Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War. He is a disabled veteran and has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades.

Gordon Duff is an accredited diplomat and is generally accepted as one of the top global intelligence specialists. He manages the world's largest private intelligence organization and regularly consults with governments challenged by security issues.

Gordon Duff has traveled extensively, is published around the world and is a regular guest on TV and radio in more than "several" countries. He is also a trained chef, wine enthusiast, avid motorcyclist and gunsmith specializing in historical weapons and restoration. Business experience and interests are in energy and defense technology.

He is co-host of the popular VT Radio show Jim and Gordie Show.

Visit Gordon Duff's YouTube Channel


View Latest Posts >>>

VT Nuclear Education: North Korea Fission-Fusion (Hydrogen bomb) Device Claim Doubted

by Jeff Smith, Gordon Duff and Jim W. Dean, VT Editors  …  with Ian Greenhalgh
 –
One of two things happened, either North Korea exploded an atom bomb, fission only, and lied about it or they exploded a small and highly advanced tactical fission-fusion (Teller type) device, which means something entirely different, something far more threatening than is being discussed may have transpired.

The North Korean “hydrogen bomb” explosion produced only a 5.1 level quake; that’s about 10 to 15 Kt. in size.  The artificial earthquake spike proves that it was a nuclear detonation. What the North Koreans are claiming is that it was an advanced fission fusion design and not a classic 70 year old WW2 style solid core implosion device such as Fat Man or Little Boy.

The media doesn’t know the difference between the two designs. They only think in 70 year old WW2 concepts. The North Koreans are most likely working on 155 mm nuclear tactical artillery shells.  The North Korean army just loves heavy artillery. If it is an advanced 3rd or 4th generation design then the cat is out of the bag.

I suspect China might have helped after it got nuked. Its called blow back.  See the VT investigative piece on the  August 2015 Tianjin explosion in China.  It is our belief that if North Korea has built a miniaturized fission fusion weapon, as they claim, and if that weapon’s output is only 15kt, as shown in appendix D, then it is an advanced 3rd or 4th generation tactical weapon.

If this is the case, and the hypothesis is a strong one, then China would most probably be the source of North Korea’s huge technical breakthrough, an act on China’s part meant as symbolic retaliation for the act of nuclear terrorism against it in August.

____________

…by Ian Greenhalgh, Britain  –  with Jeff Smith, USA

 

Fat Man - "We've come a long way baby!"

Fat Man – “We’ve come a long way baby!”

[ Editor’s Note:   Sometimes we like to move fast on a breaking story to beat mainstream news with all their money and manpower. And at other times our sixth sense kicks in, telling us to lay back a bit, study the early reporting for clues as to what is NOT being reported, and activate one of our specialty major investigation teams.

We unfortunately had more activity on our airline crash team in the last year or so, where those teams are weighted with senior pilots and crash investigators, mostly through long time contacts. When we get into mini-nuke investigations the list grows much shorter as there are fewer of those folks around.

As you will quickly learn below, if you do not know what to look for and have some depth in the scary science of what make various things go boom, and the trail left behind to tell you what it was, then having the evidence in front of you is of no consequence.

We have added more technical material than usual for a general audience as this piece had to also be written for weapons and explosive experts around the world, as they will catch onto this game very fast. Fortunately explosives are an intensively studied field with massive amounts of testing and data collected. The people who look at this stuff in their profession have to be walking encyclopedias of the past research so they can spot a tiny clue in a photo of massive destruction.

We have stepped up to the plate to do this because we have the ability and for the reason I gave Dr. Jim Walsh of MIT’s Securities Studies Program.  On a recent Press TV The Debate show on the anniversary of the Nagasaki bombing, I had planned to plug mini-nukes once again as the elephant in the living room of terror threats that the world now faces.

It is also one where there is a total security, media and academic institutional stand down on warning the public about any of this as more than a few countries have and are using these. That group does not include Veterans Today and it never will.

We feel we have a duty to push exposing this threat until the public wakes up that if they don’t get off their butts and start screaming you are going to see more of these happening. We have warned that doing nothing would only embolden those doing this, and we were right.

So I dedicate this article today to “expert” Mr. Walsh who was upset by my mention of the mini-nuke threat to the point of attacking it saying,

“I think this idea that there has been testing of mini-nukes around the world is crazy conspiracy talk. No serious person believes this… there is a test ban treaty that has monitoring testing posts all around the world designed to detect nuclear explosions associated with testing, they have never turned up any of this. I know of no serious person who believes that.”

My context of course, which I am sure Walsh understood, was not in formal testing, but “live” testing…as in on people and targets to demonstrate what they can do and to send a message to someone(s)…and yes…to terrorize people. So Mr. Walsh, excuse me if we don’t consider you and your buddies “serious people” as with you protecting us we are in sad shape. And speaking of that, you and your crowd need to shape up or ship out, sir… Jim W. Dean ]


[ Update: We have a followup article showing a frame by frame analysis of the explosion video. ]

_________________________

Two weeks ago a devastating explosion took place in the port city of Tianjin, China. Official reports claimed a chemical storage facility had caught fire and exploded. Mobile phone footage taken by residents showed an enormous blast and fireball.

Within days, aerial photos revealed the stunning extent of the damage. A steaming black crater marks ground zero, while the apocalyptic surrounding landscape is charred and flattened. Rows of burnt-out cars and twisted shipping containers stretch into the distance on all sides.

The extent of the devastation is such that it must have been a very big bang indeed.

The extent of the devastation is such that it must have been a very big bang indeed.

The total burned area spans 20,000 square meters and continues to be dangerous—more explosions were reported by Chinese authorities on the 15th of August. Residents within a 3-mile radius have been relocated; at least 85 victims of the accident have been reported dead.

We were immediately suspicious, such huge explosions have to be viewed with suspicion these days when tactical nuclear weapons can and are used with alarming frequency – 9-11, The Khobar Towers, the Haiti Earthquake and most recently, air dropped on Yemen.

Massive devastation over a wide area.

Massive devastation over a wide area.

The mobile phone as radiation detector

The key clue that allowed us to identify the use of a nuke in Yemen was the presence of scintillating pixels – white dots that flashed on and off briefly in the mobile phone videos of the explosion. The CCD imaging sensor within the camera phone is being struck by radiation thus causing a pixel to overload and appear white; in this way a mobile phone can serve double duty as a crude but effective radiation detector.

When the Tianjin blast occurred I immediately looked at the mobile phone footage of the blast and tried to find scintillating pixels; I couldn’t find any, but the huge white hot fireball and sheer size of the blast effect apparent in the footage (shaken buildings, breaking windows etc.) certainly didn’t feel like a conventional explosion to my relatively untrained eyes.

It was actually VT Contributor and expert on all things nuclear, Jeff Smith who taught us about scintillating pixels and the use of a mobile phone camera to detect radiation; therefore I consulted him about the lack of scintillation in the Tianjin footage:

Scintillation is based on the distance from the blast. The farther you get away from the blast the less neutron exposure you get. CCD Cameras will detect scintillation but only at high levels. They are not sensitive to far field radiation patterns. All CCD cameras were too far away to be sensitive enough to show scintillation properly.

So you have to look at the white out in the centre of the photo. This is where the brightness is so great that it overloads the ccd pickup chip causing a clipping effect. The fact that the fireball was whited out or clipped indicates that the colour temperature was over 4,000 degrees C. Only achievable in a nuclear blast. The cameras auto gain circuit clips the video level for being too bright so you get a white out on the screen.

The fireball with white hot centre.

The fireball with white hot centre.

No scintillation but a clear piece of evidence indicating a nuclear explosion in the form of the huge white fireball – once again, mobile phone footage proves useful in deciphering the truth.

The parking lots full of toasted cars

As reports and images became available, we studied them carefully for evidence of the use of a nuclear weapon and sadly, it was not long before we found it – the first big clue coming with the pictures of the thousands of toasted cars that looked eerily like those seen on 9-11.

Thousands of burnt out Volkswagen Beetles close to ground zero in Tianjin.

Thousands of burnt out Volkswagen Beetles close to ground zero in Tianjin.

While a layman like myself can recognize the overall similarity, it takes an expert to fully analyse the evidence contained in the pictures; luckily, at VT we have such an expert in the erstwhile Jeff Smith who provided the following analysis:

Normal people are not trained in what to look at so they simply ignore the obvious. However, once you see enough explosions like this you begin to spot the artifacts in the photos real fast. Unfortunately all of these people that know this stuff usually work for the government. Just like I did.

The big clue is in the ash produced and the exploding radiators on the cars. They show the radiation and the blast patterns the best. All melted rubber, glass, and aluminium but no melted steel? This tells you it is from radiation and not from a gasoline fire. Temps between 1500 degrees C for melting aluminium and less than 3,000 degrees C for melting steel. Everything organic ashes below 450 degrees C.

This had a plasma fireball that was over 4,000C! Only a nuke can do that. The clue is in the white ash leftover from the thermal blast.

White ash caused by the thermal blast covered everything near ground zero.

White ash caused by the thermal blast covered everything near ground zero.

A. The fuel tanks did not explode.

B. The rubber tires were ashed not burned see the white powder residue around the cars.

C. The radiators are all gone; indicating Freon explosions.

D. All the glass is ashed or melted; also the the glass was blown out not in.

E. All new white cars show extreme effects from very high temperature heating. The paint is badly damaged due to a very high oxidation rate effect.

F. Silicone rubber tires ash at 500 degrees centigrade. Glass ashes at 1500 degrees centigrade. Gasoline at 250 degrees centigrade. Tires melted but no gas tank explosions; just like on 911.

G. Yellow Volkswagen Beetle cars untouched due to location indicating radiation shielding from a nearby building. Just like on 911….

H. Finally and most important is all of the nano particle sized ash on the ground everywhere. Purple haze in photo is an indication of toxic levels of the gases fluorine, chlorine and sodium.

Conclusion; The damage to the cars was produced by neutron radiation damage and not by conventional explosives or a fuel-air explosion. The distance from ground zero is too great for a standard blast to melt the glass and tires. Also the cars fuel tanks were shielded from the heat of the ignition source.

7

Purple haze indicating the presence of toxic levels of the gases fluorine, chlorine and sodium.

So there you have it, the ‘smoking gun’ evidence of a nuke is to be found among the smoking wreckage of those incinerated cars. However, the pictures of burnt out cars contain more evidence to be analysed before we move on to the other evidence.

The melted radiators and the role of Freon

As you can clearly see in the picture below, the radiator of this vehicle has been completely destroyed, incinerated into ash. Only the steel top plate remains, all of the aluminium and copper of the radiator core have been turned into a pile of ash. Once again, our resident expert Jeff Smith was able to provide insight and analysis of what we are seeing:

Incinerated remains of a car close to ground zero.

Incinerated remains of a car close to ground zero.

All of the radiators exploded from Freon decomposition into methane, deuterium fluoride, and phosgene gas; thus causing engine fires – note the melted hoods and also how overpressure from an air burst explosion has compressed the hoods of the cars.

The copper-clad/aluminium automotive radiator is transparent to nuclear radiation. It acts as a black body hollow-ram neutron reflector and functions just exactly like its bigger brother the two staged Teller-Ulman H-bomb. What this means is if you put DT gas or 2HF (Freon) in a vacuum chamber such as a car radiator, you reduce its density thus it take less energy to either split it or fuse it when exposed to neutrons, Gamma-rays or even soft x-rays from a nearby nuclear explosion – if the blast is large enough or close enough.

This forms the basis of a micro nuclear explosive device, with ignition temperatures high enough to melt just about anything that comes in contact with it. The key is in the lower density of the gas making compression of it a lot easier. This explains all of the melted car air conditioning radiators and follow on fires. Also the lack of fallout.

Here you can actually see the radiators at the front of the cars are on fire but the rear of the cars are untouched.

Here you can actually see the radiators at the front of the cars are on fire but the rear of the cars are untouched.

See Appendix A.

The Crater at Ground Zero

Once again, Jeff Smith was able to provide detailed analyses of the available imagery of the blast crater at ground zero and the damage to the surrounding area. Jeff along with Jim stone and others stated that:

This was NOT an accident, the fracture pattern around the crater proves a to be a shallow sub ground burst. If it was a sub ground burst, then a small nuclear weapon is the biggest possibility because once a nuke has to push dirt, the blinding flash will not be seen. A slightly subsurface detonation would explain why camera sensors did not get strange artifacts. And if it was not a nuke, it was something else incredibly huge, but not a fuel air bomb because fuel air bombs will not leave craters. They also leave an oily carbide residue on everything.

blast14

Even my layman’s eye can immediately tell that the explosion that caused this level of devastation was far beyond a mere explosion of stored chemicals. Also, there were no storage buildings at ground zero, just some stacks of shipping containers. Also, it is obvious to me that immense heat was present – look at the gray-white ash everywhere. Jeff was able to explain what I was seeing in these disturbing images:

A little bit more of a detailed explanation: If the blast happened at ground level, almost all of the energy would go upwards and the blast would not have made a large deep crater, especially one large enough and deep enough to make that lake. If you look to the right hand side of the lake, you can see fracture patterns in the earth, which were caused by the earth being compressed sideways and not downwards. This would only be done with a sub surface blast. After the blast, the earth bounced back towards the centre of the lake, which opened up the cracks.

chinablast

Look closely at the ground around the lake. Those who claimed it was not a nuke cited the fact that if it was, everything around the crater would be vaporized and wiped clean. Now that we have the real crater pic from the big blast, YEP, it matches that perfectly. Take a look at the containers laying in the lower left corner of this picture – they have no paint or colour, which means they had the surfaces incinerated by intense heat only a nuke or other super weapon would reach. If this was a carbide blast, they would be black or have their original colours to some degree, complete colour change to only gray proves this explosion was FREAKING HOT.

blast2

That type and size of blast crater will only happen if a massive bomb goes off a few feet underground, such as a tactical nuke in a drain pipe which leaves scant few alternative options. No chemical blast did that, PERIOD. The building that is still standing in the upper right hand side of the frame is a typical example of what is left after a nuclear test, concrete buildings seldom get levelled, but they do get gutted by nuclear blasts. Just look through pictures of the soviet nuclear tests and you will see this. Bottom line? The aftermath is completely consistent with a nuclear blast.

china-explosion-tianjin

Even to the untrained eye, the imagery of the aftermath of this awful event cannot be mistaken as anything other than horriffic; when you also have expert testimony that explains the true nature of what you are seeing the imagery becomes even more shocking and disturbing. Destruction on this scale will become commonplace if the perpetrators are allowed to get away with this as it will signal to all parties possessed of tactical nuclear weapons that it is possible to put them to use without disclosure of that fact by the media. Perhaps more concerning is China’s silence on the nuclear aspect of this great crime – they are still sticking to their story of fire setting off explosions of stored chemicals. As we have shown, this story is about as credible as the one about hijacking airliners with boxcutters; given state control of the media in China, it might be a while before people learn the truth.

Identifying the type of weapon and Seismology of the event

Now we have established that a nuclear explosion took place, let us examine more closely the nature of that explosion. One important question is the delivery method – was it a strike by a cruise missile or was it a bomb hidden inside a shipping container? Or is there another answer to this question? The crater strongly indicates the explosion was sub-surface which appears to rule out the bomb having been smuggled into Tianjin in a shipping container. It does not rule out a cruise missile strike however – the ground in this area is very soft, alluvial deposits of soft silts and clays deposited over time by the nearby river. A cruise missile impacting this soft ground at over 500mph would surely penetrate to some depth; if a delayed action fuse was fitted to the warhead, this would create an shallow underground explosion. Jeff Smith provides further analysis:

Note the crater is about 400 feet wide as measured by comparison to the standard shipping container sizes of 40 feet. The crater is a complex crater with a cardioid shape indicating a very low altitude or surface contact blast. Side ways compression of the soil indicates some ground penetration. Penetration depth of ground is based on soil type and burst height. Horizontal crater size is roughly equal to ( for every 100 feet, 1 Kiloton in size) see charts. This would put the blast size depending on air burst altitude to be between 3 and 5 kilotons of explosive power.

Satellite image of Tianjin with overlay of blast radius.

Satellite image of Tianjin with overlay of blast radius.

See Appendix B.

If it was a low altitude air burst, ground coupling will be less showing a smaller Richter scale reading than usual. The only question is the fallout issue. Was there any and of what type. Since it rained after the blast most of the fallout went out to sea proven by the massive fish kill in the bay. The safety zone was set at 3 kilometres. This is a correct value for small tactical nuke fallout range. 1 KM per KT. The only other question was it a uranium weapon a plutonium based weapon or other i.e. a fusion weapon? Uranium cannot be traced very well but a PU based weapon can be traced down to the reactor that made it and the chemical separation process that was used. Firemen were shown carrying radiation and poisonous gas detectors.

 Given the 3km evacuation zone we can assume an explosive yield of around 3 kilotons.  A typical cruise missile nuclear warhead such as the Israeli ‘Popeye’ carries 6 kilograms of plutonium; using the rule of thumb of 1 kiloton yield per kilogram of plutonium, the size of the explosion correlates with the yield of a typical cruise missile warhead.

Jeff also noticed that a secondary blast took place; this is another indicator of the nuclear nature of this event, as Jeff explains:

Well it looks like there were two major blasts not just one. There are two sections of the video where the blast whites out the entire camera. This is the original neutron burst going off; everything else is a secondary or the atmosphere heating up and burning.

Note: The reaction caused, a sustained glowing in the sky which is a well known indicator of a nuclear explosion. Non-nuclear weapons do not provide a sustained “Sun-like” illumination because they do not have enough energy to ignite the oxygen and nitrogen in the atmosphere.

Another aspect that requires study is the seismology readings of the event.. Once again, Jeff provides some insight:

The first blast registered 2.3 on the Richter scale and the second 2.9. Eyewitnesses described what felt like a quake. USGS geophysicist John Bellini says seismographs detect man-made explosions in quarries all the time, but usually surface explosions are not detected very well because most of their energy dissipates upward into the air. The fact is that the Tianjin explosions registered a seismographic event that had as much energy as a small earthquake. One can reasonably conclude that unlike a surface explosion of chemicals, this kinetic energy released underground was caused by a powerful penetration of the surface.

sizemomoter

blast17

In this article we have tried to provide a thorough but clear and concise analysis of the available evidence and show that it is clear that this was no simple fire in a chemical storage depot that resulted in an explosion but rather it was  the detonation of a nuclear weapon of unknown type by an unknown party. We will examine the who and why in a follow-up article.

This is a very significant event that will undoubtedly prove to be of great importance in subsequent world events. In many ways, this is China’s 9-11.

Let us all hope that unlike 9-11, the Nuking of Tianjin does not become the cassus belli for a whole series of unjustified, brutal and bloody conflicts.

One thing is already very clearly illustrated by this tragic event – the gloves are most definitely off when it comes to the use of tactical nuclear weapons; we are living in an new nuclear age where a great number of countries possess the means to create and deploy tactical nukes and most worrying of all, these low yield weapons can be used and have already been used without fear of mutually assured destruction; the doctrine that prevented the Cold War from going nuclear. This makes the world a much more dangerous place and undoubtedly means we will see many more nuclear explosions in future.

There is an old Chinese curse – “may you live in interesting times”; these are certainly ‘interesting’ times for anyone who is paying attention to events in China.

See Appendix C for further reading and reference materials.


Appendix A:

An introduction to the physical principles of thermonuclear explosive devices would be incomplete did it not give at least a cursory overview of the different approaches to igniting thermonuclear

micro-explosions.

A thermonuclear micro-explosion is an explosive release of thermonuclear energy many orders of magnitude smaller than from a thermonuclear weapon. To achieve this goal, the fission trigger must be replaced by some other means of producing the required ignition temperature, but in a much smaller volume and without the large energy release.

The possibility of thermonuclear micro-explosions is itself a consequence of two facts: first, the fact that the minimum volume to make a thermonuclear explosion is given by the range of the charged

fusion products \ 0 , and, second, scaling. At solid densities and thermonuclear temperatures the range is of the order of a few centimeters and, is inversely proportional to the density p of the thermonuclear explosive. We can therefore write for this range.

X0 = a/p, a — const.

For the DT reaction we easily find that the minimum ignition energy is about 108 Joules. To obtain a useful gain the output energy should be at least ~ 100 times larger, that is, 1010 Joules = 10 n erg, which corresponds to the explosive power of approximately 2 tons of TNT.

The ignition energy can be substantially reduced by increasing the density of the thermonuclear explosive. However, since for p > p, the compression to higher densities also requires energy, the input energy is in reality larger than the value given by Eq. (132).

The time r to deposit the energy in the target is given by r ^ r/v, where v is the thermal expansion velocity of the thermonuclear plasma of radius r, which is a function only of the temperature.


Appendix B:

app_f_img_5 app_f_img_6 app_f_img_7 app_f_img_8 app_f_img_9 app_f_img_11

 

blast2 blast3

blast3 fb2

ikt crater size
neutron induced activity doses
nyc2

table000

tianjin-explosion-seen-from-space

 


 

Appendix C:

Appendix D

Using the Richter and Mercali Scales

The Richter Scale measures the energy of an earthquake by determining the size of the greatest vibrations recorded on a seismographs. On this scale, one step up in magnitude (from 5.0 to 6.0, for example) increases the energy more than 30 times.
Richter Magnitude: How many kilograms of TNT would have this much energy?

0                     0.61.0                   20

2.0                   600                    *  Smallest quake people can normally feel

3.0                   20 000               *  Most people near epicenter feel the quake

*  Nearly 100, 000 occur every year of size 2.5 – 3.0

4.0                   60 000               *  A small fission atomic bomb

*  Quakes above 4.5 can cause local damage

5.0                   20 000 000        *  A standard fission bomb, similar to the first bomb tested in New Mexico, U.S.

6.0                   60 000 000        *  A hydrogen bomb; can cause great damage locally

*  About 100 shallow quakes of size 6.0 every year

7.0                   20 billion          *  Major earthquake;  about 14 every year

*  Enough energy to heat New York City for 1 year

*  Large enough to be detected all over globe

8.0                   60 billion          *  Largest known:  8.9 in Japan and in Chile/Ecuador

*  San Francisco destroyed by 8.25 in 1906

9.0                   20 trillion        *  Roughly the worldÕs energy usage in a year

Mercali Scale

The Mercali Scale measures an earthquake according to the observable results or effects the damage caused, the sensations described by people, etc. (Mercali numbers do not correspond directly to Richter numbers; for example, V on the Mercali Scale is not equivalent to 5 on the Richter Scale).

Mercali Magnitude Observable Results and Effects

I        Most people do not notice,  animals may be uneasy,  can be detected by a seismograph

II       Hanging objects sway back and forth

III       Many people feel the movement,  parked cars may rock

IV        Doors, windows, and shelves may rattle,  people indoors can feel movement

V         Light furniture moves,  pictures fall off walls,  objects fall from shelves

VI        Nearly everyone feels movement, light furniture falls over,  windows may crack

VII       Some people fall over,  walls may crack

VIII      Heavy furniture falls over,  some walls crumble

IX        Many people panic,  some buildings collapse,  dams crack

X         Railroad lines are bent,  most buildings are damaged,  roads crack

XI        Bridges collapse,  buried pipes break,  most buildings collapse

XII       All manmade structures are destroyed


9-11 Syllabus and VT Nuclear Education Series – 2016

  1. VT Nuclear Education:  North Korea Fission-Fusion (Hydrogen bomb) Device Claim Doubted

______________

9-11 Syllabus and VT Nuclear Education Series – 2015

  1. The Secret of America’s Doomsday Waste
  2. VT Nuclear Education: The History of Nuclear Weapons Design 1945 to 2015
  3. VT Nuclear Education: The Uranium Hydride Bomb
  4. VT Nuclear Education: Subcritical and microfission explosives
  5. VT Nuclear Education – Freon and the Hohlraum
  6. The Secret Nazi role in Building the Atomic Bomb
  7. How the Nazi A-Bomb Worked
  8. VT Nuclear Education: Critical Mass
  9. VT Nuclear Education: Laser and Nuke Weapon Calculator
  10. VT Nuclear Education: Germany
  11. 9/11 Science: Craters and Explosive Damage
  12. Neutron Bombs and Other Toys
  13. NEO: Building Nuclear Case Against Saudis
  14. VT Nuclear Education: The Secrets of EMP Weapons
  15. VT Nuclear Education: Explosive Properties of Reactor Grade Plutonium
  16. Nukes on Yemen, Confirming Proofs: Yield Estimation from Illumination Time
  17. Nukes on Yemen, Confirming Proofs: Introduction to Nuclear Operations
  18. Nukes on Yemen-Confirming Proofs: Calculating Nuclear Blast Yield from the Flash
  19. How Israel Was Busted Nuking Yemen
  20. Saudis Have Israel Nuke Yemen for Them
  21. VT Warning of EMP Plot Confirmed by Guardian
  22. VT Nuke Education: Thorium Warnings
  23. VT Nuclear Education: CIA/Iran Trial and more disclosure
  24. NEO – CIA Torture Report Ties Cheney/Bout to 9/11 Nukes
  25. The DOE Defends Nuclear 9/11

______________

9-11 Syllabus and VT Nuclear Education Series – 2014

  1. Too Classified to Publish: Bush Nuclear Piracy Exposed
  2. Nuke Cancer from 9/11 Revealed
  3. 9/11 NUKE DEMOLITION PROOF: Firefighters Radiation Cancers “Off the Scale”
  4. Doc Submitted By Russian Intel
  5. Constructing the Nuclear Child
  6. VT Nuclear Education Series
  7. Nuclear Education Series: Dimona Classified
  8. VT Nuclear Terrorism Education Series
  9. VT Nuclear Education: Undeniable Proof of 9/11 as a Nuclear Event
  10. VT Nuclear Education: As the Hammer Drops
  11. VT Nuclear Education: Mossad/N. Korea Links, MOX
  12. Nuclear Roundtable: America’s Nuclear Arsenal
  13. Officials Cite “Thermo-Nuke” in 9/11 Demo
  14. VT Nuclear Education: Fission Based Thermobaric Weapons

VT Supporting Material on 9/11, Nuclear Physics and Disclosure Issues

  1. VT Nuclear Education: Anti – gravity
  2. NEO – Mini Nukes and M16: The Economy of War (must read)
  3. VT Nuclear Education: Nukes in Iraq, Confirmation UPDATED
  4. VT Flexing Its Nuclear Muscle (must read)
  5. Nuclear 9/11 Revealed: Theories and Disinformation, the Misguided and the Inhuman (must read)
  6. VT Nuclear Education: Tactical Nuclear Warfare (must read)
  7. VT Nuclear Education: Early Reactors
  8. IAEA investigators: Audit reveals US, not Iran the problem (must read)
  9. VT Nuclear Education: History of Mini-Nukes (must read)
  10. VT Nuclear Education: Answering the Hype (must read)
  11. VT Nuclear Education: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Atom Smasher (must read)
  12. VT Nuclear Education: LENR Neutron Distribution
  13. Einsteins Theory on Magnetic Buoyancy
  14. VT Science: Fuel Cell Technology
  15. VT Science: The Farnsworth Fusor
  16. VT Science: HAARP
  17. Fusion: Junk Science For Rubes
  18. NEO – Nuclear Threats Enter the Mainstream (must read)
  19. VT Science: NASA’s Low Energy Fusion VooDoo/DooDoo
  20. The Connection Between Aurora and Black Triangles (Redux)
  21. Jeff Smith on Upcoming Able Danger Leak
  22. VT Nuclear Education: Japan
  23. VT Nuclear Education: Detonations and Deceit
  24. 9/11 Hokum: Deconstructing Christopher Bollyn and Steve Jones
  25. Why are the Commanding Generals being Sacked?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Related Posts:



The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT, VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians, or the Veterans Today Network and its assigns. LEGAL NOTICE - COMMENT POLICY

Posted by on January 6, 2016, With 6425 Reads Filed under WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

FaceBook Comments

12 Responses to "VT Nuclear Education: North Korea Fission-Fusion (Hydrogen bomb) Device Claim Doubted"

  1. Preston James, Ph.D  January 7, 2016 at 2:11 pm

    Fantastic article that provides an vast amount of information not available anywhere else in such quantity and depth. Sadly, it was Cheney and Rumsfeld that sold much of the equipment to North Korea needed to process uranium and make these nuclear devices. They also sold attack helicopters and other arms to North Korea, all part of the long planned BCC efforts to make sure there would be a madman dictator willing and able to eventually start a nuclear WW3. In the meantime his presence was to keep tensions high so that South Korea and North Korea could never unify and pose a big economic threat to China or Japan. The whole Korean split was set up by the pentagon before WW2 even ended in order to stoke the cold war and keep the coffers and profits of the Military Industrial Complex full of taxpayer dollars.

  2. CRM114  January 7, 2016 at 2:08 pm

    Outstanding analysis. I did see one report on MSM that indicated the NK device was thought by the Pentagon to be a low yield boosted fission device using tritium (characteristically downplayed in the reporting, as if it was almost a failed test and little more than a PR stunt). Well done on the above.

  3. Raptor  January 7, 2016 at 11:33 am

    Again as we revisit this event, it would be nice to know if there were indeed underground storage tanks, of any type, at this facility. Further, the area is located very near to the sea which lends itself to quick craters.

    Is it possible someone had something they weren’t supposed to have and another took full advantage? Why would China sit back and do nothing if they were indeed nuked? What are they really afraid of? I hate having to weed thru all of the needless propaganda in search of the basics. One doesn’t need a nuke of any size in order to do some serious, serious damage. Stock market manipulation can also send a serious message, as can grid failure, or money clearing houses……just sayin.

    Raptor

  4. Dan Sheppard  January 6, 2016 at 11:40 pm

    I have researched Tianjin and have almost finished a complete 3D model of the entire region up 3 Kilometers away from ground zero, and totally agree that this was a semi-subsurface nuclear detonation.

    Also I had spend a lot of time, matching images of the crater with satellite overlays and found that ground zero was just 10 meters from a truck weigh bridge station with only 1 shipping container next to it. The main warehouse that stored the chemicals, was nearly 100 meters away, and the nearby yard with 4 tall stacks of shipping containers was also at least 50 meters away.

    There was actually nothing of importance stored at the center of the explosion.

    One satellite image caught my eye in particular, dated way back to 2011 which shows an odd black puddle of mud in a large circle surrounding what seems to be a blocked drain pipe at the exact area of ground zero (literally), then had been cemented over in the next year satellite image. The weapon must of had been planted at that point years in advance, to be remotely triggered when needed so.

    In 2011/2012, there was the incredible controversy in the media of the Chinese hacker attacks on US factories and facilities.

  5. Jeff Smith  January 6, 2016 at 10:48 pm

    Both Fatman and Little Boy are clasifed as solid core compression or implosion devices. Fat Man used PU and Little Boy used Uranium. They are 1st gen weapons that require physical compression of there core asemblys in order to form a critical mass. 3rd and 4th gen weapons are hybird systems that use both fission and fussion in order to work; usually by compressing lithum and trintium in a sperical blanket of PU or enriched uranium. These designs can be made verry small and only use a few pounds of HE to make them work. Fatman used 4500 lbs of HE in order to compress the core by 50% at less than 30% compression efficency. This is why no one uses that design any more. Little Boy need a gun barrel 10 feet long and 1000 lbs of tamper material to hold the critical mass together long enough to compleat full asembly. This is why it is no longer used. Both designs are to big to fit into any thing but a B-52. Try putting that into a 155mm artelery shell. People have never been updated in modern weapons designs so the have the wrong or you could say outdated concepts as to how the really work. What we did 70 years ago is now 4th grade level science. Einstine is no longer needed a 4th grader with an app can do it now.

  6. Altimometer  January 6, 2016 at 10:41 pm

    The structural uplifting is quite visible from the pics taken of the China crater. Everything is there Jeff said to look for. I recall your dressing down of the Mr. Walsh and justifiably so, he seems unable to be honest with you. These gangsters have them and sadly the sickos use them. The Ukraine received some of this treatment too, did it not? Challenge the msm maybe they’ll put out a quick blurb they are vulnerable to this too, and it’s not from fundamental guys from the ME.

  7. coffeelover  January 6, 2016 at 9:09 pm

    Gordon, do you find it credible to suppose the North Koreans actually have not developed H-bombs but merely allowed their underground facilities to be used for the tests/blasts by another country (that has secretly supplied them some nuclear materials)? NK has a lot to gain from such hidden deals and nothing to lose; ditto for the “hidden hand.” I strongly feel that NK’s continuous and belligerent nuclear tests can’t be an action all by itself and have to be staged and supported by some other power. The “timing” of the test is telling also.
    VT notes in this article that despite all the evidence of an obvious nuclear attack in Tianjin, the Chinese are still sticking to their official story of “fire setting off explosions of stored chemicals.” The U.S. covered up 9/11 because it was an insider job, but why does China want to put the Tianjin nuclear explosion under the rug? Is that because they want to walk away from the “lure” into war?

  8. jalenfromrosemont  January 6, 2016 at 7:55 pm

    and Chinese market does a inst-crash.. Halted. Retaliation? Yuan devalue?

  9. Zaguero  January 6, 2016 at 6:13 pm

    Interesting stuff, though the more technical parts are way over my head. Which is, I suppose, what I get for being a Liberal Arts major 🙂

  10. Cold Wind  January 6, 2016 at 5:51 pm

    I suppose the implications of North Korean tactical nukes are shattering for American Forces stationed in South Korea. Can North Korea be ‘sanctioned’ into giving up such a tactical advantage? I don’t think so. The US now has a great incentive to strike preemptively before the North Koreans can bring these weapons to bear on the battlefield. What goes around, comes around.

  11. Worker Bee  January 6, 2016 at 5:04 pm

    First generation atomic artillery (M65 Atomic Cannon aka Atomic Annie) – note the paint on the vehicles burning from the gamma ray radiation, then being crumpled later by the blast wave. Grable test of Upshot-Knothole.

    Put “The Atomic Cannon Devastation! Full HD!!!” or “5N0Balj2tLw” in YouTube search.

  12. Worker Bee  January 6, 2016 at 4:53 pm

    “…and not a classic 70 year old WW2 style solid core implosion device such as Fat Man or Little Boy.”

    Little Boy was an enriched uranium “gun” type bomb, not a plutonium implosion device.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


TOP 50 READ ARTICLES THIS MONTH