This passage in 180 Degrees made by Greenwood about 9-11 has stuck with me.
Here, it is worth pausing and reminding ourselves how difficult unravelling this false flag has been for those seeking the truth. It has been compared to taking five different 10,000-piece jigsaws, mixing the pieces up, throwing them on the floor, putting all the pieces face down and then saying, "solve that." And just for good measure, numerous pieces of disinformation have been added to ensure arguments over whether, in fact, a particular piece is even part of any one of the puzzles or should be discarded. All this, whilst a multitude of complicit (and non-complicit) people stand on the sidelines and ridicule you for trying to make sense of it all.
If you pay even a bit of attention to 9-11 you know that what actually happened doesn’t fit the “evidence” of what they tell us happened.
But here we are in 2024 still trying to piece it all together… five different 10,000-piece jigsaws.
In a geocentric world, what would be the “tools of thought” necessary to understand that my neighbour’s heliocentric ideas were right?
What would “knowing” mean anyway? I could never understand the actual science. It would have to be a probabilistic conclusion. I would need a collection of tools that in their aggregate helped me figure out the “shape of what is likely to be right”.
Is there a Fact Pattern that emerges from a good set of questions and thought experiments that can point me to True North?
I think there is. I think that truth can be arrived at probabilistically.
I think that enough high probability items stitched together create a practical certainty.
This is one of those situations…
I first came across Palmer in this interview about his book that is well worth listening to.
I don’t know whether Palmer is right or not. I can’t.
But I feel and think that he is very probably right, on enough of it…to be right.
What I do know is:
That my Empire lies.
That is seeks to control its 8 billion people through Illusion.
That is has the power and technology to fool me.
That I have the cognitive weaknesses to be fooled.
That Palmer’s work is broad, meticulous and highly referenced.
That the controllers of our Empire, with their One World dreams, had all the incentive in the world to create the atomic threat narrative (see Q32 and One World or None video).
That the odds that I’ve been told the truth about Hiroshima and Nagasaki are low to none.
With thanks to Michael Palmer for doing the work to get us closer to “violent opposition”.
But first let’s start with the eyes…
Unburned Retinas
The eye injuries observed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors present a significant inconsistency with the official narrative of a nuclear detonation. Palmer's analysis highlights this discrepancy, focusing on the absence of retinal lesions in survivors who reported directly viewing the flash. According to conventional understanding, such exposure to a nuclear explosion should have resulted in severe retinal burns and scarring.
Instead, the typical eye injuries documented among victims included corneal erosion, blepharospasm (involuntary eyelid closure), and temporary blindness. These symptoms align more closely with exposure to sulfur mustard rather than nuclear radiation. Sulfur mustard is known to cause painful eye inflammation, often leading to a subjective perception of blindness. This phenomenon was similarly observed in the Bari incident, where mustard gas victims believed themselves permanently blinded until their eyes were forcibly opened.
The potential systemic effects of sulfur mustard on the eyes, when transported via bloodstream, are also considered. While not directly observed with sulfur mustard, studies on similar compounds used in cancer treatment (such as nitrogen mustard and busulfan) have shown effects including cataract formation, uveitis, and retinal edema. Furthermore, in patients with generalized purpura due to bone marrow suppression, retinal bleeding might be expected.
The discrepancy between observed injuries and those expected from a nuclear detonation is particularly stark. Dr. Oughterson and other medical professionals anticipated significant eye injuries, especially retinal burns, due to the reported intensity of the explosion's flash. However, Dr. John Flick, an ophthalmologist who examined survivors, found no cases of retinal flash burns. This absence is also reflected in the broader medical literature on bombing victims.
While some witnesses reported temporary blindness lasting several days, and cases of corneal denudation were observed (attributed to mustard gas exposure), the expected acute retinal burns were conspicuously absent. Some anecdotal reports by physicians suggested retinal burns, but these were not supported by clinical evidence. Dr. Koyama, for instance, initially reported retinal burns but later appeared to have revised his assessment.
The incidence of cataracts among survivors presents another point of interest. An increased rate was observed, even at distances where radiation doses should have been too low to cause such effects. It's worth noting that cataracts can be caused by both radiation and chemical agents like sulfur mustard.
In conclusion, the lack of retinal burns in survivors who reported looking at the flash is fundamentally inconsistent with the nuclear detonation narrative. The observed eye injuries align more closely with chemical exposure than with intense light or radiation. This discrepancy raises significant questions about the nature of the events in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, suggesting that the accepted historical account may require reevaluation.
Hiroshima Revisited
By Michael Palmer
Hiroshima Revisited By Michael Palmer Unbekoming Interactive Book Summary
Question 1: What evidence does the book present to suggest that the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki may not have occurred as officially reported?
The book presents several pieces of evidence that challenge the official narrative of the nuclear bombings, including the lack of characteristic signs of destruction in Hiroshima, the absence of expected amounts of uranium-235 and plutonium in the fallout, inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts, and discrepancies in contemporary documents regarding the availability of nuclear bombs in 1945.
Question 2: How does the book describe the visible signs of destruction in Hiroshima, and how do these differ from what would be expected after a nuclear detonation?
According to the book, the visible signs of destruction in Hiroshima, as reported by Alexander P. de Seversky, were similar to those in other cities destroyed by conventional bombing, with no unique features that would be expected from a nuclear detonation. The city had a "pink carpet" of destruction, with some buildings still standing and no evidence of the extreme heat or "super-hurricane" winds associated with an atomic bomb.
Question 3: What do studies on the radioactive fallout in Hiroshima and Nagasaki reveal about the nature of the bombs used?
Studies on the radioactive fallout in Hiroshima and Nagasaki show very low levels of uranium-235 and plutonium, inconsistent with the official narrative of the bombs used. The isotopic composition of the fallout suggests that it was caused by the dispersal of reactor waste rather than the detonation of a uranium-235 bomb in Hiroshima or a plutonium bomb in Nagasaki.
Question 4: How does the book explain the discrepancy between the expected and observed amounts of uranium-235 in the Hiroshima fallout?
The book suggests that the very low abundance of uranium-235 in the Hiroshima fallout, compared to what would be expected from a highly enriched uranium bomb, can be explained by either a minuscule amount of bomb uranium being diluted by natural background or a much lower degree of uranium-235 enrichment than officially claimed.
Question 5: What inconsistencies does the book highlight in eyewitness accounts of the Hiroshima bombing?
The book points out inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts of the Hiroshima bombing, such as some survivors reporting not hearing any noise from the explosion, while others described various sounds. Additionally, some witnesses reported a blinding flash, while others did not. The book also mentions a survivor who was just 50 meters from the hypocenter, shielded only by a wooden house, yet survived for several weeks, which would be unlikely in a nuclear detonation.
Question 6: According to the book, what alternative scenario is proposed to explain the destruction, radioactive fallout, and medical findings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
The book proposes an alternative scenario involving the use of conventional bombs, incendiary bombs (napalm), and the dispersal of reactor waste to create radioactive fallout. It also suggests that sulfur mustard was used to mimic the symptoms of radiation sickness in the victims.
Question 7: What evidence does the book provide to suggest that the U.S. military was prepared to use sulfur mustard in the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
The book mentions that the U.S. had stockpiled sulfur mustard during World War II and had conducted experiments on its own soldiers. It also notes that the U.S. military would have been aware of the effects of sulfur mustard due to the Bari disaster in 1943, where numerous U.S. servicemen and civilians were killed by the poison when it was released from aerial bombs during a German air attack.
Question 8: How does the book challenge the feasibility of enriching uranium to bomb-grade levels in 1945?
The book cites Leslie Groves, who described the development of uranium enrichment plants without pilot testing and with simultaneous research, development, construction, and operation. It argues that the success of such a venture would be highly unlikely. The book also mentions Klaus Fuchs, a Soviet spy in the Manhattan Project, who reported that uranium enrichment methods were not yet ready in 1945. Additionally, it notes that even after the war, the Soviets needed several years to develop a viable uranium enrichment process, despite allegedly possessing America's atomic secrets through espionage.
Question 9: What discrepancies does the book highlight between official reports and contemporary documents regarding the availability of plutonium bombs in 1945?
The book cites a meeting of the Interim Committee in May 1945, where Arthur Compton stated that it would take 1.5 years from January 1946 to prove the second stage (plutonium production) and three years to get plutonium in volume. This contradicts the official narrative that plutonium bombs were ready for use at the Trinity test in July 1945 and in Nagasaki in August 1945. The book also mentions that physicist Robert Wilson's last-minute experiments before the Trinity test focused on uranium fission, suggesting that the test was expected to use a uranium bomb rather than a plutonium one.
Question 10: How does the book analyze early measurements of residual radioactivity in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and what conclusions are drawn from these findings?
The book examines early measurements of residual radioactivity in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, noting the scarcity of data and the surprisingly low levels of radioactivity detected. It concludes that the low initial levels of radioactivity, particularly in the first week after the bombings, are inconsistent with the occurrence of nuclear detonations. The book also highlights the lack of documentation and the disappearance of evidence, arguing that this would be inexplicable if the bombings had occurred as officially reported.
Hiroshima, ground zero. Non-wooden structures remained standing.
For comparison, this is Dresden after it was firebombed.
Question 11: What issues does the book raise concerning the thermoluminescence studies used to estimate the γ-radiation doses in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
The book critiques two influential thermoluminescence studies, pointing out the absence of essential precautions and controls, such as accounting for sample inactivation by heat from the bomb and the subsequent fires. It also highlights inconsistencies and questionable data manipulations, such as the reliance on calibration factors to produce the desired γ-ray dose estimates, despite the actual thermoluminescence measurements showing little variation with distance from the hypocenter.
Question 12: How does the book critique the evidence of neutron radiation in Hiroshima, particularly the measurements of sulfur activation?
The book analyzes the sulfur activation measurements in Hiroshima, which aimed to detect fast neutrons from the alleged nuclear detonation. It argues that the spatial distribution of 32P formed in sulfur samples is inconsistent with activation by a single nuclear detonation at the claimed altitude. The book also points out discrepancies between the raw data and the conclusions drawn by the researchers, suggesting that the data may have been fabricated.
Question 13: What inconsistencies does the book highlight in studies comparing the activation of different isotopes in Hiroshima?
The book examines studies that compared the activation of different isotopes (e.g., 60Co, 152Eu, 154Eu) in samples from Hiroshima. It finds that the derived neutron fluence estimates and the calculated date of activation vary widely between samples, even when collected from the same location. These inconsistencies suggest that the samples were not activated by the same neutron source at the same time, casting doubt on the official narrative of the nuclear bombing.
Question 14: How does the book describe the physicochemical properties of sulfur mustard and its persistence in the environment?
The book describes sulfur mustard as an oily liquid with a high boiling point and low water miscibility, which allows it to persist in the environment for long periods. It can penetrate porous materials like wood and bricks, and its slow decomposition and evaporation contribute to its lasting presence. The book also notes the foul smell associated with impurities in the technical product, which aligns with witness accounts from Hiroshima.
Question 15: What is the mode of action of sulfur mustard, and how does it react with DNA and other cellular components?
Sulfur mustard reacts with various cellular components, most notably DNA, through the formation of an unstable sulfonium ion intermediate. This intermediate can cause intra- and interstrand cross-links in DNA, leading to double-strand breaks and mutations. Sulfur mustard also depletes glutathione, an important antioxidant, which impairs the cell's ability to neutralize reactive oxygen species and contributes to cytotoxicity.
Figure 5.3 from Book: Three of many burnt-out buildings that according to various studies [82, 83] yielded pristine tiles or bricks suitable for measurement of gamma ray dosage by thermoluminescence. Top: Hiroshima City Hall; center: Hiroshima Prefectural Industrial Promotion Hall (now commonly called the ‘Atomic Bomb Dome’); bottom: Shiroyama elementary school in Nagasaki.
Question 16: How is sulfur mustard distributed and metabolized in the body after exposure?
After exposure, sulfur mustard is absorbed through the skin, inhalation, and ingestion. A significant portion of the absorbed dose is distributed to various organs via the bloodstream, with the highest concentrations found in well-perfused tissues such as the brain, lungs, spleen, and kidneys. Sulfur mustard undergoes metabolic conversions, including hydrolysis, conjugation with glutathione, and oxidation. The oxidation products, particularly the reactive divinyl sulfone, may contribute to its long-term toxicity.
Question 17: What are the clinical and pathological manifestations of sulfur mustard poisoning in the blood circulation, airways, lungs, eyes, skin, digestive tract, bone marrow, and other organs?
Sulfur mustard poisoning affects multiple organ systems. In the blood circulation, it causes dilation, increased permeability, and congestion of blood vessels, leading to edema and shock. The airways and lungs show necrosis, pseudomembrane formation, bronchial obstruction, and secondary infections. Eye injuries include corneal erosion, blepharospasm, and temporary blindness. Skin lesions range from erythema and blistering to deep necrosis. Gastrointestinal symptoms include vomiting and diarrhea. The bone marrow, spleen, and gonads are highly susceptible, with damage leading to bleeding, infections, and infertility.
Question 18: How do the effects of sulfur mustard on the bone marrow, spleen, and gonads compare to those of radiation?
The book notes that the effects of sulfur mustard on the bone marrow, spleen, and gonads are similar to those caused by radiation. Both agents target rapidly dividing cells in these organs, leading to depletion of bone marrow cells, lymphocytes in the spleen, and sperm production in the gonads. The resulting clinical manifestations, such as bleeding due to thrombocytopenia and increased susceptibility to infections due to leukopenia, are indistinguishable between sulfur mustard poisoning and radiation sickness.
Question 19: What are the characteristics and effects of napalm, as described in the book?
Napalm is described as a sticky, flammable substance made from gasoline thickened with various additives, such as naphthenic and palmitic acids. When dispersed by bombs and ignited, napalm adheres to surfaces and burns with intense heat, causing severe damage to flammable and non-flammable targets, including human skin. The book mentions that napalm burns are often deep (3rd and 4th degree) and can lead to loss of consciousness, circulatory shock, airway damage, and eye injuries.
Question 20: How does the book explain the scarcity of medical literature on the effects of napalm on human victims?
The book highlights the surprising scarcity of medical literature on the effects of napalm on human victims, with only a handful of English-language articles available on PubMed. It suggests that this lack of information may be due to the suppression or neglect of research on the topic, given the controversial nature of napalm use in warfare.
Figure 13.1 from Book: Photograph of downtown Hiroshima, taken by Alexander P. de Seversky during his visit in early September 1945. The original figure caption [5] reads as follows: “A cluster of concrete office buildings, standing erect and structurally intact amidst the ashes of the surrounding wooden houses, near ‘ground zero’ (B).”
Question 21: What prominent findings are reported by Soviet military physicians who treated napalm victims during the Korean and Vietnam wars?
Soviet military physicians who treated napalm victims during the Korean and Vietnam wars reported a high immediate mortality rate (over 35%) among soldiers struck by napalm. They also noted the depth of napalm burns (3rd and 4th degree), frequent loss of consciousness and circulatory shock in the acute stage, airway and lung damage leading to hypoxia and asphyxiation, a high incidence of keloid scar formation among survivors, and eye injuries due to facial burns.
Question 22: How does the book describe the use of napalm by the U.S. military during the Korean and Vietnam wars?
The book cites Soviet sources claiming that the U.S. used approximately 200 tons of napalm per day during the Korean War and produced around 700 tons per day during the Vietnam War, with much of it being used against civilians. It also mentions the iconic "Napalm Girl" photograph as one of the few instances when the American and international public was confronted with the horrific effects of napalm on Vietnamese civilians.
Question 23: What challenges does the book highlight in finding images or documentation of Japanese and Vietnamese napalm victims?
The book notes the difficulty in finding images of Japanese and Vietnamese napalm victims, suggesting that such documentation may have been purposefully suppressed or purged from the public record. It mentions that the only readily available images of Japanese napalm victims are those of scorched and shriveled corpses from the Tokyo bombing in March 1945, while images of Vietnamese victims, apart from the iconic "Napalm Girl" photograph, are scarce and difficult to access.
Question 24: How does the book suggest that the U.S. government and military may have been involved in covering up or manipulating evidence related to the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
The book presents several instances that suggest U.S. government and military involvement in covering up or manipulating evidence related to the bombings, such as:
The confiscation and disappearance of Japanese scientist Sakae Shimizu's research records on sulfur activation measurements.
The destruction of all cyclotrons in Japan by the U.S. occupation force, crippling Japanese scientists' ability to study the bombings' physical effects.
The confiscation of all tissue and organ samples collected by Japanese pathologists from bombing victims.
The selective presentation and alteration of data in official reports, such as the apparent cherry-picking of sulfur activation measurements in the DS02 report.
These actions, the book argues, are consistent with an effort to suppress or manipulate evidence that could contradict the official narrative of the atomic bombings.
Question 25: What are the main arguments presented in the book to support the idea that the official narrative of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki may be false?
The book presents several main arguments to support the idea that the official narrative of the atomic bombings may be false:
The inconsistency between the observed destruction in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the expected effects of nuclear detonations.
The discrepancies between the expected and observed amounts and isotopic composition of radioactive fallout.
The inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts and the survival of people who were very close to the alleged detonations.
The evidence suggesting the use of conventional bombs, incendiary bombs (napalm), reactor waste, and chemical weapons (sulfur mustard) to create the observed effects.
The challenges to the feasibility of producing and using nuclear bombs in 1945, based on contemporary documents and the state of technology at the time.
The anomalies and inconsistencies in various physical measurements, such as those related to residual radioactivity, thermoluminescence, and neutron activation.
The scarcity and suppression of medical data on the effects of napalm on human victims.
The indications of U.S. government and military involvement in covering up or manipulating evidence related to the bombings.
Taken together, these arguments aim to cast doubt on the official narrative and suggest the possibility of a coordinated deception surrounding the events of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Question 26: What evidence does Palmer present to support the claim that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were faked?
Palmer presents several pieces of evidence, including the lack of residual radioactivity, inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts of the bombings compared to the official narrative, and the presence of mustard gas and napalm in the aftermath of the bombings. Palmer also points to the apparent collusion of Japanese authorities and the use of censorship and propaganda to maintain the myth of the atomic bombings.
Question 27: How does Palmer explain the discrepancies between the official narrative of the atomic bombings and the eyewitness accounts?
Palmer suggests that the official narrative was fabricated and maintained through censorship and propaganda. Eyewitness accounts that contradicted the official story were suppressed, while those that supported it were promoted. Palmer argues that the true nature of the bombings, involving the use of mustard gas and napalm, was hidden from the public to perpetuate the myth of the atomic bombs.
Question 28: What role does Palmer suggest mustard gas and napalm played in the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Palmer suggests that mustard gas and napalm were the primary agents of destruction in the bombings, rather than atomic weapons. The presence of these substances in the aftermath of the bombings, as reported by eyewitnesses and supported by medical evidence, is seen as proof that the atomic bombs were a hoax. Palmer argues that the effects attributed to radiation were actually caused by exposure to mustard gas and napalm.
Question 29: How does Palmer challenge the conventional understanding of the effects of radiation on the victims of the bombings?
Palmer presents evidence that the symptoms exhibited by the bombing victims, such as burns, lung damage, and other injuries, were inconsistent with the effects of radiation exposure. Palmer suggests that these symptoms were more likely caused by exposure to mustard gas and napalm. Additionally, Palmer points to inconsistencies in the reported radiation doses and the lack of residual radioactivity as further evidence that the conventional understanding of the effects of radiation on the victims is flawed.
Question 30: What evidence does Palmer provide to support the claim that Japan was willing to surrender prior to the atomic bombings?
Palmer cites several instances where Japanese officials expressed their willingness to surrender, provided that certain conditions, such as the preservation of the emperor's position, were met. Palmer also points to the testimony of high-ranking American military leaders, such as General Douglas MacArthur, who believed that Japan was ready to surrender and that the atomic bombings were unnecessary. Palmer argues that the United States deliberately prolonged the war and used the atomic bombings as a means to achieve other goals, rather than to force Japan's surrender.
Question 31: How does Palmer argue that censorship and propaganda were used to maintain the myth of the atomic bombings?
Palmer suggests that the U.S. government heavily censored information about the bombings, suppressing eyewitness accounts and other evidence that contradicted the official narrative. The media was also used to spread propaganda and promote the idea of the atomic bombs as a revolutionary new weapon. Palmer points to the example of John Hersey's book "Hiroshima," which was heavily promoted despite its inaccuracies, as evidence of how propaganda was used to shape public perception of the bombings.
Question 32: What does Palmer suggest was the true purpose behind the staged atomic bombings?
Palmer proposes that the staged atomic bombings were meant to serve as a demonstration of American power and to intimidate other nations, particularly the Soviet Union. However, Palmer also suggests that the bombings were part of a larger plan to promote the idea of world government and to create a climate of fear that would make people more receptive to the idea of surrendering national sovereignty. Palmer argues that the financial and industrial interests behind the bombings saw world government as a means to extend their power and influence on a global scale.
This is a very important point.
No sooner had the war ended and they were running these short films all over US theatres.
Question 33: How does Palmer challenge the idea that the atomic bombings were necessary to end the war with Japan?
Palmer presents evidence that Japan was already willing to surrender prior to the atomic bombings, and that the U.S. government deliberately prolonged the war in order to use the bombs. Palmer cites the testimony of American military leaders who believed that the bombings were unnecessary, and argues that the decision to use the bombs was based on political and economic considerations rather than military necessity. Palmer also suggests that the Soviet Union's entry into the war against Japan, rather than the atomic bombings, was the decisive factor in Japan's surrender.
Question 34: What evidence does Palmer present to suggest that the Japanese authorities colluded in staging the atomic bombings?
Palmer points to the Japanese government's quick acceptance of the atomic bomb narrative and its failure to investigate or report on the presence of mustard gas and other inconsistencies in the aftermath of the bombings. Palmer also suggests that the Japanese authorities worked to suppress eyewitness accounts and other evidence that contradicted the official story. Additionally, Palmer cites the failure of Japanese authorities to provide adequate warning or protection to civilians in the targeted cities, despite their knowledge of impending attacks, as evidence of their collusion.
Question 35: How does Palmer explain the apparent lack of residual radioactivity in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombings?
Palmer suggests that the lack of residual radioactivity is evidence that atomic bombs were not actually used in the attacks. Palmer points to studies conducted by Japanese scientists in the immediate aftermath of the bombings, which found no evidence of radioactive fallout or induced radioactivity. Palmer argues that the small amounts of radioactive material that were eventually detected were likely planted as part of the deception, and that the inconsistencies in the reported levels of radioactivity further undermine the credibility of the atomic bomb narrative.
Question 36: What role does Palmer suggest the "Trinity" test played in the overall deception surrounding the atomic bombings?
Palmer suggests that the "Trinity" test, which was supposedly the first successful detonation of an atomic bomb, was actually a staged event designed to lend credibility to the idea that the U.S. possessed functional atomic weapons. Palmer points to inconsistencies in the official accounts of the test, such as the implausibly low altitude of the detonation and the lack of damage to nearby structures, as evidence that the test was a hoax. Palmer argues that the "Trinity" test was a crucial part of the larger deception surrounding the atomic bombings, as it helped to create the illusion of a revolutionary new weapon and to intimidate other nations.
Question 37: How does Palmer challenge the idea that the atomic bombings were carried out to intimidate the Soviet Union?
Palmer suggests that the idea of using the atomic bombings to intimidate the Soviet Union was a ploy to gain support for the bombings among American leaders, rather than a genuine motive. Palmer points to evidence that the Soviet Union was not actually intimidated by the bombings, and that it proceeded with its own plans for territorial expansion in the aftermath of the war. Palmer also argues that the U.S. government's attempts to use the bombings as leverage against the Soviet Union at the Potsdam Conference were largely unsuccessful, and that the Soviet leadership likely saw through the deception surrounding the bombings.
Question 38: What does Palmer suggest was the significance of the "black rain" that fell after the bombings?
Palmer suggests that the "black rain" was not a natural consequence of the atomic bombings, but rather a deliberately dispersed substance designed to create the illusion of radioactive fallout. Palmer points to eyewitness accounts describing the rain as oily or sticky, which is inconsistent with the properties of natural rain. Palmer also notes that the reported levels of radioactivity in the black rain were inconsistent and suggests that radioactive material may have been planted in the rainwater to support the atomic bomb narrative.
Question 39: How does Palmer explain the inconsistencies in the reported radiation doses and their effects on survivors?
Palmer argues that the inconsistencies in the reported radiation doses and their effects on survivors are evidence that the atomic bombings were staged. Palmer points to the wide variation in symptoms and mortality rates among survivors who were supposedly exposed to similar levels of radiation, and suggests that these inconsistencies cannot be explained by the effects of radiation alone. Palmer also notes that the symptoms exhibited by many survivors, such as burns and lung damage, are more consistent with exposure to mustard gas and napalm than with radiation sickness.
Question 40: What evidence does Palmer present to suggest that the United States deliberately prolonged the war with Japan?
Palmer cites several instances where American leaders, including President Truman and Secretary of War Henry Stimson, rejected or ignored peace overtures from Japanese officials. Palmer suggests that the U.S. government was aware of Japan's willingness to surrender, but chose to prolong the war in order to use the atomic bombs and to secure other strategic objectives. Palmer also points to the testimony of American military leaders, such as General Douglas MacArthur, who believed that the war could have been ended earlier and that the atomic bombings were unnecessary.
Question 41: How does Palmer challenge the idea that the atomic bombings saved American lives by preventing an invasion of Japan?
Palmer argues that the idea of the atomic bombings saving American lives is a myth that was created to justify the use of the bombs. Palmer points to evidence that Japan was already on the verge of surrender prior to the bombings, and that an invasion of the Japanese mainland was unlikely to be necessary. Palmer also cites the opinions of American military leaders who believed that the bombings were not needed to end the war, and suggests that the decision to use the bombs was based on political and strategic considerations rather than concern for American lives.
Question 42: What does Palmer suggest was the role of financial and industrial interests in the decision to stage the atomic bombings?
Palmer suggests that financial and industrial interests, particularly those associated with the Manhattan Project and the development of atomic weapons, played a significant role in the decision to stage the atomic bombings. Palmer points to the involvement of figures such as Secretary of War Henry Stimson and Wall Street banker Alexander Sachs in the promotion of the atomic bomb project, and suggests that these interests saw the bombings as a way to secure their own power and influence in the postwar world. Palmer also argues that the promotion of world government in the aftermath of the bombings was driven in part by these same financial and industrial interests, who saw it as a means to extend their control on a global scale.
Question 43: How does Palmer explain the apparent lack of knowledge about the true nature of the bombings among high-ranking American officials?
Palmer suggests that some high-ranking American officials, including President Truman, may have been deliberately kept in the dark about the true nature of the bombings. Palmer points to the influence of Secretary of War Henry Stimson and other figures associated with the Manhattan Project, who may have manipulated Truman and others into believing in the necessity and efficacy of the atomic bombs. Palmer also suggests that the compartmentalized nature of the Manhattan Project and the strict secrecy surrounding it may have prevented even high-level officials from learning the full truth about the bombs.
Question 44: What evidence does Palmer present to suggest that the promotion of world government was a motive behind the staged atomic bombings?
Palmer cites the writings and statements of several influential figures, including Albert Einstein and J. Robert Oppenheimer, who promoted the idea of world government as a means to prevent future wars and to control the use of atomic weapons. Palmer suggests that these individuals were part of a larger network of financial and industrial interests that saw world government as a way to extend their own power and influence. Palmer also points to the Baruch Plan, which proposed international control of atomic energy, as evidence of the link between the atomic bombings and the push for world government.
One World or None: A Report to the Public on the Full Meaning of the Atomic Bomb (1946).
In 1946, just months after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the scientists who had developed nuclear technology came together to express their concerns and thoughts about the nuclear age they had unleashed. In a small, urgent book of essays, legends including Niels Bohr, Albert Einstein, and Robert Oppenheimer try to help readers understand the magnitude of their scientific breakthrough, fret openly about the implications for world policy, and caution, in the words of Nobel Prize–winning chemist Harold C. Urey, that "There Is No Defense."
The original edition of One World or None sold 100,000 copies and was a New York Times bestseller. Today, with the nuclear issue front and center once more, the book is as timely as ever.
Question 45: How does Palmer challenge the notion that the atomic bombings were in the national interest of the United States and Great Britain?
Palmer argues that the atomic bombings were not in the national interest of the United States or Great Britain, but rather served the interests of a small group of financial and industrial elites. Palmer points to the devastating consequences of the bombings for the people of Japan, as well as the long-term effects on American society, such as the rise of the military-industrial complex and the erosion of civil liberties. Palmer also suggests that the British Empire's decline and the Soviet Union's territorial gains in the aftermath of the war were not in the interest of either the United States or Great Britain, and that the atomic bombings did little to prevent these outcomes.
Question 46: What does Palmer suggest was the purpose of the various "special effects" created after the bombings, such as shadows on walls and pavements?
Palmer suggests that the "special effects" created after the bombings, such as shadows on walls and pavements, were part of the larger deception surrounding the atomic bombings. Palmer argues that these effects were deliberately staged to create the impression of a powerful and devastating new weapon, and to lend credibility to the idea that the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had been destroyed by atomic bombs. Palmer points to inconsistencies in the physical evidence, such as the impossibility of preserving shadows on wooden surfaces, as well as the timing of the appearance of these effects, as evidence that they were fabricated.
Question 47: How does Palmer explain the reports of "atom-bomb gas" in the aftermath of the bombings?
Palmer suggests that the reports of "atom-bomb gas" in the aftermath of the bombings were part of a cover story designed to explain away the presence of mustard gas and other chemical agents. Palmer argues that the Japanese authorities, in collusion with the United States, promoted the idea that radiation from the atomic bombs had somehow created a poisonous gas in order to hide the true nature of the attacks. Palmer points to the inconsistencies in the descriptions of the gas, as well as the lack of scientific evidence for its existence, as proof that it was a fabrication.
Question 48: What does Palmer suggest was the significance of the timing of the creation of the "special effects" in Hiroshima?
Palmer suggests that the timing of the creation of the "special effects" in Hiroshima, which occurred several weeks after the bombing, was significant because it allowed time for the true nature of the attack to be covered up. Palmer argues that the delayed appearance of the effects, such as shadows on walls and pavements, was necessary to avoid detection by early investigators and journalists who visited the city in the immediate aftermath of the bombing. Palmer also suggests that the timing was chosen to coincide with the arrival of the official investigation team, who could then be presented with a carefully staged scene that supported the atomic bomb narrative.
Question 49: How does Palmer challenge the idea that the atomic bombings were a legitimate use of military force?
Palmer argues that the atomic bombings were not a legitimate use of military force, but rather a deliberate act of terrorism against civilian populations. Palmer points to the targeting of densely populated cities, the use of indiscriminate weapons such as napalm and mustard gas, and the decision to detonate the bombs at a time when they would cause maximum casualties among civilians. Palmer also suggests that the bombings violated international law and the principles of just warfare, and that they set a dangerous precedent for the use of weapons of mass destruction against civilian targets.
Question 50: What does Palmer ultimately conclude about the true nature and purpose of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Palmer ultimately concludes that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a carefully staged deception designed to create the illusion of a revolutionary new weapon and to advance the interests of a small group of financial and industrial elites. Palmer argues that the bombings were not a legitimate use of military force, but rather a deliberate act of terrorism against civilian populations. Palmer suggests that the true purpose of the bombings was to create a climate of fear and uncertainty that would make people more receptive to the idea of surrendering national sovereignty and accepting a system of world government. Palmer also concludes that the official narrative of the bombings, which has been maintained through censorship and propaganda, is a carefully constructed lie that has served to obscure the true nature of the attacks and to prevent a full accounting of their consequences.
Afterword
All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
This inquiry was a labor of love—exacting, but also rewarding. Some questions could be answered simply by taking the eyewitnesses at their word, rather than distorting their meaning to fit the dishonest ‘atomic’ narrative. Other insights occurred only after months of mulling over seemingly intractable enigmas. The hypothesis that took shape with time could ever better fit new evidence that it encountered; while some aspects of it may yet have to change, it has stabilized enough to face the test of public scrutiny. It is of course unlikely that fair, dispassionate scrutiny will be the predominant attitude of critics; I will be content with moving the needle to Schopenhauer’s second stage—from ridicule to violent opposition.
Aside from the scientific understanding, I also gained a deep admiration for the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki—moved by stories such as this one about two teenage boys: having set out in search of their relatives on the day of the Hiroshima bombing, they happened upon a shelter full of badly wounded people. Not finding their relatives among them, they nevertheless stayed on for an entire day to care for those sick and give them water. We learn of other adolescent boys and girls who, having lost both parents in the bombings, worked themselves to exhaustion in order to provide for their younger siblings, permitting them to go to school by abandoning their own. We read how Drs. Akizuki and Nagai, themselves affected by ‘radiation’ sickness, toiled unremittingly to relieve the suffering of others, regardless of the meager means at their disposal. We see the kindness of Dr. Hachiya and of the people near and dear to him:
I had been strongly attached to the patient they were cremating tonight. . . . This woman had been loved and respected by her neighbors, and to the soldiers in the Second Corps she was the baba-san [grandmother] of Hiroshima. Her meagre pension as well as her savings had been spent to help one soldier or another. Her round, shapeless figure had cast a friendly shadow in the neighborhood and on the wards of our hospital. Many were the times when she and another baba-san had brought cheer to the sick and lonely…
Shortly before she died I recalled stopping at her pallet to comfort her. She could not see me because her eyelids were swollen shut, but she recognized my voice.
“Baba-san”, I said, “your friends are around you. Hiroshima has been a good place to live in because you have been here to think of others before yourself. Death is approaching, but like an old soldier you can die with dignity in the knowledge that your wounds were received in line of duty.”
While this book focused on only those parts of the reports by Hachiya and by others which are germane to its scientific case, the works of these men are worth reading in full for being inspired by their genuine humanity. They personify these words by Mahatma Gandhi:
Your presence here is greatly valued. If you've found the content interesting and useful, please consider supporting it through a paid subscription. While all our resources are freely available, your subscription plays a vital role. It helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. Please make full use of our Free Libraries.
Discover Our Free Libraries:
Unbekoming Interview Library: Dive into a world of thought-provoking interviews across a spectrum of fascinating topics.
Share Your Story or Nominate Someone to Interview:
I'm always in search of compelling narratives and insightful individuals to feature. Whether it's personal experiences with the vaccination or other medical interventions, or if you know someone whose story and expertise could enlighten our community, I'd love to hear from you. If you have a story to share, insights to offer, or wish to suggest an interviewee who can add significant value to our discussions, please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com. Your contributions and suggestions are invaluable in enriching our understanding and conversation.
Discover 'Baseline Human Health': Watch and share this insightful 21-minute video to understand and appreciate the foundations of health without vaccination.
Your support, whether through subscriptions, sharing stories, or spreading knowledge, is what keeps this community thriving. Thank you for being an integral part of this journey.
Thank you for this painstaking review of this important topic.
I have reached the point where I know probalistically (thank you for that, too) that official history is false history. Virtually all of it. So, no atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Sure, I can believe that. I can believe that "they" lied to us about that, too.
Also appreciate your list of official stories and calling them illusions...and especially the reference to the official story of Sep 11.
My man! Listen man, we’re on the same page- just different paths on the wavelength. The nuclear hoax was one I discussed in the following article: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/lies-not-discussed-within-the-truth
When people realize it’s easily for 8,000 people to control 1 billion, everything begins to make sense.
Thank you for this painstaking review of this important topic.
I have reached the point where I know probalistically (thank you for that, too) that official history is false history. Virtually all of it. So, no atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Sure, I can believe that. I can believe that "they" lied to us about that, too.
Also appreciate your list of official stories and calling them illusions...and especially the reference to the official story of Sep 11.