Thursday, October 26, 2006

More Research on What Went Off at Camp Falcon

What follow are items that have been entered as comments and emailed to me, personally, in relation to this event:

At 3:23 PM, Eric Stewart said...

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:18:41 -0000, a member at a mailing list I am subscribed to said:

> I saw the Base Falcon Video at your blog first Eric, and when I went
> back the next night, it wasn't there. So I went looking around the net
> til I found it again.
> Google aquired Youtube, both upload sites are censoring. It's totally
> hit and miss as to how long something stays up.
> The video from the Marines is dated as having been uploaded in May of
> this year. I think they were viewing a seperate instance.

There could be several explanations for all of this. One is that the date was added or changed by GooTube to discredit, as was apparently done with the Pentagon images we got years ago (the date of September 12 was clearly visible on those images).

Another possible explanation is that there were two separate ammunitions dumps that caugh fire and were completely destroyed and these happened several months apart.

Still another is that it took FIVE MONTHS for news to reach us of the destruction of the Falcon base and in this case, as in the second, we see the efficiency and freedom of American news media.

Did I miss any possibilities?

Thanks for pointing this out. This information is key, somehow, I am sure. This post is getting attached to the video at my blog (as an added comment) which, at my end anyway, is still functioning.

Your name will be kept a secret.

[...]

Blogger note: I have personally uploaded lots of videos to that site and none accidentally came up with the wrong date. Can you say GooTube?

[...]

At 4:22 PM, Eric Stewart said...

Another Disastrous Coverup

[...]

At 3:12 AM, Eric Stewart said...

Apparently there have been some efforts to discredit the existence of small scale tactical nukes. They aren't new folks:

"The M-388 Davy Crockett was a tactical nuclear recoilless rifle projectile that was deployed by the United States during the Cold War. It was named after American soldier, Congressman and folk hero Davy Crockett (1786-1836)."

There is more here.

[...]

At 4:24 AM, Eric Stewart said...

Someone wrote to me:

It was suggested in a post that the explosion in question could not have been a tactical nuke because there was no electro-magnetic pulse (EMP) to 'knock-out' the cameras filming this event. Well it should be remembered that the Enola Gay, the B-29, that dropped the bomb on Nagasaki wasn't knocked out of the air by EMP! You can verify this by doing a search on "nuclear emp" in Wikipedia. For small nuclear detonations, such as tactical nukes, the resultant EMP in magnitude enough to do this would have a very short range, 1/4 mile or less. The explosion we witnessed at Camp Falcon is entirely consistent with that of a tactical nuclear device with a 10 to 20 kiloton capacity.

The DoD isn't saying much about the incident. They're zipped tight about the incident. When all of this is considered, it does not bode well. As I said before, I hope this was not a tactical nuke, but I have my nagging doubts almost to certainty that it was.

Thank-you Eric for the post. The implications are of a magnitude that boggles the mind. If this was a tactical nuke, what was it doing in Bagdhad? Was it designed for a 'false flag' event to initiate hostilities with Iran? I hope there are enough Commanders in the field in Iraq that possess the sense to recognize the lunacy of this and the courage to blow the whistle. I'm not sure we're getting enough information out of this area. I wish we could get more.

[...]

At 8:37 PM, Eric Stewart said...

All manner of attempts to discredit this bit of news have arised and why not? This has the potential to be far more damaging to the Bush administration than anything that has occured on his watch yet - yes anything. We are talking about storing nuclear devices in a foreign country, in a war zone. For what?

There has been a steady campaign, as well, to paint this explosion as some other kind of very large bomb. Here I provide links to video evidence showing what happens when the largest non-nuclear bomb ever created goes off, the MOAB. You will notice that the MOAB, unlike the bomb that went off in Iraq, does not bathe the entire landscape in white light, which is a form of electromagnetic radiation (thermal radiation, or heat, is not the same color). As well, it does not mushroom, this the biggest non-nuclear device ever devised. The last link, below, shows the first ever H-bomb detonation, in which we see the brilliant flash first (clearly visible even in broad daylight), as in the Iraq videos.

The Iraqi video is useful in that it shows a much further angle, showing just how much of the city is bathed in light and the Marines' video is useful in that we see concern about fallout in regards to wind directions and that the sirens did not go off until the mushroom went off.

The Mother of All Bombs

The Iraqi Video of a Mushroom Cloud

The U.S. Marines' View

First Ever H-bomb detonation

Also see, from Global Resarch, this piece by Michel Chossudovsky: Iraqi Resistance Strikes Camp Falcon in Major Military Assault

5 Comments:

At October 27, 2006 3:23 AM, Blogger Shutter said...

Thanks for your detailed comments. After lengthy consideration for your efforts I have ennobled you - I usually require a substantial summfor this service but am happy to waive it in your case.

I have checked the JUS link at Google video which is down but the Euronews is not - but they don't claim it was a tactical nuke.

Curiously I see we both have posted about Mr Leiberman's valuable contribution to world peace. All they need now, is for Eitan and his Grey Panthers join the cabinet and they have what could be considered a Royal Flush.

Lord Patel's office is available by e-mail from the site, you are encouraged to contact him.

 
At October 28, 2006 4:22 AM, Blogger Eric Stewart said...

I have emailed an "expert" and asked him, specifically, to take apart my research here. If he does so, without resorting to, "You wouldn't understand," I'll issue a retraction.

Someone who really understands this stuff will be able to explain it in layman's terms. This is among my criteria.

 
At November 03, 2006 1:33 AM, Blogger Eric Stewart said...

When I posted this (a theory on depleted uranium rounds accounting for the bright flashes) it was because I was assured that video of what DU explosions look like was forthcoming. I had been provided with a Google video link already but it didn't work. I asked Mr. Roland to provide another source, if he could. He directed me to Jeff Rense's website and when I went there, I found no such video. So I wrote Allen Roland again, and this is the email I sent:

From: Eric Stewart [mailto:ericstewart@imap.cc]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 7:42 AM
To: Allen L Roland
Subject: RE: PUBLIC UNAWARE OF DU THREAT OF CAMP FALCON EXPLOSIONS

You wrote: "Another clip on the same website is the most graphic image of a
fairly small - perhaps 1000 lb - penetrator or thermobaric warhead that I
have yet seen. It illustrates exactly the features listed above."

The link is here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4258374615945369026

These are the links available on this matter at Jeff Rense's website:

Huge DU Threat From Camp Falcon Explosions
http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2006/10/30.html

Falcon Ammo Dump Destruction Photos
http://rense.com/general73/falcphotos.htm

Video Of US Baghdad Falcon Ammo Base Blowout
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1410660598904719984&pr=goog-sl

What I am looking for is video that you said shows rounds going off that are
exactly the kind of explosions that went off at Camp Falcon. Did you not
cite a video as visual evidence, citing it as a reference for what DU rounds
look like?

This is crucial. This is the one piece that would lay other visual evidence
and extrapolations to rest, video showing what a DU explosion SHOULD look
like. I have had the videos of Camp Falcon for weeks and your items were
the first to offer a plausible explanation that did not involve fission or
fusion but this was only because you provided a video link to a reference
for what such should look like that it had a lot of weight. This is the
link that Google said wouldn't be availbe to people in my area, whatever
that means. This is the video evidence I need to tell my readers that we
weren't dealing with micronukes.

I really don't want to give you a hard time but I thought it necessary to go
into more detail as it seems my last email wasn't understood as pertains to
its intended meaning.

=================================

Allen Roland responded as such: "I was referring to the video you saw on Rense.com."

=================================

The problem is, there is no video at Rense.com. There are three links and one is to photos and another is to Alan's blog, where the only thing detailing what DU rounds going off SHOULD look like is a link that does not work (Roland has not denied that the link does not work) and the other link is to the Marines video of mushroom clouds going off, which we all already have, of course. So, the single item that could have set our nuclear fears to rest is nonexistent, seemingly. Since I feel I am getting the roundabout on this issue, and since the type of material I host here at Big Medicine has inspired Jeff Rense to STOP referencing my blog (read my blog and decide for yourself) in recent weeks, and since Jeff Rense is all over this alternative, unsubstantiated version of what happened at Camp Falcon, it is with a suspicious soul that I stand by my assertion that what went off at Camp Falcon were, indeed, micronukes.

I was even given the email address of an atomic "expert," whom I wrote. I explained to him (this person has been bouncing around, apparently, debunking the nuclear theory) that an awful lot of people have been coming to my blog to investigate this issue and that it would be in everyone's interest if he would take apart my reasoning process and point out its flaws, if such existed. He never answered.

One expert won't talk to me and the other simply sends me through a maze after mythical golden egg.

I smell a coverup amongst internet journalistic gatekeepers.

 
At November 05, 2006 4:53 PM, Blogger Eric Stewart said...

Thousands upon thousands of people have visited this blog's items on the Camp Falcon Mushroom. So far, every argument that I have heard asserting that the explosion was non-nuclear in nature has been answered by video evidence at this blog as well. I have emailed an expert with my position, asking him to take apart my deductions in the interest of the truth and in the interest that I not misinform people. This was a person that had reportedly been debunking this information. I even explained to him that there were an awful lot of people visiting this blog and he would do the public a great service by simply sending me something scientific to post.

Always beware that a scientist that truly understands his or her work will likely be able to explain it in layman's terms. Albert Einstein, after all, explained relativity in terms that a teenager could understand.

I posted an item from Allen L. Roland, whose work Jeff Rense has jumped all over, though it is decidly less scientific in its deductions, his Ph. D. notwithstanding. His assertion that we were dealing with depleted uranium rounds was based on the existence of a video showing what such SHOULD look like and this video, as you probably have already read above, is simply not referencable except that it was once viewed by Allen and we all need to just take his word for it. Any internet journalist and any scientist should know that this is not how we arrive at solid conclusions.

It has been weeks not and not one scientist has stepped up to truly debunk this. Were it possible, I am not sure it would happen anyway. Easily the most scientifically educated SOUNDING opinions on this have argued in favor a micronuke and those comments are interspersed throughout this blog. I think that most scientists are simply afraid of what they see. I think that most people are also afraid, being willing to embrace an explanation that is simply more comfortable.

I feel as if I have been tricked into temporarily supporting Roland's work. His work was sent to me by someone who has similarly fallen under suspicion in my eyes. This person knows that I have a way of publicizing things widely and left it in my hands. I posted it at my blog and sent it to Jeff Rense. I too, it seems, wanted to believe in something a little less dangerous. Rense, like everyone, jumped all over it because the alternative is truly scary. I managed to help a false theory, I fear, explode onto the scene and I take my share of the responsibility. To readers and people everywhere, I apologize, from the depths of my heart.

In Europe, as is evident in watching my tracker, this issue has exploded all over independent media and there seems to be little doubt that the United States could allow for something like this to occur. As much as I have tried to rid myself of the poison of patriotism, it seems that the Europeans have managed to highlight that it still exists in my psyche. It's something for me to work on.

I am still waiting for a scientist that knows his stuff, one with integrity and who doesn't drop from the debate upon a demand for layman's terms (I know enough about physics to know that this stuff is not un-translatable from jargon), and debunk this: that nuclear devices, probably fusion oriented ones, were stored at Camp Falcon. Such a person must explain the generation of white light as well as the mushroom effect and subsequent shock wave felt miles away. I have already found out that a small nuke doesn't generate an effective EMP at much of a distance, less than a mile at any rate.

Well? I'm STILL waiting!

 
At November 15, 2006 3:18 PM, Blogger Masher1 said...

First the light. The very bright color of the fire tells the temp. of the fuel causing it. The color temps that i saw on the live news report on CNN that night at roughly 4 am revealed that the fire was hotter than 3000 degrees. Only a few sorces for this sort of fire temp Magneisum flares is one and Uranium 238 is the other likely and more plasuble. this fire is the worst radioactive contamination since Chernobyl.
The photos of the site from 12th show most of the white air conditioned storage spaces for the DU tank and A-10 magazines totaly melted. The only way to render this damage is an DU fire in these containments. The DU rounds are not stored with charges. so the damage to these containments was from U-238 fires. The Radioactive mess burned into the air TONS of radioactive Gasses released. Everyone in the area is affected. the blasts were US attempts to control fire spread. I think the big blast was a tank deployed MOAB to snuff fire and prevent further spread of convntional fires to more destrutive Ammo stores. The amount of folks killed by the radiation will never be known for sure but i bet this 300 name list is accurate. The level of radiation released in this event are GARGANUAN.

This one is BAD folks. Tell eveyone these things PLEASE!.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home





eXTReMe Tracker