4um: richard koshimizu SITE MAP

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Activism
See other Activism Articles
Title: richard koshimizu SITE MAP
Source: panpakaphan.com
URL Source: http://panpakaphan.com/richardkoshimizu_miiror/sitemap.htm
Published: Sep 26, 2010
Author: richard koshimizu
Post Date: 2010-09-26 05:32:27 by Itistoolate
Keywords: None
Views: 563
Comments: 10

panpakaphan.com/richardkoshimizu_miiror/sitemap.htm
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Itistoolate (#0)

I always knew that, with all their bright science students, there had to be some science slugs at the low end of the bell curve, even in Japan.
This moron actually thinks you could have hydrogen bombs and use them like demolition charges and not vaporize or knock over half the buildings in Manhattan.
This is beyond silly. Even a suitcase nuke is about like the Nagasaki device, you simply cannot make them smaller than that due to requirements of critical mass in plutonium devices. And a hydrogen bomb is a lithium shell around a plutonium bomb, essentially a fuel for the full fusion phenomenon.
Maybe this guy is playing a joke, just to see how stupid people are. Because there are not and cannot be any mini-hydrogen bombs. It is not possible.
Dr. Lowenstein of CJA says "Therefore, it is become necessary to move our plans to next phase ahead of schedule. Operation Dreidel-Yarmulke will be going ahead as it is planned, regardless of the claims you website make. Yes, you force our hand. But do not consider this victory." So what does he mean by OPERATION DREIDEL YARMULKE?
This guy is crazy or pranking people.

TooConservative posted on 2010-09-26 7:56:13 ET (1 image) Reply Trace Private Reply
#2. To: TooConservative (#1)
Cancer Hits 283 Rescuers of 9/11
« PBA Home « WTC Home « Media « New York Post 06/11/06 . Cancer Hits 283

Rescuers of 9/11. By SUSAN EDELMAN. June 11, 2006 — Since 9/11, 283 World
www.nycpba.org/wtc/media/nyp060611.html

Itistoolate posted on 2010-09-26 8:00:14 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#3. To: Itistoolate (#2)
Hate to break it to you but people get cancer from lots of causes other than mini-hydrogen bombs.

TooConservative posted on 2010-09-26 8:20:36 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#4. To: TooConservative (#3)
Hate to break it to you but not at the 'rate' present at the WTC.

Itistoolate posted on 2010-09-26 9:20:39 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#5. To: TooConservative (#1)
And a hydrogen bomb is a lithium shell around a plutonium bomb, essentially a fuel for the full fusion phenomenon.

That's the key. It takes an atomic bomb to detonate the h-bomb.
So what does he mean by OPERATION DREIDEL YARMULKE?
This guy is crazy or pranking people.
I vote prank. No one could be this stupid.
.

Blog
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

The second dumbest creature on the face of the earth is the one who cannot recognize its enemies. The most stupid of all is the one who will defend and collaborate with the very enemies that are destroying it and its own kind. -Ben Klassen
PSUSA posted on 2010-09-26 9:31:09 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#6. To: Itistoolate (#4)
The illnesses are consistent with the high levels of asbestos, dioxin, PCBs, lead, chromium, fiberglass particles which have been found there at WTC and for many blocks around it, especially downwind from the towers at the time of the collapse.
Generally, that area of Manhattan is about twice as hazardous as the biggest Superfund cleanup site. And yet the feds declared it safe. I think that they should have knocked down a lot more buildings and removed and replaced the topsoil entirely and got it done before rains seeped the particulates into the soil permanently.
So no mini-nukes were needed to explain cancer from a list of known carcinogens at the WTC site and in the surrounding area. That dust cloud was quite deadly, something the government won't admit.

TooConservative posted on 2010-09-26 9:43:29 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#7. To: PSUSA (#5)
I vote prank. No one could be this stupid.

I agree. I have read that it is possible to create subcritical releases of energy with small amounts of uranium or plutonium, but I don't think that the use of nukes is a likely or even practical method of blowing up buildings.
If what you see in 911 tapes are demolitions, they must be the result of many carefully distributed detonations.
This site is poppy-cock.
I would like to direct this to the distinguished members of the panel: You lousy cork-soakers. You have violated my farging rights. Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves. - Roman Moroni
randge posted on 2010-09-26 9:46:26 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#8. To: randge, TooConservative (#7)
His main point is WHO was behind it, not the H-Bomb.

Itistoolate posted on 2010-09-26 9:58:14 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#9. To: PSUSA (#5)
I vote prank. No one could be this stupid.

Got me. Someone must be.
It's not like it's hard to find some basic facts about plutonium bombs, minimum size for a bomb to explode, etc.
And of course you'd have radioactive isotopes throughout the debris and on the site. You'd have people many blocks away blinded by the fireball like at Hiroshima because hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers were staring at it constantly.
Well, this Japanese guy is too silly to argue with.
This is a good page on the construction of various types of nukes.
The infamous atomic hand grenade is a myth. The smallest warhead issued by the United States was probably the W-54 Davy Crockett, usually delivered by a recoilless rifle launcher. The warhead was 27.7 cm in diameter, 39.9 cm in length and massed 22.7 kilograms. Its yield was around 20 tonnes (not kilotonnes) TNT equivalent. You just can't make a deployable warhead much smaller or lighter and still have it work.
The lowest yield of any device tested (that I have been able to learn details of, anyway) was the Buster Able shot. This was known to have a core right at the lower limit of what could be squeezed to criticality, and no-one was surprised when it fizzled. The design had the irreverent name of The Petite Plutonium Fission Bomb, and was designed by Ed Taylor, he of Orion fame. The predicted yield was 0.2 KT. Once the yield from the chemical explosives was subtracted, the fission energy was estimated at the equivalent of under one pound of TNT. This is also the first recorded failure of any nuclear device, the first actual squib known. The core actually went supercritical and produced a detectable amount of neutrons. Just not many of them...
The problem with small nukes is that they are basically a fizzle and spread a lot of very dirty hard radiation around the area. This would be easily measurable in the WTC area.

TooConservative posted on 2010-09-26 10:04:20 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#10. To: Itistoolate (#8)
His main point is WHO was behind it, not the H-Bomb.

It looks like he used Microsoft Paint from Win95 to produce his graphics. LOL.

TooConservative posted on 2010-09-26 10:54:49 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

Freedom4um