On 6 August 1945, during World War II, an American B-29 bomber dropped the world’s first atomic bomb over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. The explosion immediately killed an estimated 80,000 people; tens of thousands more eventually died of radiation exposure.
They repeated the same atomic bombing over Nagasaki a few days later.
Or did they?
Michael Palmer, who spoke to me in the following conversation, held a faculty position in the chemistry department at the University Of Waterloo before being fired after his refusal to receive the jab.
He published a book – which is freely available for download – in which he challenges the atomic bomb claim, using archival medical and scientific data and showing that the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a result of mustard gas and napalm, not unlike the bombing of other cities (like Tokyo).
Consider that, as Swedish engineer Anders Björkman pointed out, when Hiroshima was attacked, the US air command had 66 bombers ‘lined up for a mission in nearby Imabari, Japan’, but Imabari had already been destroyed in two earlier raids.
These were the planes that firebombed Hiroshima, he believes.
For a detailed collection of critiques and analyses, I recommend going through this “guided tour” which includes patents, photos, reports, testimonies and more.
For example, one individual noted that locating photos captured by Japanese witnesses is very hard to come by, but that he discovered the following photos from a Japanese book published during 1949.
He added the following caption.
However several photographs appear online claiming to show ‘the mushroom cloud’. I’ve looked at Hiroshima in detail here (not Nagasaki) and tried to find details – including by use of google.jp, and online translators, though these don’t usually handle proper names.
There are only three principal photographs, neither showing any general scenery. They could be genuine – but showing the effects of firebombing; they could show firebombing in some other location – I haven’t attempted to collate the points from which they were supposedly photographed with the actual view which would have been seen; they could be faked; or they could as claimed show the after effect of an atomic bomb exploded in the air. I leave it to you to judge.
The first appearances of these photographs all post-date 1945 by a number of years – at least as far as I could discover from Internet. Moreover, one has to wonder why these people only took one picture of what is presented as a horrific and unusual event. (And there are no doubt copyright issues – there seem to be different sets of photographs in circulation).
The Daily Telegraph published the following photo of the bombing, during January 2013. It also resembles a firebombing.
In Hiroshima I was prepared for radically different sights. But, to my surprise, Hiroshima looked exactly like all the other burned-out cities in Japan.
US Major, Alexander P de Seversky, circa 1945
There was a familiar pink blot, about two miles in diameter. It was dotted with charred trees and telephone poles.
Only one of the cities twenty bridges was down. Hiroshima’s clusters of modern buildings in the downtown section stood upright.
It was obvious that the blast could not have been so powerful as we had been led to believe. It was extensive blast rather than intensive.
What about the famous Bikini Atoll nuclear tests between 1946 and 1958?
An interesting study was published during 2014, showing that they were faked. It highlights inconsistencies in the reported dates of the tests, lack of continuity in photos, and questionable physics, such as the lack of a tsunami or heavy wind. By scrutinising the images of the blasts, ships, and water spouts, the author suggests that they look fake and do not match other known nuclear detonations. The images of sailors watching without protection and inconsistent cloud cover further suggest manipulation. The study also examines the current state of Bikini Atoll, noting the lush plant life, well-maintained roads, diving tours, and abundant sea life, all of which seem to contradict the reported radioactivity of the area. Plus, the reported temperatures created by the blasts should have melted the sand and rocks.
He published a related study, during 2016.
And here’s a study published by Jeremy James, refuting the existence of explosive nuclear devices.
Meanwhile, Marvin Minsky was a computer scientist and co-founder of MIT’s artificial intelligence laboratory. He received many accolades including the Turing Award in 1969, and noted his suspicion surrounding the official story.
The following is a comment found under the video.
Subscribe to my War Report, sent to your inbox every few days.
