13 Responses to “Nuclear attack on Beirut – video”

  1. Gordon Logan says:

    Powerful governments have registered this madness. Netanyahu has just signed Israel’s death sentence.

      • pete fairhurst says:

        If it was nuclear then how to account for the mobile phone footage? If it was nuclear there would be an electromagnetic pulse which would destroy all modern semiconductors…….

        The Saker is usually a thoughtful realist. Here is his take on the Beirut explosion:

        “However, considering how huge this explosion was, I feel that I ought to post these few reminders:

        1. It is quite impossible to conceal the use of a nuclear device, even a low-yield one, in particular in a densely populated area and in a warzone.
        2. Most (all?) major explosions produce a “nuclear mushroom” simply because the air rushes back into the place from where it expelled by the explosion.
        3. You can clearly see two colors in the explosion, which points to a chemical, not nuclear, event.
        4. There is a complete absence of any nuclear flash and fireball.
        5. In the case of the Beirut explosion, you can clearly see in the footage that there is/are a (few) primary explosion(s) and a much bigger secondary explosion.  You don’t see that with nukes.  See for yourself:”


      • sovereigntea says:

        Single frame white out blinding flash … expanding fireball centred slightly above ground zero. See crater and vanished dockside at ground zero.The telltale will be radiation related illness. Modern nuke 3 days high radiation at GZ see cancer deaths of responders NY 911. Witnesses confirm flash and “feeling like you are melting”. Estimated 5-6 KT device.

      • sovereigntea says:

        Saker is a gatekeeper.
        I have better things to do so I’ll debunk the plonker on a single point.

        4. There is a complete absence of any nuclear flash and fireball.

        Ha ha ha its so easy see flash as device goes critical at 7s. ( pause the video above use the slider to isolate the single frame flash. Gatekeeper Saker must eat his hat )

        Re all modern semiconductors … that’s Hollywood for you 🙂

      • pete fairhurst says:


        The video proves nothing other than there was an explosion somewhere. It is not evidence of a nuclear event. No video can ever prove that

        Hollywood for semiconductors but not for explosion videos? ?

  2. Aldous says:

    NUKE LIES 7:19

    I’m a nuclear sceptic – and i’ve served with a couple of so-called ‘nuclear outfits’. If nukes really existed, we would easily have had several nuclear ‘false flags’ since 1945. To me, that’s the smoking gun.
    Hollywood perpetuates the myth with superb films like The Sum Of All Fears and The Hunt For Red October – both books written by Tom Clancy who is no longer with us; a lot like Stanley Kubrick who almost certainly filmed and faked the Moon landings.
    Both probably knew far too much for their own good and safety.

    2,750 tonnes of ammonium nitrate/industrial fertilizer (allegedly) would certainly make quite a blaze but there is no way it could explode the way it did without a detonator (probably several synchronized) to trigger the initial shock wave through the ammonium nitrate and resulting massive explosion.

    One thing’s for certain, on the virtual anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki ‘bombings’ (carpet bombings resulting in fire storms and not caused by nukes imho) the attack on mainly Christian Lebanon was certainly no accident.

    • pete fairhurst says:

      I tend to agree with that Aldous because I am a nuclear sceptic myself. The nuke story has lots of holes for sure, see Miles Mathis:
      Conventional makes more sense for pretty well all these so called nuke events. Why not just use conventional and pocket all the $$$ that went down the nuclear drain…….
      The Cold War was clearly a hoax at the elite level so why not the nukes too? Nukes were such an integral part of the CW story weren’t they
      The 2 Japanese bombs could easily have been conventional, and most likely were. We have no evidence from the day they were dropped other than extremely suspect film footage from many miles away

    • sovereigntea says:

      The days of the 1950’s city buster nukes are long gone. Low yield micro / tactical weapons have plausible deniability.

      There have been plenty used over the last 30 years the resulting detonation has been blamed on arms dumps or chemical fires or just denied and ignored by the media.
      Syria has been hit, so has Yemen also Ukraine. One might also cast a critical eye over terrorist acts in Norway following the Brevik massacre. and the massacre of US Marines at barracks in Lebanon which was blamed on a truck bomb.

      Which piss ant evil regime served its strategic goals on each end every occasion ?

      Re the ammonium nitrate “fertilizer” how would you mix the fuel with 2750 tonnes of the stuff ? ANFO a commercial high explosive is made by mixing evenly fuel oil and A’Nitrate ?

      • sovereigntea says:

        IRA also made frequent use of fertilizer and diesel again the proportions of the mix determine the power of the explosive. Hard to get that right with 2750 tonnes of it.

      • pete fairhurst says:

        What evidence do you have that they are now more sophisticated and low yield micro? How do you know that other than from the usual suspects themselves? It is all top secret isn’t it, so they can tell you whatever they want……

        Also what evidence do you have of the actual use of nukes over the last 30 years? I mean real evidence, not speculation or easily faked videos

  3. Aldous says:

    “An unwritten, but rigorously followed tradition mandates that the president always be a Maronite Christian, the prime minister Sunni Muslim and the parliament speaker a Shiite.
    After the Copts of Egypt, Lebanon’s Christian community is indisputably the second-largest in the Middle East.”


    • sovereigntea says:

      It seems to be regime change hit. The BBC have gone in to overdrive with their poisonous rhetoric the scripted response indicative of an exploitation plan in play.

      Re tiny nukes how small could you get years ago in the Soviet era ? Things have moved on.

      he description of atomic bullets can be found in science fiction, but few people know that such munitions were reality in the USSR. One such bullet could melt an armoured tank, while several atomic bullets would destroy a multistory building. Why did the Soviet Union have to cease the production of such powerful ammo?
      Why did the USSR refuse from atomic bullets?. 53984.jpeg

      It turns out that atomic bullets were invented in the USSR at the time when the country was striving for military parity with the US. They were not only created, but even tested. It goes about 14.3 mm and 12.7 mm caliber ammunition for heavy machine guns. Soviet engineers created a bullet of 7.62 mm – not for the Kalashnikov assault rifle, but for its machine gun. The cartridge was the most miniature nuclear weapon in the world.

      Читайте больше на https://www.pravdareport.com/science/129079-atomic_bullets/

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.