NORTH KOREA PUTS WARHEAD ON SHIP!

Sat May 30, 2009 8:35 pm » by **Thefreeze**

Saturday, May 30, 2009
NORTH KOREA PUTS WARHEAD ON SHIP!

******* BULLETIN *******

Washington, DC (TRN) -- The U.S. National Reconnaissance Office which manages United States military spy satellites, issued a frightening alert this morning regarding North Korea.

According to the alert, which was seen by the Turner Radio Network, U.S. spy satellites code named "Misty-2" and "Lacrosse -4" detected a nuclear bomb being loaded onto an ocean going container ship at the port of Chiongjin in the northeastern area of North Korea.

That ship has set sail into the Sea of Japan.

The vessel is now under constant satellite surveillance and the U.S. Navy is deciding what to do about it. A military officer with knowledge of the situation told TRN:

"The ship has to be stopped but we can't send any ships to put a shot across her bow, order it to heave-to and prepare to be boarded. The North Korean ship Captain may have orders to detonate the bomb in such a circumstance, which would kill any ship trying to board her.

We can't send in attack aircraft to sink the ship for the same reason.

A submarine could safely torpedo the ship to sink it before the crew could detonate the bomb deliberately and the sub would survive underwater if the bomb went off, but since North Korean nuclear technology is very unstable a torpedo might cause the bomb to detonate anyway. The sub would survive, but the radiation released by an accidental detonation will cause terrible problems.

Even in the best case scenario, if the ship is sunk and the bomb does not detonate, there's the whole issue of having a nuclear bomb at the bottom of the Sea of Japan. The environmental damage from leaking plutonium would be catastrophic, poisoning the ocean and killing sea life for thousands of square miles.

This is an unimaginable act by North Korea and is going to end badly for everyone."
At present, the ship is heading out into the Sea of Japan. Its destination is unknown. If it is heading toward Japan, it can be within range of a major Japanese City within 2 days. If it is not heading out to Japan, it can reach the U.S. west coast in about 14 days.

More details as they become available. Check back
at 5/30/2009 01:09:00 PM
http://turnerradionetwork.blogspot.com/ ... -ship.html

Sat May 30, 2009 9:03 pm » by **Lowsix**

Ill look into it furhter, and am NOT knocking your post..

BUT..and this is a proven fact..

Hal Turnerr is one of the most Blatant Liars to ever refuse to back up his claims with proof, that hes lost all credibility.
Blog posts frm Unnammed and uncorroborated stories are his M.O.
I mean shit i can mak my own free blog..and say i got sources..

Thats not journalism by any stretch.
Hes PLAYING journalism..and nothing more..
He hasnt backed up a single claim in the last two weeks where hes said..
*(and this is funny)
Details as they emerge..
yeah um ok Hall..whens that gonna be?

Again, cant knock it, but im pretty damn sure that wed hear about this one.
Sure they cover shit up, but not Nukes traveling to the sea of Japan..if they arent covering up the recent tests..

That would invite an instantaneous strike from the US, Japan AND china, if it were true..

Imcalling BS for now..

(still a good find, just hal is full of shit usually)

Sat May 30, 2009 9:12 pm » by **Thefreeze**

Yeah LowSix, from your post from a couple days ago, I'm keeping an eye out on his news releases and where they go from there, wheather their creditable or not. Time will tell for sure, but thought I'd share the release. However, taking it thus far with a grain of salt and see what happens with them.

Dont entirely trust Hal, and sure don't trust the government and main stream media either.

Sat May 30, 2009 9:28 pm » by **Ph0enix**

thefreeze wrote:Yeah LowSix, from your post from a couple days ago, I'm keeping an eye out on his news releases and where they go from there, wheather their creditable or not. Time will tell for sure, but thought I'd share the release. However, taking it thus far with a grain of salt and see what happens with them.

Dont entirely trust Hal, and sure don't trust the government and main stream media either.

i'm with you on that. watch everybody. listen to everything. but make up your own damned mind...

Sat May 30, 2009 9:33 pm » by **Lowsix**

Freeze, another subtle clue i took in when reading the article..

(if you pasted the text directly)

The HEADLINE says...Warhead..
The Body of the article..says Bomb.

Carrying around a warhead would be a lovely way to get sunk at sea,
with the equivalent of taking Bullets to a gunfight..

Two entirely different and entirely discernible items, and ANY real journalist would immediately spot the problem it poses for credibility sake..

O damn, noticed s second problem..
(he claims) They claim they cant sink the ship bc the technology is unstable..and would set the bomb off..

But the problem with that, and any officer worth quoting wouldnt and COULDNT say that about Nuclear Technology.

You CANNOT start nuclear Fission with a conventional explosion..
Or else NK and IRAN would have been setting off nuclear bombs DECADES ago..
Their biggest technological hurdle has been in constructing the ignition phase of the bomb component which is VERy stable, and very hard to get right in a technical sense..

The ignition is actually the MOST complex portion of the sequence, and tif they could just use a big conventional bang to set one off..they would have had operational bombs LONG ago..

owned i think...

Sat May 30, 2009 9:36 pm » by **Ph0enix**

LowSix wrote:Freeze, another subtle clue i took in when reading the article..

(if you pasted the text directly)

The HEADLINE says...Warhead..
The Body of the article..says Bomb.

Carrying around a warhead would be a lovely way to get sunk at sea,
with the equivalent of taking Bullets to a gunfight..

Two entirely different and entirely discernible items, and ANY real journalist would immediately spot the problem it poses for credibility sake..

low why ya gotta be such a straight shooter man? can't a guy literally scare up an audience based on bullshit, start sellin books to profit from it, and retire early???

Sat May 30, 2009 9:40 pm » by **Lowsix**

ph0enix wrote:
LowSix wrote:Freeze, another subtle clue i took in when reading the article..

(if you pasted the text directly)

The HEADLINE says...Warhead..
The Body of the article..says Bomb.

Carrying around a warhead would be a lovely way to get sunk at sea,
with the equivalent of taking Bullets to a gunfight..

Two entirely different and entirely discernible items, and ANY real journalist would immediately spot the problem it poses for credibility sake..

low why ya gotta be such a straight shooter man? can't a guy literally scare up an audience based on bullshit, start sellin books to profit from it, and retire early???

Hell, id start writing a book of my own to debunk all this shit... but i cant...
Because i would be assasinated by the people trying to make money of Videos of Birds and bugs being passed off as interdimensional UFos cloaking and uncloaking...and unstable nuclearwarheadbombs and shit..

They are dangerous people..im finding..

Sat May 30, 2009 10:08 pm » by **Thefreeze**

LowSix wrote:
ph0enix wrote:
LowSix wrote:Freeze, another subtle clue i took in when reading the article..

(if you pasted the text directly)

The HEADLINE says...Warhead..
The Body of the article..says Bomb.

Carrying around a warhead would be a lovely way to get sunk at sea,
with the equivalent of taking Bullets to a gunfight..

Two entirely different and entirely discernible items, and ANY real journalist would immediately spot the problem it poses for credibility sake..

low why ya gotta be such a straight shooter man? can't a guy literally scare up an audience based on bullshit, start sellin books to profit from it, and retire early???

Hell, id start writing a book of my own to debunk all this shit... but i cant...
Because i would be assasinated by the people trying to make money of Videos of Birds and bugs being passed off as interdimensional UFos cloaking and uncloaking...and unstable nuclearwarheadbombs and shit..

They are dangerous people..im finding..

ROFL.... 'Touche'!!!!!!

Sat May 30, 2009 10:16 pm » by **Ph0enix**

LowSix wrote:
ph0enix wrote:
LowSix wrote:Freeze, another subtle clue i took in when reading the article..

(if you pasted the text directly)

The HEADLINE says...Warhead..
The Body of the article..says Bomb.

Carrying around a warhead would be a lovely way to get sunk at sea,
with the equivalent of taking Bullets to a gunfight..

Two entirely different and entirely discernible items, and ANY real journalist would immediately spot the problem it poses for credibility sake..

low why ya gotta be such a straight shooter man? can't a guy literally scare up an audience based on bullshit, start sellin books to profit from it, and retire early???

Hell, id start writing a book of my own to debunk all this shit... but i cant...
Because i would be assasinated by the people trying to make money of Videos of Birds and bugs being passed off as interdimensional UFos cloaking and uncloaking...and unstable nuclearwarheadbombs and shit..

They are dangerous people..im finding..

You' ve been gettin death threats from Ducky too?

Sat May 30, 2009 10:26 pm » by **Lowsix**

had edited to add in prior post,
but might get missed..so reposting new observation:

O damn, noticed s second problem..
(he claims) They claim they cant sink the ship bc the technology is unstable..and would set the bomb off..

But the problem with that, and any officer worth quoting wouldnt and COULDNT say that about Nuclear Technology.

You CANNOT start nuclear Fission with a conventional explosion..
Or else NK and IRAN would have been setting off nuclear bombs DECADES ago..
Their biggest technological hurdle has been in constructing the ignition phase of the bomb component which is VERy stable, and very hard to get right in a technical sense..

The ignition is actually the MOST complex portion of the sequence, and tif they could just use a big conventional bang to set one off..they would have had operational bombs LONG ago..

owned i think...