Correction: Some 0s are missing, since the temperature generated by a nuclear event would have been in the millions of degrees C, not just thousands.] Just large enough to melt the I beams [Correction: they were box, not I beam, design.] of the central core of the building and drop them in place. The light flash would last less than 1 second and primarily be in the UV light range. Overpressure would only be at 60PSI max and directed upwards with the blast. See underground effect.

Fallout would be minimal and located to within ground zero 
range only. Radiation would drop to acceptable levels within 
72 hrs. after the blast. [Correction: That would be true of 
an airborne blast, but in this case there were underground 
blasts, the effects of which would tend to endure for years.] 
Most fall out was trapped in the cement dust thus causing 
all of the recent cancer deaths that we are now seeing in 
NYC amongst first responders. (Editor’s note: Consistent 
with site data)

High FluxIsotope Reactor Core – Cross Section

Melted steel and iron oxide or “nano thermite” is a byproduct of the very high gamma ray / Neutron flux induced into the central steel core. The radiation dissolves the steel into iron oxide consuming the carbon and silicon in the steel.

This explains the missing steel columns and the very important clue of the “vaporized’ 20 ton antenna tower atop the south tower. The upward blast of radiation literally vaporized it. Video evidence proves this to be true. (Editor’s note: Tower issue a vital one.)

The total XXOO data file from DOE Sandia on the 911 event is well over 72 MB. P.S. Snowden didn’t have a Q clearance so he missed this one. Carnaberry had a pretty good stash of documents on the subject. (All under the transit stuff.) The entire nuclear nonproliferation story of stolen nuclear material coming from Russia was an Israeli cover story to hide the original source of weapons material coming from the US stock piles. (Editor’s note: Fully confirmed)

Illegal distribution of US nuclear material to foreign allies was not limited to Israel. Virtually all NATO allies were in on this scam too. Dick Cheney was the bad guy on this one. Bush2/Cheney traded nuclear pits to foreign country as IOU’s in order to get what they wanted. Tom Countryman a well-known Israeli operative is curiously now in charge of N.N.P. at the State Department under Obama.(?) He was put there by Rahm Emanuel.

Early Israeli core model – Vannunu photo

It appears that the weapon of choice for the Israelis were the W-54 and follow on series of nuclear pits taken from the Amarillo TX storage dump. This was what Carnaberry was working on for Bush senior in Houston.

A total of over 350 pits were transferred to the Israelis over a 10 to 20 year period of time. The W-54 type of pit design were the most desirable due to the 2 point implosion pit design. This is the easiest to re manufacture and modify as compared to other circular pit designs.

The pill shaped design of the W-54 type weapon contains over 1.5 times more plutonium than a standard pit. This would allow enough Plutonium to be recovered that was still of weapons grade use even after 32 plus years of age. Americium build up in the pit over time eventually makes the Pit unusable as a weapon so they have a limited shelf life based on how fast or slow the Plutonium was produce in the reactor at Stanford.

Usually it was about 150 days max. Irradiation time in the reactor during production determines the shelf life of the pit as weapons grade material. All of the micro nukes used by the Israelis are re-manufactured W-54 type series devices.

Khazelov confirmed this a micro nuke bombing

[Correction: Dimitri, to the best of our knowledge, has continued to maintain his 150kt (big nuke) theory and disdains the mini nuke theory.] These devices were used in the Bali bombing and the London bombing and in Japan on their reactors. (Editor’s note: Nuclear weapon use in Bali confirmed) Also used in Damascus, Iraq and Afghanistan by the US. (Editor’s note: Multiple confirmation including site samples.)

These are stored in most Israelite embassies for ease of deployment. The one’s used on 9/11 were kept at the Israeli consulate in NYC until put in place. After 9/11 the FBI now checks all diplomatic pouches with a Geiger counter before entering or leaving the US. The South African weapons were also surplus W-54 artillery shells acquired from Israeli and final assembly and testing was done in South Africa with Israel assistance. (Editor’s note: This explains Pelendaba production issues.)

This was done because the Israelis needed a testing ground in order to make sure that there rebuilt weapons would work as designed. (Editor’s note: Testing on Sept. 22, 1979 multiple confirmations.) The North Korean weapons are also of the 155 mm artillery design as provided by Israel.

The true North Korean nuclear weapons program is based on nuclear artillery use and not missiles. The plan is to use a massive artillery barge on South Korea if war breaks out this include the use of small nuclear artillery shells to counter US tanks rockets and artillery.

The Saudi’s also have a stash of W-54′s acquired from the US under Bush2. (Editor’s note: Confirmed) The Israelis have also provided them to India, Brazil, China, Taiwan, Japan, North and South Korea etc. (Editor’s note: All but South Korea confirmed. Canada had been believed to be the source of Brazilian nuclear weapons.) Dimona is a standard 75 megawatt thermal open top reactor as used in France for their plutonium weapons production program, their version of Stanford (Editor’s note:  Probably “Hanford”).

Dimona – Israel

Due to over use as a fast breeder reactor by the Israelis, Dimona suffered a “steam explosion” IE a flash over indecent due to neutron criticality back in the late 1980′s under Bush 1. This shut down its operation for many years until repairs could be made.

It know only operates at very low power levels due to neutron absorption damage to the containment vessel. Now mainly use for isotope production. This forced the Israelis to turn to stolen nuclear stock piles from the US for the continuation of their nuclear program.

The Israelis knowing that the nuclear material that they had acquire only had a limited shelf life left before it was no longer usable as weapons grade then tried to dump it on the surplus market as fast as possible before it was of no use to them. So they dumped it on unsuspecting nations who would only sit on it and not be able to test it. These were the fissile tests in North Korea. (Editor’s note: Confirmed, multiple sources)

When everybody caught on to the scam such as Japan and Korea. (IE the Korean sub sinkings etc) they were angry because they paid big bucks for junk. This started a mini cold war with Israel and her old clients. However with micro nukes even as the plutonium ages it will still fissile producing a smaller size detonation well under 2 kiloton in size.

So they can still be used as small dirty bombs or as very small tactical nukes such as the nuclear artillery strikes on Damascus with rocket assisted W-54′s. (Editor’s note: Confirmed strike, May 4, 2013) On the W-54 pit design it is pill shaped and it is only about 4 inches in diameter and weighs about 24 pounds.

Most of the fuel is consumed in the plasma fire ball when detonated so there is very little plutonium fallout left to escape. If it is salted with other materials the fallout can be even reduced to lower levels such as in an enhanced radiation device or the so called neutron bomb. This is what was used on 9/11.

The primary purpose of the nuclear weapon used on 9/11 was to produce a massive Gamma ray / neutron flux that would vaporize about 150 to 300 feet of 6 inch thick steel I-beams [Correction: box design] that constituted the central core of the WTC buildings. This created a free fall event as seen on TV that day.

The flash would be hidden from sight due to the underground detonation. Most of the light was in the non-visible light spectrum any way. Over pressure would be reduced to 6 psi due to the blast traveling up the central core and neutron radiation vaporizing the TV antenna at the top of the building as see on TV.

The fallout would be mainly vaporized concrete cement and iron oxide. This is why after 911 they told everyone on TV that the beta radiation burns that people were getting were due to the caustic cement dust and not due to the radiation effects from the radioactive cement fallout. (Editor’s note: Fully confirmed)

The iron oxide found all over the place was what was left of the steel I beams. This was the so called Nano Thermite that was found everywhere. Fallout was limited to a 1 mile area around down town NYC. See charts. (Editor’s note: Received)

Radiation decay was reduced to safe low levels after 72 hrs., (Editor’s note: Fully confirmed) outside of ground zero its self. This is why the area was blocked off from the public for 3 days after the event, in order to let the radiation drop to safe levels.

If you read this excerpt closely,  you can clearly see that Russia means business.  It is what they did not say — directly — that makes this data-dump so poignant … and dangerous to the Anglo-American power structure.