Anonymous ID: 830d69 May 19, 2018, 12:49 a.m. No.1466583   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6631

Dear anons, digging I came across something that could be of some interest knowing how it acts and reasons the cabal.The first atomic explosion in the history of the world took place at Port Chicago near San Francisco on July 17, 1944. The armed forces of the U.S. were highly segregated in 1944. The only positions open for blacks were in menial jobs. In Port Chicago, they loaded ammunition onto ships 7-days a week, in three round-the-clock 8-hour shifts. All the overseers were Simon Legree type officers, while the backbreaking work was left to the black sailors. The atomic explosion was visible over 200 miles away but the official line was that ammunition exploded. The commanding officer of the Alamogordo air base had been provided weeks before with a news release in which each word had been numbered for security. Groves now ordered the release to be distributed at once. A copy of it was rushed to the AP office in Albuquerque. The wire service story that appeared in a modest half-column on the front page of the Albuquerque Tribune that afternoon carried the lead: An ammunition magazine, containing high-explosives and pyrotechnics, exploded early today in a remote area of the Alamogordo air base reservation, producing a brilliant flash and blast which were reported to have been observed as far away as Gallup, 235 miles northwest. (Lamont, Day of Trinity, p. 250).The devastation to the town of Port Chicago was complete. Many were blinded by the brilliant flash of light that accompanied the explosion: the devastation was so complete that 320 sailors were killed instantly. The U.S. Army/Navy Safety Board Report, Technical Paper #6 reports the yield of the Port Chicago explosion as 2.13 kilotons, which is in excess of the conventional explosives inventoried aboard the E.A. Bryan. Technical Report No. 6 on the Port Chicago Explosion was suddenly reclassified to top secret after years of being declassified. Some Los Alamos scientists have privately stated that the explosion at Port Chicago was caused by an atomic weapon. (part1)

Anonymous ID: 830d69 May 19, 2018, 12:58 a.m. No.1466631   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1466583

 

(part2) The bomb would not have to be dropped from 30,000 feet, a technology which was not available in the summer of 1944. (The Enola Gay, by Thomas and Witts documents the timetable of the development of high altitude bombing techniques). As far back as 1943, the High Military Policy Committee, the board of directors of the Manhattan Project, had chosen the Japanese fleet concentrations in the harbor at Truk in Micronesia, as the first target for the atomic bomb. Declassified documents from the Manhattan District History, Project Y, from the U.S. Department of Commerce, have been uncovered. The National Technical Information Service, LAMS-2532, Vol. I, December 1961, page 8:13, refers to the "…results of certain underwater tests (performed in 1944)…which had been directed toward achieving the goal of using a nuclear weapon against the Japanese fleet concentration at Truk, in Micronesia." Port Chicago would have been a perfect "blast gauge" for a port-buster type atomic bomb. The height of the fireball, the Wilson condensation ring, and the damage to 14 counties of California, all point to something more insidious than incompetence causing 1.5 kilotons of ammunition to go off all at once. The possibility that the explosion was nuclear but accidentally detonated while being transshipped through Port Chicago on one of the cargo vessels has also been put forward. What classified memos said By David Caul and Susan Todd (Part Two of a Four Part Series) Copyright, Napa Sentinel July 15, 1994 Through the Freedom of Information process, dozens of suspicious letters surrounding the Port Chicago explosion have surfaced. There is yet another letter in the paper trail leading back to a suspected nuclear explosion at Port Chicago. This letter was first made public in the Napa Sentinel magazine in February 1994. James Conant, who was a member of the board of directors of the Manhattan Project referred to a full-scale test of the weapon in a letter to General Groves. In the letter he indicated that the secret test occurred shortly before August 1944. The Port Chicago explosion took place on July 17, 1944. The explosion Conant refers to was a year before the Trinity test, which has officially been documented as the first atomic test. The interesting part of Conant's report is that the results of the first atomic test shortly before August 1944 exactly match the damage report Captain Parsons wrote on Port Chicago. The letter states that dwelling houses were damaged in the test. The letter is dated August 17, 1944, one month after the Port Chicago explosion. It is one of the most heavily sanitized, declassified documents on the subject. It is entitled "Report on Visit to Los Alamos." In the name of national security, 50 years later, the censor left only a few sentences intact: "It is agreed that the Mark II should be put on the shelf for the present. If all other implosion methods fail, it could be taken off the shelf and developed for combat use in three to four months time." Conant’s letter continues: "It was agreed that for dwelling houses the area of Class B damage was about as follows for 1000 tons of TNT. The Navy has a film record of the disaster at its Concord Naval Weapons Station. After being challenged, the Navy claimed this was a Hollywood simulation of a miniature explosion. The film shows a typical nuclear explosion, which would have been hard to simulate. According the Navy, the film was created to support their argument to the US Congress sometime in the 1960s that the remains of the town of Port Chicago be purchased by the Navy and incorporated into the Concord Naval Weapons Station as a buffer zone in the event of another large explosion. Significantly, the Navy did not claim the film was a re-creation until after it was suggested that the film could be the record of a nuclear detonation.However, Dan Tikalsky, public affairs chief at Concord, told Peter Vogel, writing for The Black Scholar magazine, that the film was a nitrate-base film, which would require the film to have been produced prior to 1950 when nitrate-base film was replaced with non-explosive cellulose-base film.

http://www.petervogel.us/