Unraveling Atomic Deception: Incendiary Evidence for Irradiated TNT

An Investigative Look into Alternate Theories on the Atomic Bombings of Japan

by Skip Pulley

For those who have re-examined the ridiculous tin-foil and cardboard lunar-lander and are now slowly realizing that humanity has been conned for 50+ years, should understand that the "space race" deception was built on a prior deception, one that is equal - or even greater in scope.

One that involved some of the same personnel, singing the same old song.

Part One:
Unraveling the Myth: The Hidden Truth Behind the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Bombs

When Robert Oppenheimer said to Harry Truman in October 1945 the phrase, "Mr. President, I have blood on my hands" he was saying even more than he knew. He was referencing the future, not the August 1945 US bombing of Japan. He knew perfectly well that air-burst in bombs or shells, high-altitude or not, were a a result of some type of fuse, and later on, a programmable fire control system. He knew that a gun-barrel was needed to fire them or a plane from which to drop them. He also knew that certain types of radiation could made people gravely ill, and potentially cause their death. 

As early as November 1944, Oppenheimer realized he was pawn in a very large game. He knew that the ideas being proposed by "leaders" in DC related to the project he was being pressured to complete, were sheer fantasy. He knew this because the Germans, who had the greatest experimental physicists in the universe, said both publicly and privately that the creation of "nuclear weapons" as we know them today, was not possible. (Those guys would be needed later on in the 60's to help with the moon nonsense, so put a pin in that.) Even the Russians, who had some pretty good physicists of their own, thought it was so laughable that they never even pretended to work on it; that is, until it became widely accepted as fact, so eventually they just said "Oh, yeah. We have those too, I guess. Whatever".  All of this would ultimately lead to the myths of megaton/kiloton air-burst, the "cold war" and ICBMs - which have never existed. The reason the US parked missiles in eastern Europe was because that was and is the maximum range. It's the same reason why the US has an insane number of bases surrounding countries whom they don't like...to keep them in range. It was the same reason the Russians parked missiles in Cuba, which ironically were only intended to fight off a planned invasion - which thanks to Jack Kennedy not being the CIA's punk, never happened, so the missiles were ultimately not even necessary.

But let's go back, to where the fantasy began. Japan. 1945.

The "atomic" bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 are often understood as the decisive actions that led to the end of World War II. Conventional history states that these bombs were uranium- and plutonium-based nuclear devices, the first and only uses of nuclear weapons in war. However, an alternate theory posits that these "atomic" bombs were not typical nuclear devices but instead a sophisticated series of incendiary devices composed of irradiated TNT, a concept sometimes referred to as "battlefield nukes" or RDDs (radiological dispersal devices) i.e. "dirty firebombs". This assertion warrants a closer examination, particularly considering the broader geopolitical implications.

Both military experts and empirical physicists argue that traditional accounts of the bombings fail to adequately explain certain anomalies observed in the aftermath. For example, the destruction patterns and injury types in Hiroshima and Nagasaki differed significantly from those expected from nuclear explosions. Instead of the all-consuming blast associated with nuclear fission or implosion, the damage resembled that caused by widespread incendiary assaults, consistent with the type of destruction one might expect from multiple incendiary bombs, possibly containing irradiated TNT. Such evidence raises the question: If these had been true nuclear explosions, why was there not a more uniform devastation indicative of a nuclear blast?

The Nuclear Hoax (2023)

This alternate perspective also highlights the strategic motives potentially guiding the United States' actions in 1945. Historical analysis shows that the development and deployment of the "bombs" were deeply tied to demonstrating power, not solely to Japan, but also to the Soviet Union. By using advanced incendiary technology dubbed as nuclear, the U.S. could project an image of overwhelming technological superiority without the complexities or potential risks associated with full-scale nuclear explosions. In the contentious post-war atmosphere, particularly as wartime alliances shifted to Cold War tensions, showcasing such power was essential to dissuade Soviet expansionism.

Investigating these claims requires more than examining scientific and historical records; it involves understanding the human psychology and political chess game of the era. By contextualizing the bombings as acts meant primarily to intimidate the Soviet Union rather than as mere war-ending measures against Japan, this theory suggests a complex interplay of warfare and diplomacy. To fully grasp these dynamics, we must continually question the narratives and explore every facet of history, ensuring the lessons of the past are comprehensive and not shadowed by the victors' gloss. Although this remains a theory, it is more scientifically plausible. It encourages a broader reflection on the events that shaped the modern world, urging us to reconsider whether an A-bombs' true power lay in its explosive might or in its symbolic strength.

firebombing was a common practice in WWII

Part Two:
The Theory of Incendiary Bombs in WWII Japan

In the aftermath of World War II, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki became a focal point of historical analysis, fueling debates over the necessity and morality of using atomic weapons. The conventional narrative centers around the atomic bombs as fission devices utilizing uranium and plutonium; however, an alternative theory suggests that what fell upon Japan were not the uranium and plutonium bombs famously known, but rather a series of incendiary bombs composed of irradiated TNT - often referred to as "battlefield nukes" or irradiated firebombs. Based on the nature of the destruction and injuries observed in the bombed cities align more closely with incendiary effects than with the expected outcomes of nuclear fission.

The incendiary bomb theory highlights various anomalies in the aftermath of the bombings that appear inconsistent with the devastation expected from atomic bombs. Reports from Hiroshima and Nagasaki describe peculiar patterns of destruction, including the relatively low levels of radioactive fallout and the specific types of injuries sustained by survivors. For example, many victims experienced severe burns but often in patterns that would be more consistent with flames rather than radiation exposure. During the bombings, a significant number of structures remained unaffected, a phenomenon best explained by the nature and distribution of incendiary explosives rather than supposed widespread  destruction from a nuclear explosion.

The theory gains further credence when considering the broader geopolitical context of the atomic bombings. As Japan lay defeated by the summer of 1945, the United States was also looking towards a new power dynamic with the Soviet Union. By showcasing a devastating new type of bomb, regardless of its true composition, America was not merely seeking to end the war but also aiming to establish a formidable presence in international relations. The spectacle of an overwhelming destructive capability served as a warning to the Soviets and other nations about the United States' military prowess. If the bombs were indeed incendiary devices, claiming them to be nuclear weapons not only served propaganda purposes but also manipulated the narrative of American strength and deterrence.

In investigating this theory, one must also consider the implications if true - both historically and ethically. If the bombs dropped on Japan were not the nuclear weapons launched to unleash apocalyptic destruction, what does this reveal about the lengths to which governments might go to control narratives and instill fear? The potential ramifications touch upon the ethics of warfare and the moral responsibilities borne not only by military leaders but also by scientists and politicians involved in weapon development. The incendiary bomb theory inserts perplexing questions into the narrative of World War II, challenging us to reconsider the legitimacy and motivations behind the bombings while acknowledging the complex interplay of war, power, and the human cost of conflict. As further investigations unfold, historical truths may reveal themselves, but the legacy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki will resonate, demanding a deeper understanding of the intertwining fates of humanity and technology in the theater of war.

two images superimposed

Part Three:

The Hidden Truth Behind the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Bombs

In the final days of World War II, the United States supposedly dropped two unprecedented bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, leading to an immediate and catastrophic impact that has been scrutinized for decades. Officially, these bombs, "Little Boy" and "Fat Man," were uranium-based fission and plutonium-based implosion devices, respectively. As previously discussed, a more plausible theory challenges this narrative, suggesting that these bombs were not purely nuclear devices but rather a series of advanced incendiary explosives - composed at least partially of irradiated TNT. This theory not only attempts to explain the anomalies in damage patterns and injuries observed in both cities but also aligns with strategic geopolitical objectives aimed at intimidating the Soviet Union.

The conventional account tells us that "Little Boy," dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, was a uranium gun-type bomb, while "Fat Man," unleashed upon Nagasaki on August 9, was a plutonium implosion device. These bombs are credited with ushering in the atomic age and allegedly ending the war swiftly by forcing Japan's surrender. However, some anomalies in the aftermath have fueled alternative explanations. Eyewitness accounts and post-bombing surveys described a different kind of destruction: Hiroshima's structures were flattened, yet radiation levels were unexpectedly lower than what would be anticipated from a pure fission device. Furthermore, the injuries in Nagasaki appeared inconsistent with the expected effects of a plutonium bomb, suggesting a mechanism beyond simple nuclear fission.

The theory posits that these bombs were not traditional nuclear weapons but rather complex incendiary devices that utilized irradiated material to enhance explosive yields, thus creating massive firestorms. Proponents argue that this could account for the intense heat and subsequent widespread fires, coupled with the peculiar radiation damage patterns. Such weapons, deployed via medium-range artillery or from mid-level aircraft, would have been perceived as tactical innovations aimed at maximizing psychological and infrastructural impact while minimizing radioactive fallout. This approach would align with the United States' strategic objective of swiftly concluding the war while simultaneously sending a geopolitical message to the Soviet Union about its technological prowess and readiness to deploy "advanced" weaponry.

Blood on My Hands (2011) a Skip Pulley film

The real reason Japan surrendered was because the USSR launched a massive and rapid invasion of Japanese-occupied Manchuria between the "atomic" bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. This offensive was the determining factor in Japan's decision to surrender. On August 8, 1945, the Soviet Union formally declared war on Japan. The invasion of the Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo, known as "Operation August Storm," began the next day, August 9, with a massive three-pronged assault. More than 1.5 million Soviet and Mongolian troops, equipped with thousands of tanks and aircraft, quickly overwhelmed the roughly 700,000-strong Japanese Kwantung Army, which was poorly equipped and already weakened. The Soviets surprised Japanese forces by launching their attack across rugged, seemingly impassable terrain. The speed of the Soviet advance demonstrated that Japan's last major military asset, its Kwantung Army on the mainland, was now defenseless. This left Japan with no viable military options - and no way to continue the war.

The battlefield nuke or firebomb theory provides a lens through which to examine the broader context of post-war geopolitics, particularly the immediate cooling of relations between the wartime allies and the onset of the so-called  "Cold War". While mainstream historical narratives focus on the bombings as nuclear milestones, exploring alternative theories reveals a complex interplay of technological experimentation and strategic intimidation. As investigative journalists peel back layers of declassified documents and testimonies, the true nature of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings remains a conflicting and antithetical anomaly. A deception... that is gradually coming to light.

Let me know what you think in the comments.

Skip Pulley

Editor in Chief