Benjamin Fulford's posts and reports

[kemo]

Hi guys

I've just read the transcript of David Wilcocks' interview with Ben Fulford on his website. I'm never sure what to make of either. BF seems a bit mad and DW seems genuine but is blatantly self-affirming. They discuss the rumour abour nuking of underground US bases, the collapse of the world financial system, suppressed technologies, the power struggle between the NWO and their opponents - who it is said are getting the upper hand and something big happening soon etc etc. Interesting stuff though and no doubt there are nuggets of truth in there. Some of the topics have been posted in other threads, but as I say an interesting discussion anyway. There's an MP3 if you want to listen to the interview. I'm not very good with links - but you wouldn't have any trouble finding it.

I'd be interested to know what others think. These guys keep referring to their 'sources' but I occasionally suspect that either the sources are disinfo or maybe other theorists. Channelled stuff? Who knows. BF states that a lot of what he says is on public record so may so a bit of research.

Cheers

[Lily de Cuir]

Posted by kemo (here)
Hi guys

I've just read the transcript of David Wilcocks' interview with Ben Fulford on his website. I'm never sure what to make of either. BF seems a bit mad and DW seems genuine but is blatantly self-affirming. They discuss the rumour abour nuking of underground US bases, the collapse of the world financial system, suppressed technologies, the power struggle between the NWO and their opponents - who it is said are getting the upper hand and something big happening soon etc etc. Interesting stuff though and no doubt there are nuggets of truth in there. Some of the topics have been posted in other threads, but as I say an interesting discussion anyway. There's an MP3 if you want to listen to the interview. I'm not very good with links - but you wouldn't have any trouble finding it.

I'd be interested to know what others think. These guys keep referring to their 'sources' but I occasionally suspect that either the sources are disinfo or maybe other theorists. Channelled stuff? Who knows. BF states that a lot of what he says is on public record so may so a bit of research.

Cheers

Hi Kemo,

I agree, I never know what to think of Fulford nor Wilcock. The best scenario is that there are nuggets of truth in there somewhere! I personally am very leery of Wilcock's self importance and ego. Not a good look.

I will go searching for interview link and post if I can. (Don't count on it through, I'm computer illiterate mostly, except for the basics).

Cheers,
Lily

[ThePythonicCow]

I'm guessing that y'all above are referring to this: Disclosure Imminent? Two Underground NWO Bases Destroyed. It is an interview of Benjamin Fulford by David Wilcock, dated yesterday Friday, 16 September 2011 21:48.

[Lily de Cuir]

Hello Everyone,

Thanks Paul, I think this will work as the mp3 download for the interview. Right click to 'save as', then sync to your mp3 player.

http://divinecosmos.com/podcasts/Wil..._2011-9-14.mp3

(Not real good with this sort of stuff, but I'll have a punt and give it a go, lol....)

Love Lily

[Eric J (Viking)]

Listening to the link now...

Jeeeze Wilcox has stated that appox 60,000 deaths may have occured in the bunkers which were nuked!!

viking

[Bollinger]

I have to say that everything Ben Fulford says, however crazy and outlandish it sounds, he backs it up with very logical and reasoned explanation. It sounds more than plausible to me, it really does. If I had a choice of picking which version of events sounds the most plausible, I would pick Benjamin Fulford.

[Ria]

I do not have a problem with BF and DW views as the pieces are out there, they have just threaded them together.
This dose not make BF mad, it is very easy playing it safe, attacking people with courage.

[Bryn ap Gwilym]

Is there anyone who has confirmed that the ground has sunken due to the result of a underground nuclear explosion which would have taken out all the supporting beams & fracturing everything else around it, resulting in a huge unstable void that would have collapsed in on itself?
Are there any pictures to confirm the above or is this just second hand hearsay by David Wilcox who is promoting Benjamin Fulford?

An enclosed explosion is devastating & folk must understand, that tighter the grip the more violet it becomes.

NUCLEAR STRIKES AGAINST UNDERGROUND BASES

Recently, these sources informed him that the earthquakes that occurred in Colorado and the Washington DC area, surrounding August 22nd and 23rd, were, in fact, apparently nuclear strikes against underground military facilities.

Just one small test.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=S1f6vbiuUt0

[Eric J (Viking)]

Posted by Bryn ap Gwilym (here)
Is there anyone who has confirmed that the ground has sunken

Does it not depend on how deep the bunkers are?

viking

[Eric J (Viking)]

Very interesting....as Bolly has stated he does seem to back most of his stuff with good explanations ect etc ... for sure interesting times...

Love the ending ...

"But, unlike the end of the Soviet Union, it is not going to be followed by hardship or poverty. It’s going to be followed by an era of unprecedented prosperity and happiness"

viking

[greybeard]

Posted by viking (here)
Very interesting....as Bolly has stated he does seem to back most of his stuff with good explanations ect etc ... for sure interesting times...

Love the ending ...

"But, unlike the end of the Soviet Union, it is not going to be followed by hardship or poverty. It’s going to be followed by an era of unprecedented prosperity and happiness"

viking

Yes the ending was worth waiting for.

I think David W conducted the interview exceedingly well, intelligent questions and for the main part he kept quiet.

Me I dont have a clue but Dutchense? was pointing to escaping plumes which he attributed to underground volcanic activity.
I dont know if it was the same part of America or not but if it was reasonably close to the supposed nuking of underground facility that could tie in and also explain his u tube account getting into "trouble".
If there wasnt a conspiracy there would be a need to invent one--- smiling.

C

[Bryn ap Gwilym]

Posted by viking (here)

Posted by Bryn ap Gwilym (here)
Is there anyone who has confirmed that the ground has sunken

Does it not depend on how deep the bunkers are?

viking

Hi

The depth shouldn't really matter because of the area involved of an enclosed nuclear explosion which is alleged to have taken the lives of 30,000 people in one area alone, would have vaporised the infrastructure & the rocks, plus also fracturing the rocks over a massive area, in turn creating a massive void that the fractured roof would have no other choice but to collapse in on itself due to the huge span.
The area required to house at least 30,000 people, all of the equipment, food reserves etc could be many mi².
I'd imagine the blast doors in these structures open out making them almost useless to an internal nuclear explosion. All of that energy must have vented somewhere & some sort of evidence by such a blast must have be witnessed by someone. And this allegedly happened twice in two different parts of the country.

An example of an explosion.

(Hypothetically speaking)
Place a banger in your open hand & light it.
Now place another banger in a clenched first & light it.
Observe the outcome..

[Eric J (Viking)]

Posted by Bryn ap Gwilym (here)

The depth shouldn't really matter because of the area involved of an enclosed nuclear explosion which is alleged to have taken the lives of 30,000 people in one area alone, would have vaporised the infrastructure & the rocks, plus also fracturing the rocks over a massive area, in turn creating a massive void that the fractured roof would have no other choice but to collapse in on itself due to the huge span.
The area required to house at least 30,000 people, all of the equipment, food reserves etc could be many mi².
I'd imagine the blast doors in these structures open out making them almost useless to an internal nuclear explosion. All of that energy must have vented somewhere & some sort of evidence by such a blast must have be witnessed by someone. And this allegedly happened twice in two different parts of the country.

Hmmmm some info here ...



If the nuclear explosive is shallowly buried (Fig. 1-b, Fig. 2-c, Fig. 3 at >100 ft) a deeper and more voluminous crater is formed. This is due to two effects - the confinement of the soil above causes more energy to be directed downward, enhancing the compaction process, and at the same time the confining soil is blown upwards and outwards by the expanding gas, most of it falling to earth some distance from the crater.

As the depth of burial (DOB) increases the confinement effect increases, as does the amount of material lofted by the upwardly expanding gases. The average velocity of the material propelled upwards decreases as its mass increases, and the imparted motion becomes more vertical - i.e. less radial motion is imparted. As a result a larger and larger fraction of the soil thrown upward falls back into the crater (and is consequently called fallback). This tends to trap and bury much of the radioactivity.At some particular depth the increasing amount of material thrown upward is exactly balanced by the decreasing fraction escaping the crater, the crater volume reaches a maximum. This depth is called the optimum depth of burial and varies somewhat with the geology of the site, being greater for less dense and structurally weaker material (e.g. loose soil and alluvium) and shallower for dense strong rock (Fig. 1-c, Fig. 2-d, not shown in Fig. 3 but occurs between DOB 125 and 175 ft). For a 1 kt explosion in alluvium the depth is about 50 m (160 ft), in hard rock it is 43 m (140 ft). At the optimum burial depth about 90% of the radioactivity is trapped under the fallback. The largest crater produced by a U.S. explosion on land was by the Sedan test a 100 kt explosion fired at its optimum DOB (192 m).

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Libr...ndEffects.html

viking

[spiritguide]

No place to run, no place to hide! ..... Is true justice on the horizon? ...We shall see.....

[Bryn ap Gwilym]

viking Hi

Sorry but you have missed the point.
That link you post is meaningless in this case. That experiment is a device which has been placed in a tight hole.

The explosion that Benjamin Fulford is on about happened in two underground cities which would have been filled with open spaces. The blast would have been massive.

[Bill Ryan]

-------

I don't believe a word of it.

Benjamin Fulford may be sincere, but is certainly credulous and frequently played by his sources.

Credulous | Define Credulous at Dictionary.com
dictionary.reference.com/browse/credulous
willing to believe or trust too readily, especially without proper or adequate evidence; gullible.

[firstlook]

Posted by Bollinger (here)
I have to say that everything Ben Fulford says, however crazy and outlandish it sounds, he backs it up with very logical and reasoned explanation. It sounds more than plausible to me, it really does. If I had a choice of picking which version of events sounds the most plausible, I would pick Benjamin Fulford.

Whats interesting to me is we all know events are taking place behind the scenes. And as you stated, Ben (and Wilcock) are the only ones out there, as far as I have seen, who claims to have knowledge and give reasoning. Whether how much is true or not, they sort of win by default as far as availability is concerned. I wish more "insiders" and "sources" would start stepping forward for the community to critically examine what info they put up.

[mountain_jim]

Long as Fulford's sources for this underground nuke event were not all Sorcha Fall, which was the first source I heard for this. If true, it would mean that the Sorcha Fall source does mix some conspiracy-truths with the disinfo.

I believe the financial system stuff is more likely to be true that the nuke stuff, but my mind is open for more info on all this.

[Eric J (Viking)]

Posted by Bryn ap Gwilym (here)
viking Hi

Sorry but you have missed the point.
That link you post is meaningless in this case. That experiment is a device which has been placed in a tight hole.

The explosion that Benjamin Fulford is on about happened in two underground cities which would have been filled with open spaces. The blast would have been massive.

Its just an example Bryn ... the point I was trying to make the deeper the explosion the lesser the impact on the surface...this would apply to any explosion regardless of the size of the chamber... let just say if it was 1 kilometre below the ground the upwards effect would lesson as you get higher toward the surface... yes?? ...

Perhaps as Bill has stated we are all too gullible... who knows?! ...

If this is the case where does truth lie ...

viking

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Bryn ap Gwilym (here)
Sorry but you have missed the point.
That link you post is meaningless in this case. That experiment is a device which has been placed in a tight hole.

The explosion that Benjamin Fulford is on about happened in two underground cities which would have been filled with open spaces. The blast would have been massive.

The specifics details that Viking's post related differ, yes.

However we don't know the specifics of the actual underground "city", such as depth, geometry and surrounding geology. For example, the destruction, even the total collapse, of a long relatively thin tube in softer material, beneath a thick layer of granite, all some depth below the surface, would not (I suspect) show a major depression on the surface.

The details do matter -- that part of what Viking alludes to is accurate I believe.

In the case of these underground "cities", one might well expect them to be sufficiently deep, and under sufficiently hard rock such as granite, that they could survive a surface nuclear bomb directly over them. I would think that would be a major design goal. If such were the case, then the inverse might well be true - that a nuclear explosion inside them might not cause major deformation of the surface.

We also don't know the size of bomb -- perhaps it was not enough to collapse the major cavity containing the "city", but rather some smaller amount sufficient to render it quite inoperable.

[ P.S. -- written after reading Bill's "I don't believe ..." post above . I should say "alleged bomb", not "bomb" .]