Sunday, May 5, 2013

UPDATE-28: Did Israel just nuke Syria? (A war of aggression under the cloak of discretion #syria)

(Now that I am no longer a top result on Google I am returning the original post, updates 1 and 2)

Notice the flash which fills the entire scene at 0:21.


For comparison, here is a recreation of Hiroshima. Keep in mind that technology has advanced significantly since these first two nukes were used, now capable of smaller and more precise targeting (tactical nuke).

Notice the bright flash, the resulting explosion and mushroom cloud, and the shockwave. There have also been reports (either from Israel or Syria, not sure) that the "ammunition used was unconventional which may have included depleted uranium".


Iran is now claiming Israel used depleted uranium.


I am doing something I've never done before and re-writing my entire post on the Syria explosion, without providing the original. Why? You might be asking.

This blog doesn't have a large audience, and I'm really happy with that. Occasionally, when I come across something puzzling in which my Google searches are coming up with crap, or I simply feel as though I don't know enough about what it is I will ask on my blog. For instance, I never did get an answer on what those weird sounds were...

I started asking about Syria because I came across that video and had read a few scattered reports of "nukes" and there was very little information available. I felt it was important enough that it deserved an answer, so I posted it, expecting the same thing to happen which happened every time I've done something similar, it gets passed around a bit and dies off.

Well, it seems lots of people are asking, and very few are answering and the spike in traffic to this blog has been.. unexpected, as a result. I've changed the title and tried to make the content a little less relevant of this post so I hopefully start getting filtered out of the Google searches as pretty well everyone seems to be ending up here.

Now, let's get down and dirty, did Israel nuke Syria? In the words of one of my followers who has extensive background in the area, Michael:
Richard, in response to you request for a review of the video. I just finished typing for 20 minutes and hit preview button and lost everything.

I'm not going to start all over again so here's a recap:

a. not a nuclear device;

b. either air/fuel devise 80% probability. Note event appears to be above ground, or direct hit on munitions storage area. Sparks in explosive cloud suggest hot metal, as in ground event. Or it could be a combination of the two;

c. we know source of Israels fissionable material and source can be traced back to its origin;

d. notwithstanding nuclear fall out stretching out hundreds of miles, a nuclear devise leaves a very large traceable foot print; and finally d. you must ask yourself what the risk are to Israels economy should it be discovered they attack another nation with nuclear weapon. Would they be willing to have more than half the world put a trade embargo on them? Would they be willing to loose the support of their current friends?

Bottom line, the probability of this event being nuclear is very close to zero.
I hate Blogger's comment boxes. Before I thought of asking Michael (sometimes I forget things) I had put out a request to Jesse Columbo for his opinion or to see if he could get an opinion. Several informed tweeters replied with nearly identical information as Michael's.

So I think we can safely say the answer is no. Hopefully you all understand why I had to ask.

Update-4 (Situation updates resume at Update-6)

Seems a few people believe I changed my post not to get out of Google searches but rather to "cover up" the event. I assure you that's not the case and that I have good reason to not want attention.


Ok, now this is just ridiculous. Check this out:
admin 3:06PM

This particular idiot (innadiated [Editor's note: that's me]) had the audacity to link to a censored blogger account, that really was set up by an explosives expert WHO ORIGINALLY SAID IT WAS A NUKE.
No, I've provided the analysis of an explosive's expert. I am not such an expert. I also never said it was absolutely a nuke. I showed the video, the aspect I believed was reminiscent of a nuclear blast, and then put the question out there for all to answer. On top of pursuing expert opinion privately. When initially linking my blogs on third party sites I always used present tense terms, such as "for the moment I believe it's a nuclear explosion". I was never sold and convinced of that, it didn't make sense, which is why I wanted a solid answer.
But his post was hacked to say it was a fuel air MOAB.
Nothing has been hacked.
But the comments below were nothing but ridicule for the weapons expert saying it was a nuke.
There were only two comments by other people, and Michaels. None of them were ridiculing except the first although I believe that was an honest mistake of him thinking I was trying to say it was a nuke rather than trying to get an informed opinion. Nobody has ridiculed Michael, the explosives expert.
THEREFORE, a weapons expert said it was a nuke, got shilled for it, had his original post replaced with Moab bullshit, and the shill comments below were intact, ridiculing him for saying it was a nuke.

ENTER INNADIATED, who then linked the bullshit moab report, claimed to be in contact with this weapons expert, and then proceeded to push the Moab B.S. line.
I am Innadiated, it's my report. What may be extra funny about this is it's very likely he is talking about my own comments trying to find youtube videos of devices with similar capability. Ridiculing myself?

SO, now, we know how they are going to shill this, that they will flatulently lie, and you cannot trust anything. This alone says IT WAS NOT A MOAB.

Furthermore, a Moab could not have filled even the zoomed in frame from 3.8 kilometers away with even a yellow flame, Moabs ARE NOT FING WHITE WHEN THEY GO OFF, THEY ARE ORANGE YELLOW. They won't even clip the sky to white let alone clip the ground and even the shadows to white, and at that from 3.8 KM away?. There were plenty of bombs going off on the hillside nearby before the nuke went off, and all they do is flash a tiny fraction of the frame immediately where they are, not even close to maxing the sensor. We have all seen bomb videos, and NOTHING EVER clips the entire frame to white, nothing ever clips even 5 percent of the frame to white, it is so obviously a nuke blast that I don't even know why I bothered with engaging this troll AT ALL

We axed mister religion, now we need to axe zionist murdering supporter.
This is the difference between you and me. I'm interested in truth and accuracy. You're interested in superstition.

It doesn't seem to end here though so for Chapter 2 in this saga of what I shall dub the 'Canadian Trends nuclear conspiracy' I present: The Jim Stone story.


Gordon Duff's review of the mushroom cloud video specifically  has concluded that it was nuclear. Until I get some confirming information though I am still on the "probably not" side. Syrian Commando has told me that he is having soil samples taken and that he will send me the link as soon as the results are available.


After reading Gordon Duff's full report I've noticed something of interest, particularly the method of delivery:
The other problem with the GBU 57 is delivery. Only two aircraft are capable of delivering this weapon, the B-52 and B-2 Stealth Bomber.

Israel does not have these aircraft.

Collapse of US Air Force Command Structure,

Again Thus, if a MOP where used, it could have only been delivered by the United States Air Force, an organization reeling from recent disasters within its own ranks after a second lapse in nuclear weapons security in a five-year period was discovered at Minot Air Force Base in South Dakota.
This is interesting, because "officially" The U.S. had "no early warning".
The United States was not given any warning before air strikes in Syria against what Western and Israeli officials say were weapons headed for Hezbollah militants, a U.S. intelligence official said on Sunday.
Without confirming that Israel was behind the attacks, the intelligence official said that the United States was essentially told of the air raids "after the fact" and was notified as the bombs went off.

But I then remembered an earlier report I had read:
"The Israelis are justifiably concerned about the threat posed by Hezbollah obtaining advanced weapons systems, including some long-range missiles," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. He said the U.S. was in "close coordination" with Israel but would not elaborate.
Close coordination? No early warning, but close coordination. Did the U.S change their story to cover for their involvement?

Ugh. I'm back to 50/50.


Seems there is a lot of confusion as to the extent of what coordination is and when the intelligence about the attack occurred.

On May 5th, The White House Press released:
Q    What’s the expectation within the administration on how much information you guys have, should Israel take action, beforehand?  Is there an expectation that you guys are being looped in before they would have an attack?
MR. EARNEST:  Well, I can tell you that the United States, and this administration, in particular, is in very close contact and is closely coordinating with the Israeli government on a range of issues, including important national security priorities.  So there are conversations and communications that are happening all the time between senior members of this administration and their counterparts in Israel. 

But in terms of the details of those conversations, I'm obviously not in a position to read those out.  But the close coordination between the Obama administration and the United States of America is ongoing with the Israeli government.
On May 6th, The White House Press released:
Q    I wouldn't even say Israel.  I would just say did you guys know that something was going to happen?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can tell you is that we are in close coordination as a matter of course with the Israelis, and continue to be.  But I'm not going to comment specifically on actions that the Israelis may or may not have taken.  I would certainly refer those questions to the Israeli government.
Then there is the 'no early warning' story. Which seems completely contradictory but grabbed some of the biggest headlines. I find it hard to believe they had no idea, especially considering on May 2nd:
So while Western governments debate what they might do, Israel is strengthening its defenses on the Golan Heights -- on a border with Syria that has been mostly quiet for 40 years -- because the red lines being talked about now in Washington appear to lead straight to Israel's borders.
Palestinians, Syrians form units to fight for Golan - May 11th
Syria asserts right to enter Golan, occupied by Israel - May13th


Israel Was Right Not To Return Golan Heights to Syria - May 3rd

That last one is very interesting, as it would seem to support the U.S. story of not being informed of the attacks.
Here’s the beginning of one newspaper article about Syria that you didn’t read this week: “Israel Weighs Golan Invasion.” “U.S. Warns It Not To Act.”
So it could be one of two ways:

A) Israel is really acting on it's own without U.S. consent or military support. This wouldn't fit Gordon Duff's analysis, and from this perspective one has to then wonder with the recent capture of U.N. peacekeepers in Golan why the U.S. would continue to fund the Al-Qaeda/FSA? Are the warnings hollow?

B) The opposite is true, in which the strike had full U.S. support and the warnings to Israel as well as the "no early warning" story are for plausible deniability.

EDIT: This author writes strangely in sort of a Star Trek alternative universe way. U.S. gave no warnings to Israel - that's in his alternative universe. What is perhaps ironic though now is that war is brewing in Golan and the reason given in all references are the Israeli airstrike.

(BTW, welcome to the inner workings of my mind. Usually this stuff happens behind the scenes.)

Philippines may Pull Out 300 UN Peacekeepers from Golan Heights - May 10th


Now we're cookin' - Feb 24th
For Israel to grant a US company (Genie Energy) the license to explore for oil in the occupied Golan Heights is signaling to the world that the occupied Golan Heights fully belongs to Israel. The New York-based company that was granted the license includes Jacob Rothschild, Rupert Murdoch, and Dick Cheney among its shareholders. Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights has not been recognized under international law.
Alright, so where are we at now? We have established the U.S. has a direct vested interest in the Golan heights. That prior to the airstrike Israel mobilized it's defenses in the area which we can only assume if some news outlet knew, the U.S. knew. Starting a new war in the region (which appears to be exactly what's happening) would certainly call their attention thus I find it near impossible that they didn't know about it with their own interests at stake.

Syria ready for Israel talks on basis of Golan pullout - Mar 2nd

I would say it's not unreasonable to assume that they would have offered direct aid in these airstrikes and must be involved fully for Israel to put their own interests at risk. Does that mean by supplying B-52/B-2 bombers?

After thought: Maybe their interests were already at stake?
After-After thought: Fucking Cheney.


Truthout has just put out a good summary of U.S. relations and Golan. While it makes no mention of the oil licenses one paragraph did catch my eye:
The Jerusalem Post reported that during the 2006 war between Israeli and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon, President Bush pushed Israel to expand the war beyond Lebanon, with Israeli military officials "receiving indications from the US that America would be interested in seeing Israel attack Syria." In the early days of the fighting, US Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams reportedly met with a very senior Israeli official to underscore Washington's support for extending the war to Syria, but Israeli officials described the idea as "nuts" and decided to limit their military operations to Lebanon. Haaretz noted that some in Washington were "disappointed by Israel's decision not to attack Syria at the same time." Meyrav Wurmser, head of the Center for Middle East Policy at the conservative Hudson Institute and wife of the principal Middle East adviser for Vice President Cheney, went further, declaring that there was "a lot of anger" in Washington that Israel did not attack Syria, which, she argued, would have served "US objectives." US officials also hoped that an Israeli invasion of Lebanon might lead Syrian troops to re-enter Lebanon to defend the country from the Israeli invasion, which could then be used as an excuse to expand the war to Syria itself. 
It goes on
With the Syrian government distracted by its civil war and with Israel under a far right-wing government unwilling to end its occupation of the Golan even in return for strict security guarantees, the opportunity for Israeli-Syrian peace may have passed.
IDF chief: Era of quiet on Golan border is ended   - Apr18th
One of the signs that things are changing on the Golan - for decades Israel's quietest border - is the behavior of the UN forces stationed there since the Yom Kippur War as observers and peace keepers. Following several assaults on UN personnel, the world body is ready to pull its people out, rather than do their job preventing a border flare-up.

Meanwhile, Israel is preparing for the day after the fall of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, with the expected eruption of chaos and the likely withdrawal of the international force meant to separate warring Syrian factions from the Israeli army.
This situation together with ongoing instability in Egypt means Israel is facing a strategic shift in the Middle East, and both Ya'alon and Gantz emphasized that Israel is preparing for the worst.
This is starting to look like a nuclear sized conspiracy...


For some added context the Guardian has put out a great piece.

Peak oil, climate change and pipeline geopolitics driving Syria conflict


The B-2 Stealth Bomber Will Deliver Nuclear Cruise Missiles Anywhere In The World - Apr 22nd
The Long-Range Standoff Weapon (LRSO) has been testing well for months. It should be, considering the best minds at Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northropp Grumman, and Raytheon have been working together to perfect the LRSO. Even DARPA had its hand in the plan for a missile like this to be fielded sometime over the next few years.
Pentagon Eyes More Than $800 Million for New Nuclear Cruise Missile
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Air Force plans to spend more than $800 million to build a new nuclear-armed cruise missile for its bomber aircraft, according to little-noticed details buried inside the Obama administration's fiscal 2011 budget request delivered last month to Capitol Hill (see GSN, Dec. 16, 2009).

A "Follow-on Long-Range Stand-off Vehicle," or LRSO for short, would replace 375 aging
AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missiles, expected to retire from the fleet by 2030. The Defense Department has estimated the new effort could cost a total $1.3 billion, Global Security Newswire has learned.

Syrian Commando has informed me no soil samples are coming and that the blast site has been locked down. He reasons this is likely do to the seriousness of the situation and likely for Syria's own safety. With the story unfolding here, this is very plausible.


More info on this new cruise missile.

Cruise Missile Warhead Pick Coming
Air Force nuclear deterrence planners are building the requirements for the service's future air-launched nuclear cruise missile and will likely choose which warhead will go on the weapon this spring, said Billy Mullins, associate director of strategic deterrence and nuclear integration on the Air Staff. In a Jan. 16 interview, Mullins said there are three warhead candidates for the Long Range Standoff vehicle, or LRSO: the W80 warhead currently used on the AGM-86 Air Launched Cruise Missile that LRSO is meant to replace; the B61 nuclear bomb warhead; and the W84, the design formerly integrated on the now-retired BGM-109G Ground Launched Cruise Missile. LRSO is part of the Air Force's notional future "long-range strike family of systems" that will be centered on a new nuclear-capable bomber, dubbed LRS-B. "We don't see any reason why we won't need an air delivery system" as part of the LRS family, said Mullins. Regardless of the warhead chosen, the future bomber will carry LRSO, as will the B-52 fleet, and the service's B-2s, he said. In the case of the latter, LRSO will give the stealth bombers a nuclear standoff capability to carry out missions in heavy air defense environments, he noted. (See also Streamlining the Nuclear Stockpile for more from Mullins' interview.)
B61 nuclear bomb
The B61 nuclear bomb is one of the primary thermonuclear weapons in the U.S. Enduring Stockpile following the end of the Cold War. It is an intermediate yield strategic and tactical nuclear weapon featuring a two-stage radiation implosion design.[1]

The B61 is a variable yield bomb (0.3 to 340 kiloton yield in various versions and settings) designed for carriage by high-speed aircraft. It has a streamlined casing capable of withstanding supersonic flight speeds. The weapon is 11 ft 8 in (3.58 m) long, with a diameter of about 13 in (33 cm). Basic weight is about 700 lb (320 kg), although the weights of individual weapons may vary depending on version and fuze/retardation configuration.
The newest variant is the B61 Mod 11, a hardened penetration bomb with a reinforced casing (according to some sources, containing depleted uranium) and a delayed-action fuze, allowing it to penetrate several metres into the ground before detonating, damaging fortified structures further underground.[7] The Mod 11 weighs about 1,200 lb (540 kg). Developed from 1994, the Mod 11 went into service in 1997 replacing the older megaton-yield B53 bomb, a limited number of which had been retained for anti-fortification use. About 50 Mod 11 bombs have been produced, their warheads converted from Mod 7 bombs. At present, the primary carrier for the B61 Mod 11 is the B-2 Spirit.
It's been a lingering question how crippled the Syrian air defense systems really were. I've noticed many people commenting that they seemed extremely in-effective. Could this cruise missile be the method of delivery? Keep in mind that Gordon Duff fingers the rest of the attack not on airstrikes but rather on artillery.


I had overlooked this, but now that I'm thinking about this cruise missile this report may make some more sense.
Israel used "a new type of weapon", a senior official at the Syrian military facility that came under attack from the Israeli Air Force told RT.

“When the explosion happened it felt like an earthquake,” said the source, who was present near the attack site on the outskirts of Damascus on Sunday morning.
The rest of the article talks about depleted uranium shells, but depleted uranium isn't 'a new type of weapon'. Are these cruise missiles the 'new type of weapon'?

(btw.. great tune.. )


Israel carries out second air strike in Syria
Hezbollah's al-Manar TV said the Jamraya facility was not hit and that it was an army supply centre which had been targeted. The station quoted Syrian security officials as saying three sites, including military barracks, arms depots and air defence infrastructure, were targeted. Amateur video footage said to have been shot early on Sunday in the Damascus area showed fire lighting up the night sky.

"In last night's attack, as in the previous one, what was attacked were stores of Fateh-110 missiles that were in transit from Iran to Hezbollah," Reuters quoted a "western intelligence source" as saying. There was no way to verify the claim.
Why does it always feel like the "intelligence source" is trying to misdirect you?

Syria's Uncertain Air Defenses


SYRIA - [PUBLIC] Analysis of where air strikes blamed on Israel hit - May 05 - Been looking for this.

Side thought: Field Testing one of their new cruise missiles would also add fabulously to plausible deniability.


This investigation will continue, but at this point I have to say that there is enough reason to pause and debate any further actions against Syria at the government level. During Libya I contacted Elizabeth May about the presence of Al-Qaeda in the rebels, she listened. Nothing that's going on here is in anyone's best interest but the benefactors. The Israeli's are being used, we're being used, and the Syrians are being destroyed.

I've sent this in it's current form to Elizabeth May via Twitter (it's how I got thru to her directly before). I'll send it a couple more times if I don't get a reply but I'm sure she'd take this more seriously with a few other people that are concerned of any possible future involvement of Canada (or perhaps your own country). If you believe your MP will listen talk to them. I'm putting this request out now as it's starting to look a lot less like Israeli's strike was defensive, but rather was a direct first strike offensive which is likely a prelude to all out war. In short, I don't think there's much time left before all out war. Syrian Commando reported today that another U.N. abduction attempt was thwarted. We don't have all the answers yet, but I think we have enough answers to start raising serious questions.

Your help would be greatly appreciated. You can reproduce anything on this blog according to the lack of guidelines as stated here.


Israel Hints at New Strikes, Warning Syria Not to Hit Back - May 15th


It's been a very busy May long weekend so I haven't had a lot of time to put into back research, but a few headlines that I noticed pop up are really beginning to paint a good picture of what's really going on with the back story already uncovered.

Syria: Civilians Come Under Fire From Rebels - May 15th

It's clearly becoming increasingly difficult to manage favorable P.R. for the "rebels".

Israel to continue preventing transfer of arms to Hezbollah: PM - May 20th
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday that his government remains committed to preventing the transfer of the advanced weaponry to Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, local media reported.

"We are acting in accordance with the policy we had set to prevent as much as possible the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah and terror elements," Army Radio quoted Netanyahu as saying.

"The Israeli government is operating in a responsible, determined and level-headed manner in order to ensure the supreme interest of the country, which is the safety of its citizens," he said, vowing to continue "guaranteeing Israel's security interests."
I think it's now safe to say statements such as these should be considered to be complete propaganda primarily aimed towards citizens of the anti-Assad side. Being that the public analysis of the targets previously hit seem to confirm the story as described by the Hezbollah official we can read into Israel's continued promises to intervene in that they are looking to systematically disable Syria's military infrastructure before the war begins using these stories of self defense as cover. Consider that if these videos hadn't gotten out the only information we'd know about this action would be via given reports.

Israel's self defense line makes no sense in light of the other evidence as their direct support of the Syrian "rebels" is putting them at risk as it is the Syrian rebels, funded by the U.S. and it's allies, who are abducting U.N. officials, as is their refusal to return the Golan Heights.

It's no wonder why Israel is becoming more overt and direct:

Syrian army, fighting alongside Hezbollah guerrillas, launch assault on rebel stronghold - May 18th

The rebels are not only losing the P.R. war, they're losing the hot war too.

This one is very blunt - May 19th
But there is a difference in the war here today, from when I last visited four months ago.

Assad's men appear to be winning, in Damascus at least.
Israel caught in the middle as U.S. and Russia clash over Syria's future - May 18th

This also is a very telling post about the given situation and fits perfectly with the peak oil post put out by the Guardian, though in place of "energy security" they put "Iran's nuclear program". WMDs! That old chestnut again...

Turkey-Kurd Deal On Oil Riles Iraq - May 14th


Iraq captures suspected Al Qaeda cell that planned to make chemical weapons - June 2nd
Qusair falls: Rebels vow to keep fighting after losing Syrian stronghold - June 5th
Austria begins withdrawing peacekeepers from Golan - June 11th

White House reassesses arming Syria rebels - June 11th
Assad’s reclamation of Qusair – a city valued for its position on the supply route between the Assad-loyalist West and the heartland of the country and the city of Homs – represents a significant moment in the conflict that reminds some in Washington of the moments before forces of Libya’s Colonel Muammar Gaddafi were preparing to descend on rebel-held Benghazi during their 2011 civil war.
You all remember Libya right?

Israel worried after Austria leaves UN Golan force - June 6th
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon scrambled on Thursday night to find troops to replace some 380 UN peacekeepers on the Golan Heights that Austria announced earlier in the day it was evacuating.
Keep in mind the reason that the U.N. is leaving is because the rebels are abducting their personal!


Big developments today.

U.S. Stepping Up 'Military Support' to Syrian Rebels - June 13th
President Barack Obama authorized his administration to provide arms to rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, officials briefed on the decision said Thursday, after the White House said it had confirmed that Damascus used chemical weapons in the country's civil war.
The White House declined to comment on the order, saying only that Mr. Obama had decided to ramp up "military support" to moderate rebels both in "scope and scale."

Rebels requested weapons to hold off Mr. Assad's forces and Hezbollah fighters who are closing in on rebel positions in the city of Aleppo, The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday. The head of Syria's opposition Supreme Military Council, or SMC, issued a plea to U.S. officials and others for arms.
Turkey finds sarin gas in homes of suspected Syrian Islamists – reports - May 30th
The sarin gas was found in the homes of suspected Syrian Islamists detained in the southern provinces of Adana and Mersia following a search by Turkish police on Wednesday, reports say. The gas was allegedly going to be used to carry out an attack in the southern Turkish city of Adana.

On Monday, Turkish special anti-terror forces arrested 12 suspected members of the Al-Nusra Front, the Al-Qaeda affiliated group which has been dubbed "the most aggressive and successful arm” of the Syrian rebels. The group was designated a terrorist organization by the United States in December.
This is twice now that Al-Qaeda has actually been found with chemical weapons or attempting to produce them in neighboring countries. Why is that being ignored?

Ask yourselves why it would be so important to arm the rebels, and to help their struggle. It's imperative now, the rebels are losing. Coincidentally the timing just couldn't be better for the White House to "conclude" that Assad has in fact used chemical weapons. This isn't about chemical weapons, read the language in the Wall Street Journal piece. It's about Aleppo on the verge of falling. Israel clearly doesn't want to get their hands dirty with Assad, they want to stroll in once the Al-Qaeda and affiliates have done all of the "hard work". This is sickening the bullshit military propaganda we're being fed in piece meal so that "the allies" populations don't catch on.

The only context in which the U.S. blind support of Al-Qaeda makes sense when all the facts are considered is that described here. This is pure aggression, plain and simple and at any cost and little care about everyone being effected.


Ron Paul: "Obama’s Syria Policy Looks A Lot Like Bush’s Iraq Policy" - June 17th


Found this a little interesting:
Israel is believed to have carried out three bomb strikes this year in Syria targeting Hezbollah weapons caches but refuses to confirm or deny whether it was responsible. 

On August 1st another mysterious explosion occurred though for the moment I do not believe this is nuclear. We'll see if any other info comes out. Full video of the explosion below.

Video of the area after the blast:
Channel 4 blog on nukes in Syria is pulled. [Original Link]

This part caught my eye: "probably by cruise missiles launched from aircrafts near the borders of Syria or right off the coast in the Mediterranean."
Full text:
Monday 05 Aug 2013

Nuclear strikes on Syria: The genie is already out of the bottle

The fight against Assad’s brutal regime has taken an unexpected turn late Thursday afternoon when a large weapons cache belonging to the so-called national protection force in Homs city, an arm of Assad’s Shabeeha, was destroyed. The explosion was reminiscent of the attack on Qasyoon mountain, a stronghold for the Syrian army and a location said to house missiles targeting Israel. 
It was first reported that the missile fuelling station had blown up which seemed like a reasonable proposition especially since an ammunition depot was targeted. 
 Nuclear strikes on Syria: The genie is already out of the bottle 

But the two explosions in Homs and Qasyoon share the same property: They are both above ground air bursts according to Greg Thielmann, an expert on arms control policy whom I spoke with on Saturday at great length. I was first alerted to the connection by slow twitter chatter right after the bombing in Homs.  
Needless to say I was shocked at what he told me next: “The fact of the matter is, what we are seeing in both these cases is a tactical nuclear strike, probably by cruise missiles launched from aircrafts near the borders of Syria or right off the coast in the Mediterranean.” 
But sure, Greg, wouldn’t this mean a nuclear holocaust? Not so he says. “Tactical nuclear weapons lower the threshold on use of a nuclear bomb as their modern incarnation can be tuned in yield in order to target military sites using stand off weapons without escalating by destroy surrounding civilian infrastructure.” 
He went on: “Keep in mind a nuclear bomb sounds like a huge device, but it can have a yield as small as the equivalent conventional payload carried by a formation of 5 F-15s. Sites in Syria are inaccessible to these jets due to the Russian support available in the field of air defense. So these strikes are an option for the west to implement its policy.”
The likely assailant in both cases is Israel he claims: “Israel is the only nation that can deploy these sorts of weapons with impunity without fear of a counter-attack. Syria has shown no appetite to get into a shooting fight even over the deployment of such weapons”. 

This all presented a remarkably delicious possibility of removing the tyrant Assad using all tools available. “The army can be gradually destroyed with these sort of strikes, or destroyed all in one go in a devastating nuclear attack. Should Assad attempt to counter-attack, the cities can be destroyed by larger nuclear bombs with ease, since the insurgents have done the job of deteriorating Assad’s command on the ground”, an anonymous military strategist added. 
What about the coast, I asked him? “The coast does present a problem for suppression of air defense missions by NATO due to Russian missiles stationed there, but as I speak hordes of Muslims are throwing themselves on coastal cities in the hopes of destroying these weapons to allow Israel and NATO to intervene.”. This made no sense to me since the coastal cities are amongst the most supportive of Assad. “It’s not an issue, the insurgents are now armed with chemical weapons manufactured in Georgia exactly for this scenario. Assad’s pulse was tested in Khan Assal a week ago when an entire brigade was killed with chemical weapons and there was no response. We don’t see a likely response to further use of this tool.” 
I concluded with him that it is awfully ironic that an inhuman weapon such as nuclear weapons and chemical weapons could be used to promote human rights and freedom in the world. But the Syrian people, or at least who will remain of them after these attacks, deserve to enjoy the same freedoms enjoyed today by Iraqis. 
“Don’t be so sure”, another anonymous strategist disagreed, “We are now playing with nuclear fire and the use of all these weapons of mass destruction will definitely attract a counterattack with massive force. We are now on a slippery slope, there is no such thing as a limited nuclear strike, the retaliation will be delayed, but it is coming and god save us all when the nuclear fire spreads to our backyards.” 
Spooky stuff. All I know is, I’ll be spending time in my summer home in the woods for the next few weeks.

Going back and reading the final version of reports of the Homs blast, many make references to:
"Rockets were falling on the area ... when the arms depot began to explode but we don't know if the rockets triggered the blasts," he said, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation.

He said the explosions were so strong that "they shook parts of the city." They also shattered all windows in the area and cracked walls, he added.

Click here to recommend this post on and help other people find this information.

Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for CenturyLink

Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.


  1. dude, are you seriously suggesting that Israel nuked Syria based on this. Man, go have breakfast and start your day again, minus the tinfoil hat. OK, that was kind of rude of me, but big explosions make bright lights. There is just no need for Israel to use any nukes, because they have plenty of bunker busters, and very big bombs that could do what happened here without guaranteeing that the whole world turns on them and crushes them out of existence.

  2. I'm asking the question, there is sufficient reason to ask. Yes, big explosions make bright lights - and big explosions need big bangs. There is a reason why we fear nuclear war above all other war, the explosions are the biggest. The one important thing missing from your reply is an alternative explanation of what type of weapon was used then to make such a big explosion.

    1. Richard, I did say that Israel has bunker busters. I am not a munitions expert, but over the yeras I haveread enough references, and seen enough war footage to know that there are all kinds of conventional weapons for just about any task. There is also the fact that israel was likely targeting anti-aircraft missiles, and it did actually look like a secondary explosion. Meaning, possibly some stored munitions were burning and then exploded.

    2. If that were the case the explosion would have originated on the ground, it didn't, it originates in the sky with an outward, and not an upward, blast. You can clearly see portions of the blast moving downwards toward the ground.

  3. Here is what a bunker buster bomb looks like:

    Notice that the bright flash before it is dwarfed by the size of the explosion, it's not pure white, and it doesn't fill the scene. There was far far more energy in what they just dropped on Syria, enough that between video frames the explosion expands so rapidly it just "appears".

  4. Here is the largest non-nuclear bomb:

    Again, notice the difference in the way a conventional warhead explodes, and the rapid bright light type of explosion of the warhead dropped on Syria. It's clearly unconventional. The question is, well then what is it? It has all the earmarks of a nuclear explosion.

    That's not tinfoil hat bud, that's called observation.

  5. Oh, and one final point. Bunker Buster bombs are designed to penetrate and destroy their target. Nuclear devices are designed to detonate in the air.

    The Syria device was clearly detonated in the air.

  6. Had it been a nuke, even a small one, the fellow shooting the image would have swept by the blast and unlikely would've a chance to broadcast the images.. second, the EMP from a nuke would have fried, camera, and either the tape or mem chip in the camera,

  7. The fellow is at least 3km from the explosion (judging by the delay in sound). Even then, by the time the force reaches him there is enough of a shockwave left that everything shakes.

  8. Oh also, in response to the EMP comment, I'm aware of this aspect as well. However, due to the distance and darkness it is imposible to tell if any electronics were even left in the area to knock out. There is no way the EMP effect would have reached the person taking the video.

  9. I see a lot of people on the net now saying it may have been a MOAB. Here is an example MOAB explosion:

    No flash, ground detonating. Does not fit what's shown in the video from Syria.

  10. Richard, in response to you request for a review of the video. I just finished typing for 20 minutes and hit preview button and lost everything.
    I'm not going to start all over again so here's a recap:
    a. not a nuclear device;
    b. either air/fuel devise 80% probability. Note event appears to be above ground, or direct hit on munitions storage area. Sparks in explosive cloud suggest hot metal, as in ground event. Or it could be a combination of the two;
    c. we know source of Israels fissionable material and source can be traced back to its origin;
    d. notwithstanding nuclear fall out stretching out hundreds of miles, a nuclear devise leaves a very large traceable foot print; and finally d. you must ask yourself what the risk are to Israels economy should it be discovered they attack another nation with nuclear weapon. Would they be willing to have more than half the world put a trade embargo on them? Would they be willing to loose the support of their current friends?
    Bottom line, the probability of this event being nuclear is very close to zero.

  11. Thanks for your opinion Michael!

    Yes, this is what I've been saying too is that it looks to be above ground. But what could have created that flash? I can't find examples of anything anywhere that can do that, even the air/fuel devices.

    I've been told that that hill wasn't the depot itself but was a location of defenses which had been bombed for some time prior to this event. I would guess plenty of hot metal lying around.

    As for the final point, I totally agree but then again Israel does seem to do whatever it wants with complete hubris too. Still the question I have that is top of mind is what possibly could make that flash?

  12. Some examples of conventional munitions flashes. The last one, a fertilizer bomb gives off a very bright flash.
    a.; and

  13. I've got awesome followers, thanks again!

  14. Anonymous8/5/13 08:31

    Here is the proof it was a nuke:

    Keep up the good work.

  15. Hi farganne,

    Yes I had that same sequence of frames posted here as well, it was why I started asking. It is that 3 frame flash -> fire I had Michael review. He's not just an explosives expert but also was assigned to the Israeli desk during his time in the Canadian military. He's familiar with all of their devices.

    After taking his informed information into consideration and reviewing the video a couple more times I notice that prior to the very bright flash there is a small explosion that would be near the center of the blast, this may have been the first blast from the FAE which dispersed the aerosol. I've been looking a lot into FAEs now and it does fit, especially how quickly that fireball lights up (think hairspray).

    At this point I have to agree with Michael.

  16. Hi farganne,

    I just want to be extra concise since I did alter my post. That frame that was pure white is what caught my attention too:

  17. Sorry, slight correction: Mid/East desk.

  18. On Jim Stone's site at Erik asks:

    Erik 1:18AM
    The Yahoo page asks, "Did Israel just nuke Syria?"

    When I scroll down to Richard Fantin's post on that Yahoo page, I find:

    RF: "I believe the answer is yes. I have detailed why on my blog: - which also includes a better video of the entire explosion (including the bright flash typically associated with nuclear warheads)."

    but then when I go to that blog page, he says "no" (that it was NOT a nuke). Did he change his mind? He also remarks about the smaller explosion that occurred prior to the criticality (in reference to the video that Jim analyzed, one of the copies is at ).

    RF: "I notice that prior to the very bright flash there is a small explosion that would be near the center of the blast, this may have been the first blast from the FAE which dispersed the aerosol. I've been looking a lot into FAEs now and it does fit, especially how quickly that fireball lights up (think hairspray)."

    In fact, the smaller earlier explosion is much closer to the camera than the big blast, easily estimated by the time it took for the sounds to be recorded by the camera. Jim explains this clearly in his analysis, but Richard Fantin just keeps pushing his propaganda.


    I'll answer here since Jim Stone won't allow me to post there.

    Yes, I changed my mind, read my blog post. It's not even so much that I changed my mind, it was sort of 50/50 - I can not change the yahoo answer now or I would have. I actually put that answer in very shortly after I had put out my post and I was so shaken I was vibrating still a little so it wasn't very thought out.

    I'm not pushing propaganda, I am saying that there must be at least ONE other piece of evidence out there beyond the flash. I can't find anything at all. I have multitudes of reason now to believe it's not a nuke, and no more evidence than I had on day one to say it was. It's easier to ask if you just ask here.

  19. The post I'm referencing in the previous comment appears now to have been edited to drop the bottom two paragraphs (those referring to my site as propaganda). Thanks.

  20. Oh, I suppose I'll add here if it helps that the reason I sought an expert of who I personally trust is for the reason that I was not willing to trust any media analysis. That's why I'm satisfied with my answer, I personally trust the source. It's not some Col. on PressTV or whatnot.

  21. For those of you who want to keep looking into this (if not satisfied with the answer here), Syrian Commando on twitter is probably the first place any new information will come out:

    If you find anything, you're of course welcome to post it here.

    I am monitoring the situation still, but for the moment I will be leaving this post as is.

  22. Why are my thoughts so scattered right now?!?!

    I forgot to add, currently Syrian Commando believes it was a nuke. I'm aware of this, but he has yet to produce any evidence of it. (though he's promised blog posts on it in the future)

  23. kb7dqh says, in the same thread above. that someone may be changing my mind.

    kb7dqh 3:20AM
    Or someone is changing his mind... I have seen other discussions about the behavior of persons subjected to "mind control" and "multiple personalities" appears to be a feature...


    Ok, let me explain what happened with this Syria post once and for all. At the time that I posted it there was ZERO information on it. The yahoo, before it's news etc all had the mushroom cloud video but not the explosion video. I had the video showing the explosion and felt it warranted the question and that it needed to be answered, and that I personally needed it to be answered for my own sake as well. The purpose of this post was never to draw attention in the first place - and I had no idea that my post would be in the top results of a google search on the subject (by changing the content I have successfully returned my ranking to normal, however my May traffic already exceeds all of the traffic I had in February - to give you an idea). To put it bluntly: I whole bunch of people found my blog because of a topic which my blog doesn't normally write about but had because no one else had and had I not none of them would found it in the first place and I'd be just fine with that). I don't write here to break stories are attract attention, I'm not even a journalist, I focus on trends.

    The reason I've "changed my mind", is this: Seeing the video provided sufficient reason to believe it's a nuke. 50/50, I don't know. It could be or it might not be, but it's worth the investigation.

    From this perspective I work to poke holes in the theory it is. I did this by seeking outside analysis by trusted sources and also by looking for comparable explosives with video evidence to show it was capable. Basically, I either wanted a layman with good video, or an expert with a good hypothesis.

    Now that this has been satisfied, the approach changes. There is now more reason to believe it wasn't than it was, and so from this perspective to convince me it was I need sufficient holes poked in the wasn't theory. I haven't been able to poke a single hole in it.

    If my mind was being altered by mind control, I wouldn't be trying to weigh facts on the situation nor would I continue to monitor the situation for more evidence. You guys are WAY too paranoid.

  24. Israel and the US have been using depleted uranium for shell casings for a while now. There are reports of it in the first gulf war. Why is it so hard for people to realize that was a nuclear bomb. There are reports the video was taken about 3km away.

  25. No one is debating the depleted uranium, what I found interesting about the unvonentional ammo report was that it "may have included". Definitely "unconventional", but maybe depleted uranium.

    Overall, the DU is still important to the story because it means that any soil samples will be contaminated anyway. Need to ensure the contamination is from a nuke itself.

    3430m by my calculations. (You'll see earlier I also posted "at least 3km")

    It's not about whether people believe it was, or believe it wasn't. Open and apparent nuclear war changes everything, it's a serious accusation. Before declaring that it absolutely was there must be more evidence than a couple of videos of an explosion, a nuclear blast leaves evidence. If it was nuclear, this evidence exists and if found confirms the story 100%. You cannot confirm the story based on the video, it can however give you some great ideas where to look to confirm it.