First Tianjin, Then Siberia, Then Iraq, Then Rouren, France & Now…
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
December 3, 2019

I had a lot of people emailing me this story  in various versions in the past week about the explosion at the synthetic rubber chemical plant in Port Neches, Texas:

Massive explosion at chemical plant in Port Neches, Texas lights up night sky (VIDEOS)

60,000 people ordered to flee as another explosion rocks burning Texas chemical plant (PHOTOS, VIDEOS)

If you’re a regular reader here, you know me: I’m very skeptical of all these explosions. In fact, it seems as if we’ve seen a raft of them, beginning with the strange explosion of the Chinese chemical plant in Tianjin east of Beijing a few years ago. Remember that one? I even blogged about it. (See  and  and This was followed by yet another explosion at a Chinese chemical plant, and then of course we watched two Russian ammunition dumps and munitions factories explode, another explosion at a Russian hospital, an explosion of an ammo dump in Iraq, another chemical plant explosion in Rouen, France, and now a chemical plant explosion in Port Neches, Texas.

The Iraqi ammunition dump explosion I found highly suspicious, if for no other reason than that Arabs have been stockpiling munitions for decades in high heat without incident. They know how to do it. And similarly, the Chinese, French, Russians, and Americans know how to run chemical plants and store ammunition. Or do they? We’ll get back to that in a moment.

If there’s a pattern here, it’s this: the explosions seem to be either mainly in petro-chemical plants, or ammunition facilities. And they pose a nasty and highly problematical question: have the people running chemical plants and storing ammunition from France, Russia, and China to Texas all of a sudden become curiously incompetent and stupid? (Or, to put it differently, did they all attend American schools and learn their unique gifts of incompetence and stupidity from Common Core?) Or are we looking at something more sinister?

Back when the Tianjin explosion occurred, I speculated that perhaps it was not an accident, but a message. But if a message, who’s sending it? If we assume that the raft of these explosions is not accidental, nor incompetence, nor stupidity, then other questions of interpretation arise: are we looking at a kind of covert warfare going on between the countries involved? Or are we looking at one behind-the-scenes actor, with tentacles in each of the affected countries? Or are we looking at cyber-warfare, such as some suspect was involved at Fukushima? or are we looking at some sort of exotic technology able to detonate munitions and chemical plants at a distance? Some, for example, speculated after the Tianjin chemical plant explosion that a “rod of God” may have been the culprit, due to the extraordinarily deep and narrow crater left at the site of the plant. Others, myself included, have speculated that some sort of exotic energy weaponry may be involved, similar to what has been speculated for some of the California fires anomalies.

So on to the high octane speculation of the day, because there’s another pattern in evidence here. It’s one of those obvious things that one doesn’t notice until the obviousness attracts a bit of attention. And it’s a curiously contradictory pattern. In some cases, there’s a rush to (nonsensical) explanation. For example, in the case of the Iraqi ammunition dump explosion, there was a rush to explain it all as being due to high heat, the destabilization of explosives due to that, and so on. As I pointed out in a previous blog, that doesn’t make much sense to me, because as I pointed out, all major combatants in the region in the past few decades have been storing munitions all over the place, without incident. But in most other cases, there is a curious lack of explanation of the explosions, or if there is, they are long on narrative and short on plausible details.

It’s not much to go on, of course. As the old adage goes, the absence of evidence is not evidence of the absence of evidence, or something like that. It’s that strangely contradictory pattern both of the rush to explain certain incidents (the Iraqi ammo dump explosion) and the curious lack of explanation in other cases (Tianjin, Novosibirsk, Port Neches) that raises my suspicion meter into the red zone.

Or to put it country simple: my money is not of the “string of coincidences” hypothesis… covert ops are a game that two or more can play.

Read More @


About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Space: Satellites Explode, Lasers Revealed & Interplanetary Ops…

ScreenHunter_4096 Feb. 01 21.54
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
January 23, 2020

This has been a very odd time for space news. Odd, because the stories, taken individually, aren’t all that odd. But taken or viewed together over a long period, present a very chilling picture. So, consider these stories, shared by K.M., T.M., and G.B. Firstly, there was that story of the Russian spy-satellite that exploded:

A TOP-SECRET spy satellite operated by Russia is feared to have “disintegrated” in space.

As the article indicates, the likely cause of the explosion was unused propellant in the satellite. End of story (for the moment, but we’ll get back to it.)

Then there were stories about Russia (from 2018), France (from last year), and Israel (from this year) revealing powerful new ground based lasers, in France’s and Russia’s case, for anti-satellite capability:

High-Tech firepower: Russia develops new space laser cannon

France to develop anti-satellite laser weapons: minister

Israel hails ‘breakthrough’ towards laser air defence system

(Now, needless to say, ground-based Earth laser anti-satellite systems will have to have a mastery of phase conjugation to counter-balance atmospheric distortion of the laser beam. That Russia and France are revealing these systems means this is largely a solved problem.)

And finally, there’s the US “Space Force”:

Space Force preparing for everything, even interplanetary operations, as it sets up

Note from the last article these statements:

Maj. Gen. John Shaw, leader of Space Force’s Space Operations Command said the new service is building itself for the far future.

“This is a huge opportunity. We have the opportunity to create a warfighting service from scratch,” Shaw said Friday at an Air Force Association event in Washington. “I’ve been telling the team, ‘Don’t think about a warfighting service for the next decade. Create a warfighting service or the 22nd century. What is warfighting going to look like at the end of this century and into the next?’”

That may include interplanetary operations, Shaw said. (Emphasis added)

In other words, weapons and troops and ships for interplanetary operations. But, relax, that’s all for the “far future,” unless, of course, one wants to factor Ben Rich’s strange end-of-life statements about “finding errors in the equations” and being able to “take ET home.” Or, in this context, bring war right to ET. Oh, and lest we forget, remember the American general’s statement recently about having to fight “little green men?”

I submit that all of this context puts that explosion of the Russian satellite into a very different interpretive matrix. Russia isn’t talking of course, but to my mind, that raises the possibility that the explosion of the satellite was not accidental to a greater likelihood. If it was accidental, there’d be little reason for the Russians not to say so, even if it was a very secret satellite with very secret mission capabilities.  And a pin-prick from a ground or space based laser system on its propellant tanks may be the cause. Perhaps it may have even been a test of Russia’s ground-based anti-sat systems. But if so, again, there’d be little reason to keep it quiet, and every reason to crow about it.

So why the silence? Well, consider today’s high octane scenario. It is quite likely that the Russian satellite had a very sophisticated instrumentation suite, one for example that could detect, fairly instantaneously, the heat blooming signatures of being targeted by a laser. Very likely it had some sort of “all-around” sensor suite allowing it to determine give three-dimensional 360 degree detection capability. After all, “blind spots” on a spy satellite or an anti-satellite satellite would be analogous to the chink in the armor on the HMS Hood, and we all know how badly that ended. Such all-around sensor capability would have allowed the Russians a reasonably accurate picture of where any laser or other kind of energetic attack came from, whether from the ground, or space, and done so in that short period of time between its acquisition and its destruction by “whatever.” To make a long point short: if it was deliberate, then the Russians have a good idea of who did it, and how.

So we might be looking at a very real shooting war “up there,” and if the perpetrators were terrestrial, then expect similar “accidents” to occur to other nations’ satellites in the future as retaliation. But if the silence continues, perhaps that’s an indicator that someone else may have taken out the Russian satellite.

Just a thought.

See you on the flip side…

Read More @


About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

The Red Mercury Saga: Russians Say Lithium-6 Was Red Mercur
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
May 2, 2019

OK… I had to do at least one “fun” blog this week, and T.M. sent this article along, and I couldn’t resist. And it’s appropriate that the article is based on a report from those always-byzantine-never-to-be-trusted-Russians and their evil-super-genius-criminal-mastermind-martial-arts-expert-who-is-behind-all-conspiracies-of-all-the-ages Dr. Fu Manchu Vladimir Putin.

So what has Mr. Putin and his evil minions and lackeys been up to lately? Why, they now claim that all that red mercury scare that was the favored Nuclear Nightmare of the 1990s, and which occasionally resurfaces in a variety of contexts (most recently as the “culprit” behind those strange bridge fires in Atlanta a few years ago) was really simply a “code” for Lithium-6. But, as you might imagine, there’s a bit more to this story than meets the eye. Here’s the article, which, you’ll note, is really the abstract to an article:

‘Red Mercury’ is Lithium-6, Russian Weaponsmiths Say

And here’s the problematical part:

The name ‘red mercury’ is a code word used in the USSR nuclear weapons program since the 1950s to describe enriched lithium-6.

Well, that’s not really the only problematical part. There’s also this:

Lithium-6 has two nuclear weapons uses: as a reactor target for production of tritium, and in the form of lithium-6 deuteride as a thermonuclear weapon material. The most common production process uses large amounts of mercury as chemical agents. The code name originated because mercuric impurities contaminate the lithium- 6 during production, giving it a red color. ‘Red mercury’ has been identified by many European media reports as ‘any of several simple mercuric compounds and tinctures offered for sale by Russian and European agents,’ but none of these had any nuclear value. The uses for lithium-6 are consistent with claims about the uses of ‘red mercury.’ The USSR built a large complex in the early days of their nuclear weapon program to produce and stockpile lithium- 6. Some was also supplied to China in the 1950s. Russian and Western officials have both stated that no lithium-6 from Russian or Chinese inventories has been diverted since the disintegration of the USSR. (Emphasis added)

Well, what’s so problematical about that? To answer that question, we’ll have to take a short trip around Harvey’s Barn. In 2009 I published my book The Nazi International, in which I review the post-World War Two nuclear fusion research of Dr. Ronald Richter, which he was ostensibly conducting for Argentinian dictator Juan Peron. In 1951, Peron gave a press conference where he introduced Dr. Richter, and then made the extraordinary claim that Argentina had discovered the secret to the hydrogen bomb. The world’s press denounced Richter as a fraud, and so vociferous was the press response that Peron appointed a young Argentine nuclear physicist, Dr. Jose Balseiro, to head a commission to investigate Richter’s claims. Richter was indeed claiming to do the impossible – at least, by the lights at the time. He was claiming to obtain fusion reactions in a compound of lithium-6 (the rest of the compound was unspecified, but may have involved mercury) under extreme rotation and stress, and at temperatures far below that the standard thermonuclear chemistry of the period thought possible. In effect, Richter was making cold fusion claims some decades before Pons and Fleischman would do so.

Dr. Balseiro filed his report, basically pointing all this out, Richter was denounced as a fraud and placed under house arrest by Peron, and that was that.

Until the USA’s infamous Castle-Bravo h-bomb test, which ran away to a reaction of about 15 megatons’s yield, after a pre-detonation calculation of “only” 7-8 megatons. As I pointed out in The Nazi International, suddenly people in the USA became interested – very secretly interested – in Richter and his work again, and the US Air Force dispatched people to interview him. Meanwhile, the “cover story” of Castle Bravo was put out: the American thermonuclear bomb engineers had not factored in that the lithium-6 would burn in the reaction.


Except, that Richter had made this prior claim, and now, the Russians are also implying that they too knew lithium-6 would burn in a thermonuclear reaction as early as the 1950s. Which means either the American story about Castle Bravo’s  engineers being incompetent is probably yet another one of those narratives that has to be questioned, because it implies they fully knew and concocted a nonsensical explanation for it. And now we’re learning that mercury was used as a chemical agent in some unknown process involving the lithium-6.

It’s the presence of Richter in this mix that makes me wonder, once again, if there is not some truth in the red mercury legend, particularly in this current incarnation; it makes me wonder if some mercury “salted” with lithium-6-deuteride and then put into plasma form might not, in fact, under the right conditions, do what was always claimed for “red mercury”: detonate with enormous “quasi-nuclear” force.

Finally, most importantly, if this latest admission from Russia is to be believed, then it means one very important thing: the substance called “red mercury” was, and is, real.

See you on the flip side…

Read More At:

About The Author:

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Of The Qult & That Strangeness In That Wikileaks Dump Of…
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
April 23, 2019

So many people sent some version of this story last week that it made it almost immediately into my “finals folder” of stories to blog about. So thank you to all of you, once again, who brought it to my attention, and another “generic thank you” to all of you who take the time to send articles. Anyway, this story is about that little bit of strangeness that made it into the Wikileaks dump which occurred around the time frame of the arrest of Julian Assange. But before we get to that, first a little caveat lector; most regular readers here already know, that during my years of writing, talking, and blogging about “strange stuff” that  I’ve not commented much – if at all – about Wikileaks or Julian Assange. When Assange and Wikileaks first appeared, it was not a subject that was very much on my radar, and hence, to this day, I do not know much about Assange nor his operation. At the time he first appeared, I expressed some skepticism as to how it all worked, including who his sources were. I still have that skepticism. That said, I am even more skeptical and cynical about the nasty precedent and implications that his arrest portends. In some respects, I suppose, what bothered me about Assange was what bothers me about the Q-cult, or Qult as my colleague Bernard Grover calls it: it struck me as contributing to that malaise of our age, the desire to be “on the inside” and “in the know,” not that that was Mr. Assange’s goal, but that seems to be one implication. Granted, Assange and Wikileaks did not concoct a labyrinth of bread crumbs for the faithful acolytes to decode and follow nor did Assange assert cryptic claims to a kind of infallibility ex cathedra et ex consensu ecclesiae Qque. That is to say, Assange at least did not, so far as we know, construct a psyop nor was he part of one. That makes his arrest – at least to me personally – very troubling.

What I find even more troubling is the possibility that the Qult has been carefully nurtured for the past couple of years, almost as if some sort of “replacement” was being prepared for the day that Mr. Assange was taken down.

Which makes the strange little document in the last Wikileaks dump, and that has been making the rounds on the Internet, even more intriguing:

Wikileaks Document Exposes a “Secret US Base on the Moon

Taking this document (and the accompanying article) as authentic for the sake of argument, we’re presented with a bit of a conundrum. On the one hand, if one views the document itself, and then reads the above-linked accompanying article, one is struck by the fact that the original document states that the report that the Soviet Union destroyed a secret US moonbase was unclassified. Quite frankly, when I read the accompanying article and saw the document itself, it struck me that the headline read like one would expect to find on The National Enquirer, accompanying yet another article headlined Two-Headed Elvis Seen in Hotel Bar in Mindinao. So my first difficulty here is not only the Enquirerlike headline, but the fact that the whole thing is unclassified ab initio. Without the benefit of the whole document and possessing only its summary, we’re left with not much other than the possibility that we might be looking at a summary of a newspaper article that might have appeared in some foreign media.

A second possibility here is that we might be looking at a bit of deliberate and intentional “meme-planting.” After all, it would be a relatively easy thing to plant false documents for someone (like Assange) to “find” and disseminate.

But strangely enough, it took a junior Senator from Wisconsin to point out the possibility that perhaps one way to keep a “super secret” super secret is to downgrade the classification from “Super Secret” to “Kinda Secret but Not So Much,” that way, one doesn’t have to track the “Super Secret” document on the “Super Secret Documents Ledger”. By the same token, some times the best way to hide something is just to pull it from the public awareness, but not to classify it Super Secret, nor even Kinda Secret but Not So Much, but just to leave it unclassified and on the shelf. No one else knows about it, who doesn’t know the location on the shelf, and since it’s So So Secret, it’s above Super Secret and its ledgers; it’s So So Secret it’s not even classified.

But with all the strange photos of stuff on the Moon, including some strange things in the Chinese and more recently the Israeli pictures, the idea that the US may have had a So So Secret (i.e., unclassified) base on the moon is not so strange, and raises new questions: what kind of base – manned or unmanned – was it? Where was it? What was its mission? When did it become operational? When was it constructed? And who constructed it? Did this base have something to do with NASA’s strange L-CROSS mission in 2009, which was designed to crash into the South Pole of the Moon? Remember that one? We were all told that the impact would be visible on Earth, so spectacular would the collision be.

When it happened, it was  – at least after all the hype – a big nothing burger. Except to a handful, who were far more excited about the fact that the impact was not visible to the naked eye. What the telescopic images revealed was rather stunning, for the impact signature was not that of impacting on a solid surface, but of impacting on, and penetrating, a roof and exploding into an empty space beneath it.

And finally, to round out today’s high octane speculation, there is a bit of an odd thing in the assertion that the Soviet Union destroyed this alleged American Moonbase. On the document itself there is a space labeled TAGS< and under this heading, one reads “ARBOGAST, CEYD QUENTIN, OGEN – Operations-General, UR – Soviet Union (USSR).” Now, the way I’m reading that strange list, ARBOGAST, CEYD QUENTIN, and  OGEN” would seem to be codewords, with “ARBOGAST” perhaps being the codename for a specific project area, and CEYD QUENTIN and OGEN perhaps being specific projects within that project area. OGEN could be simply a sigil for what follows it:  “operations-General”. Then we get something very suggestive: “UR – Soviet Union (USSR).” Is UR explained by what follows it, as OGEN appears to be by “operations-general”, in which case UR becomes some sort of sub-project heading for the Soviet Union in whatever ARBOGAST represents? Perhaps. Or, even better, is UR intended – as one individual who sent this story to me speculated – to represent an ancient UR, Ur of the Chaldeas in Mesopotamia? And is the reference to the Soviet Union indicating that it has some sort of “project ARBOGAST” (whatever that may be) interest in Ur?

Who knows, but I find that whole chain and line of reasoning to be intriguing to entertain.

So, for the moment, color me skeptical, but willing to be open to the high octane speculations here if indeed we could find out more information and details about this document.

Read More At:
About The Author:

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.