Dissecting the Beirut coverup: Ammonium nitrate not explosive and Lebanon was nuked before

We start with the text below in response to a Russia Today video where a so-called explosives expert explained Beirut.  RT has become quite unreliable for the past year, a distinct pro-Israel bias, has repeatedly attacked Syria’s President Assad and is backing racist-supremacist elements in the US.

RT cleaned this off, which reports the Israeli bombers at 30 seconds onward:

We also burn Rick Sanchez as a fake anti-Zionst who went to RT because of equally fake media prosecution.  We recognize the “OP,” which we believe Snowden is as well, certainly Wikileaks but, under the blanket of Google/YouTube-Facebook disinformation and censorship, the selling of a fake narrative has become so reliable that nuclear terrorism is becoming a “go to” for Israel, Saudi Arabia and, of course, the US.

We begin by debunking ammonium nitrate with a detailed explanation from a mining engineer explaining how the cover story is absurd.  Simply put, you can’t make ammonium nitrate by itself explode, it simply burns.

And this is what a fireworks explosion looks like:

The massive Chinese explosion was an explosive slurry, not fertilizer grade ammonium nitrate.  From here we cover issues of the use of tactical nuclear weapons and present a reasonable assertion that Lebanon was nuked in 2006.  We begin with a mining demolition engineer with decades of experience:

“Now listen carefully, it takes a TNT detonation to initiate or ignite a load of Anfo, Hanfo or Magnafrac. What I mean by that is that for Anfo to detonate, it needs the violence of a TNT initiation before it itself will actually detonate. I’ve watched Anfo catch fire and burn numerous times.
It won’t explode, it will just burn. And if doesn’t have the diesel fuel mixture it won’t even do that. Ammonia Nitrate is a commercial fertilizer. The company employees were each given two twenty Kilo bags of Ammonia Nitrate every spring to fertilize their lawns. It will quite literally turn a brown lawn a vibrant green over night…”

He next describes listening to an interview on the Beirut warehouse fire where he became ‘spin’ suspicious, or if you will allow me to create a new word, ‘spincious’.

“I have to say I disagree with this gentleman. The moment he hesitated to answer the very first ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question posed to him when asked if a match tossed on a pile of ammonia nitrate would initiate a catastrophic explosion, he hesitated for a few seconds before answering and I knew immediately that whatever he was going to say was maybe a bit cloudy and opaque.

I’ve worked in the open pit mining industry all my life as a surveyor and a blasting technician. For my last two years at a large open pit coal operation in the British Columbia foothills, my job was designing the blast patterns and deciding which explosive product to load into the drill holes.

We used ANFO, a mixture of ammonia nitrate and diesel fuel. The AN stands for ammonia nitrate and FO stands for fuel oil or diesel fuel. We used a product called HANFO  or what is called heavy anfo. It was called heavy anfo because it had a higher concentration of diesel fuel in it’s mixture, hence the term Heavy anfo.
Both anfo and heavy anfo have to be used in dry holes. If the holes are wet, the diesel component would wash out and the ammonia nitrate by itself would not ignite.
In those instances we would line the drill holes with plastic liners and then load the anfo or heavy anfo into the plastic liners. If it still proved too wet, we went to a very expensive product called Magnafrac. It was a slurry based emulsion that was more or less water proof, but still, if left to sit too long, the slurry would decompose and fail to ignite.
Heavy anfo has a higher power factor than regular anfo. That means more bang for the buck or more explosive energy. The name of the game was always to blast the most amount of rock with the least amount of actual product loaded. This is called the powder factor. The lower you can keep the powder factor and still break the host rock, the cheaper the cost. Anfo cheapest, hanfo, more expensive, Magnafrac very expensive which drove the powder factor up. The goal was to maintain a balance.
I’ve handled all of these products, loaded them, helped the blast crew tie the pattern in with DET cord and basically pulled the trigger. We used blasting wire connected to a blasting machine like you see in the old movies where the bad guys are trying to blow up railroad tracks. In the early 90’s, the wire and blasting machine was replaced with a much more efficient system we called non-electric blasting.
There was no electric charge produced to run down the yellow blasting wire to the DET cord and initiate the blast.
What was used was a product called ‘shock tube’. It was a small diameter hollow plastic tubing about 3 or 4 millimeters in diameter that had a very small powdery dusting of an explosive called ‘pentlandite’ a type of your basic TNT. It was called shock tube for a reason because it was non-electric.It is basically a fundamental shock wave generator, (shock tubes) either compressed air-driven or detonation-driven). It produces a ‘blast shock wave’. This is the lead shock wave that then in turn initiates the DET cord, then the explosive.
To initiate the detonation there was a small, for lack of a better word, I will say clacker, that you could step on. The non electric energy released when the clacker was stepped on was sufficient to ignite the very minute amount of powdered explosive in the shock tube that ran and initiated the DET cord which of course ran into each drilled hole filled with the actual explosive product used in the blast pattern itself.
Now here is where the rubber meets the road. Up until now we are talking inert elements and components that combined or by themselves couldn’t blow up a box of Kleenex.

The key to all this were the 500 gram TNT detonators placed at the bottom of each drill hole at the bottom of the explosives. We generally used 2 500 gram TNT detonators per hole.
That is where the ignition took place. Now listen carefully, it takes a TNT detonation to initiate or ignite a load of Anfo, Hanfo or Magnafrac. What I mean by that is that for Anfo to detonate, it needs the violence of a TNT initiation before it itself will actually detonate. I’ve watched Anfo catch fire and burn numerous times.
It won’t explode, it will just burn. And if doesn’t have the diesel fuel mixture it won’t even do that. Ammonia Nitrate is a commercial fertilizer. The company employees were each given two twenty Kilo bags of Ammonia Nitrate every spring to fertilize their lawns. It will quite literally turn a brown lawn a vibrant green over night. That practice was discontinued in about 1993, at least at the mine I was employed at during that time span.
An automobile or truck perhaps running at speed, exploding and slamming into a mound of anfo etc. might be able to deliver the explosive force necessary to detonate the explosive product. Or the shock wave required. (or a missile or bomb)
We used to make the ammonia nitrate prills off mine site at a facility that was used by the explosive company that provided all the explosive product to our site. This is a huge, explosive company that is global in scope. And I will add that in all my time working with them and handling the various products, they/we used, they had a stellar safety record.
I’ve probably missed a lot and/or left out some information but this is all that I can recall to mind without having to refer to my various texts and notes.
So were there pumps, in this storage facility, was there fuel oil saturating the ammonia nitrate that gradually was absorbed over time?

Absolutely no disrespect meant or directed to Mr. Basulto or Mr. Sanchez.”

VT: Israel hit Hezbollah with an advanced tactical nuclear weapon in 2006 according to Russian military experts.  Today Russia sides with Israel and is suspected of running Donald Trump as a shill.  While Israel bombs Syria daily, Netanyahu prances around Moscow like a Czar.

TruPublica: A thermonuclear weapon weighing little more than 2,400 pounds (1,100 kg) can produce an explosive force comparable to the detonation of more than 1.2 million tons of TNT. A nuclear device no larger than traditional bombs can devastate an entire city by blast, fire, and radiation. Nuclear weapons are considered weapons of mass destruction, and their use and control has been a major focus of international relations policy since their debut.

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.

Five states have signed up to NPT, the US, UK, Russia, France and China. Between them, they have declared 22,000 nuclear weapons in stock. These five Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) have made undertakings not to use their nuclear weapons against a non-NWS party except in response to a nuclear attack. India, Pakistan and N.Korea have also declared stocks of nuclear weapons. Israel is widely known to have nuclear weapons but does not declare it and has therefore not signed up to the NPT treaty.

As of 2009, only the US is known to have provided nuclear weapons for sharing. Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Italy and Turkey are still hosting U.S. nuclear weapons as part of NATO’s nuclear sharing policy. Canada and Greece withdrew and no longer participate.

However, the USA sticks to the old policy that goes back to 1945 – to monopolise the right to use nuclear weapons by making their non-proliferation part of international law in combination with new restrictive measures against others.

In his book Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War Michel Chossudovsky tells us about the interconnection between the Pentagon and US corporations. The book says the US Congress okay’d the use of tactical nuclear weapons in non-conventional wars in 2003. According to congressmen, it was quite “safe for civilians”.

In intensive warfare conditions, up-to-date tactical nuclear weapons can create an illusion of their absence on the battlefield when used together with conventional weapons. For instance, according to Russian military experts, nuclear munitions of a new generation were used in Lebanon in 2006 during the operation against the Hezbollah.  The soil samples taken from craters had traces of enriched uranium. At the same time, there was no gamma radiation and isotope of caesium 137 resulting from radioactive decay. The radiation level was high inside the craters but went down approximately by half at the distance of just a few meters away.

According to U.S. military sources, the first detonation of a nuclear weapon against another country since 1945 took place approximately 11 miles east of Basra, Iraq sometime between February 2 and February 5, 1991.

By then, Iraq’s former capitol had been declared a “free fire on zone” – open to carpet-bombing by high-flying formations of eight-engine B-52s. “Basra is a military town in the true sense,” military spokesman General Richard Neal told the press. “The infrastructure, military infrastructure, is closely interwoven within the city of Basra itself.”

Though the soon-to-be fired General Neal claimed there were no civilians left in Basra, the city was actually sheltering some 800,000 terrified residents. In direct violation of Article 51 of the Geneva Protocols, which prohibits area bombing, the B-52s commenced saturation grid-bombing of the city. Mixing fuel-air bombs with shrapnel-spraying cluster bombs, the bombers levelled entire city blocks, the Los Angeles Times reported, leaving “bomb craters the size of football fields, and an untold number of casualties.” [Washington Post Feb 2/91; Los Angeles Times Feb 5/91]

With the city of Basra resounding to gigantic explosions and engulfed in “a hellish nighttime of fires and smoke so dense that witnesses say the sun hasn’t been clearly visible for several days at a time,” a 5-kiloton GB-400 nuclear bomb exploding 11 miles away under the desert attracted no notice.

Under the cover of massive Depleted Uranium tipped bombs that raised dirty mushroom clouds in thunderous explosions that rained radioactive dust over Jalalabad and nearby villages, the first nuclear bombs dropped since Basra in 1991 were detonated by American forces in Afghanistan beginning in March 2002.


Before their field tests were concluded, United States forces would explode four 5-kiloton GBU-400 nuclear bombs in Tora Bora and other mountainous regions of Afghanistan and was so powerful that it actually created an earthquake there.

The use of such lethal weapons by US military, which is a gross violation of the Geneva Convention, has been sanctioned by both US presidents Bush and Obama; thus they should be prosecuted for war crimes, as it is nothing less than a nuclear war.

The classification of DU munitions as weapons of indiscriminate effect is defined in the 1st Protocal additional to the Geneva Conventions. Their use is a war crime.

The US military contends that “mini-nukes” are “humanitarian bombs” which minimize “collateral damage”. According to scientific opinion on contract to the Pentagon, they are “harmless to the surrounding civilian population because the explosion is underground.”

The B61-11 is a bon fide thermonuclear bomb, a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) in the real sense of the word.

Military documents distinguish between the Nuclear Earth Penetrator (NEP) and the “mini-nuke”, which are nuclear weapons with a yield of less than 10 kilotons (two-thirds of a Hiroshima bomb). The NEP can have a yield of up to a 1000 kilotons, or seventy times a Hiroshima bomb.

This distinction between mini-nukes and the NEP is in many regards misleading. In practice, there is no dividing line. We are broadly dealing with the same type of weaponry: the B61-11 has several “available yields”, ranging from “low yields” of less than one kiloton, to mid-range, and up to the 1000-kiloton bomb.

In all cases, the radioactive fallout is devastating. Moreover, the B61 series of thermonuclear weapons includes several models with distinct specifications: the B61-11, the B61-3, B61- 4, B61-7 and B61-10. Each of these bombs has several “available yields”.

The latest in the series, the B61-12 is classed by many as the most dangerous nuclear weapon ever due to it being the first guided missile with dial-in yields making proliferation a real threat.


What is contemplated for the theatre of war use is the “low yield” 10 kt bomb, two-thirds of a Hiroshima bomb. What allows it to happen is the disinformation and propaganda issued that these weapons are somehow not really nuclear weapons – they are.


Depleted uranium has a half-life of 4.5 billion years and has thus earned the title “The silent killer that will never stop killing”.

These weapons are called ‘micro-nukes’ as if somehow that makes it better or legal. We know that tactical nuclear weapons or mini-nukes are part of the US-NATO arsenal and that they were cleared for use in the conventional war theatre by the US Senate in 2002. Rather bizarrely, these weapons can be used without the approval of the Commander in Chief.

As prof. Chossudovsky from Global Research asserts “the “evidence” of a nuclear attack against Yemen (see video) remains unconfirmed, the use of mini-nukes against countries in the Middle East has been on the Pentagon’s drawing board for almost 20 years. In 1996 under the Clinton administration, the B61-11 tactical nuclear weapon was slated to be used by the US in an attack against Libya.”

Nuclear weapons will now proliferate as a direct result of American use. It is known that Israel enjoys the luxury of around 80 nuclear weapons, deliverable with great precision to any spot in Iran from land, air or sea. This is especially so considering it is not a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

As the conflict in Syria rages on, concerns emerge as a result of the use of depleted uranium shells (DU) in Iraq. This from bandepleteduranium.org – 1/2/2015 – Citizens of Raqqa in Northern Syria, are concerned over the long-term impact of the growing number of strikes by Coalition forces on their city and nearby villages.

In a report to the United Nations on DU, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned that: “in a post-conflict environment, the presence of depleted-uranium residues further increases the anxiety of local populations”. The collective experience of communities grappling with the public health and environmental legacy of conflict, and the known or suspected presence of radioactive materials, is a contagious cocktail that can have a lasting psychological impact on the memory of people. These concerns have now spread to Syria.

It appears that Israel has used DU rounds as widely reported in Jamraya, Syria. It is just a matter of time before we find out which other country has been contaminating Syria. So awful are these weapons the international community has tried, in vain, towards an outright ban of their future use.

The collapse of Russia’s relationship with the West in the last five years has ended hopes of further progress of non-proliferation as the super-powers intend on upgrading and increasing their weapons systems and nuclear arsenals.

Pakistan is now deploying short-range battlefield nuclear weapons designed to deter Indian tank columns. Only four months ago, General Khalid Kidwai, the former director of Pakistan’s powerful Strategic Plans Division, the country’s main nuclear planning body, declared that Pakistan’s nukes “are not seen as separate weapons”, but are “very much integrated” with conventional forces.

To recap – nuclear weapons, whether under the guise of ‘depleted uranium munitions, ‘mini-nukes, ‘bunker busters’ are quite simply nuclear weapons that leave a legacy of long-term death and destruction.

The UN used nuclear weapons in Libya HERE – The use of Depleted Uranium in Libya has been certified by a group of independent scientists.

Nuclear weapons use and it’s deadly effects HERE.  Nuclear weapons use in Iraq is already devastating families experiencing profound congenital birth defects HERE and HERE

NATO itself, refuses to cooperate with investigations of war crimes and indiscriminate use of illegal weapons systems HERE and HERE

Type “congenital birth defects nuclear weapons Iraq” into Google images for a truly horrific gallery of misery emerges.

Dissecting the Beirut coverup: Ammonium nitrate not explosive and Lebanon was nuked before

0 thoughts on “Dissecting the Beirut coverup: Ammonium nitrate not explosive and Lebanon was nuked before

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *