76-Zentner the Nazi Atomic bomb found at Espelkamp in 1945

sy.gunson
This is a photo of US Army Colonel Charles A. Lindbergh

reply to post by hellobruce

Actually he had resigned his commission in April 1941.... and was in the Pacific as a civilian engineering representative of United Aircraft.

Ah yes !!

A perfect way to go undercover.

reply to post by xuenchen


Not everybody in intelligence work does so incognito...

Nowl Coward for example worked for British intelligence during WW2.

Moe Berg a famous baseball player undertook spying missions in Italy and Switzerland against the Nazis

Linbergh used his celebrity status from 1938 to 1941 to ingratiate himself with the Nazis and obtain data about the latest Luftwaffe aircraft quite openly.

During 1944 he worked as an intelligenceconsultant for the USN on secondment to the 443rd fighter squadron.

Maybe it is your logic which is flawed?

reply to post by hellobruce


From 1942 Lindbergh whilst working for Consolidated Ford on the Liberator was also a consultant flying instructor for United Aircraft Corporation in the Pacific training improved fuel/engine handling techniques on Vought F-4U Corsairs of the US Marine Corps to extend their range and his techniques were also taught to P-38 units in the Pacific.

The point being rhetorical about which service he belonged to and he continued to be addressed as Colonel throughout the War.

reply to post by sy.gunson


That's your opinion. I know all about Groves. He said no such thing. I question the source of your information.

if true very scary indeed

Thank-you Op for the interesting thread, (its more like the threads from years ago when ATS was good at investigating odd history)

The only part of the story i find hard to believe is the part about a A bomb being found and it being flown out of Germany back to the USA,
it is not the person who flew it out that gets me but the actual thought of an early design of A bomb being safe enough to move around in such a way.

even the early M Project A -bombs were very sensitive and were not one point safe , it was not until much later that safer designs were brought in.
(for more details see the new book called `Command and Control by Eric Schlosser.)

so i highly doubt that a bomb was found and that it was flown out. as for the other parts of the story it is quite possible, i myself have heard of such rumors, even my own father has talked of many places and finds that have not come to the public light. My father was based for a short while in Sylt an island in Northern Germany, as well as being used for raids into other countries, he says that it was also used as a staging base for about 4 days to ship out sensitive materials and persons that had been found around the Northern part of Germany , specifically he remembers the names : Neumunster, Scheslwig and Tarp.
the latter he says was a large bunker in a forest just outside the village of Tarp , and that a lot of material came from there.

I have not been able to find any info on the Tarp bunker or any info on Scheslwig other than it was used by the Navy.
but Neumunster as well as having a Luftwaffe base was famous for the Abbey were the Nazis held high ranking prisoners .
its also worth noting that for some reason Neumunster was spared a lot large bombing raids, even though it was a industrial town important to the Germans.


Great thread , I really hope more members have some more info to share on this.

Snoopyuk

reply to post by AlphaHawk


He used the stuff we sold to turkey. They passed to him and SHs us handlers verified what was wanted. SH was very shocked when his overlords betrayed and used him as a scapegoat.

Would be a rare twist If the German Zentner bomb was one of the two we dropped on japan hey?
NOW>>>>>>THAT WOULD BE A KICKER!

reply to post by stirling


It would make more sense if it exploded in New Mexico after all that's when the world's first nuclear bomb exploded

An observation.

Are we really supposed to believe that Hitler had an atomic weapon and chose not to use it against the Russians - an event that absolutely would have changed the tide of the war - or that he wouldn't have used it against the Allies?

The Nazi's threw everything they had at both sides to try and turn the war back in their favour.

I find the notion preposterous.

neformore
An observation.

Are we really supposed to believe that Hitler had an atomic weapon and chose not to use it against the Russians - an event that absolutely would have changed the tide of the war - or that he wouldn't have used it against the Allies?

That is what some people who want to revise history want us to think....

I find the notion preposterous.

That is a understatement!

Just adding my tuppence worth lol... This is purely my opinion, but it is shared by other nuclear physicists too...

Out of all the guys round the world who knew about the potential of an atomic bomb, there was one gentleman who stood out as being the one guy who would be able to get it to work. Werner Karl Heisenberg, and the Nazi's had him.

I really do believe that the fact the Nazi's never got to use an atomic device is to his eternal credit, and we owe a huge debt to him.

Like I say, just my opinion, but Heisenberg is an unsung hero of WWII

Agit8dChop
If the Nazi's had a bomb, they'd have used it the instant they lost Stalingrad and the Russians started pushing them back.

That isn't necessarily true, as the Germans had gas, but didn't use it in any military action that I am aware of...Hitler was very shrewd when it came to using non-conventional weapons. He had been gassed, and realized that sometimes these weapons could quickly get out of control and do more harm to his own troops, than the enemy. If his own scientists couldn't convince him that his own troops wouldn't be harmed, then I'm guessing he wouldn't use it.

That's saying that this story is true...which I do not know. From a military perspective, he was willing to risk everything with conventional arms, but he often showed an inability to grasp new weaponry (ME-262, STG44, IR assisted weaponry, mass production of modern tanks, such as the Panther, etc., etc.), and often stuck to an almost stubborn reliance on older, more reliable weaponry. One could argue that his way of thinking was the most effective utilization of Germany's war material, and production capabilities, however.

reply to post by neformore


Nef in my studies of world war 2 the one thing that has become readily apparent to me over the years is that the general public has nowhere close to the full story.

When you really look at it though there were empires within empires inside the nazi regime, ESPECIALLY when it came to R and D! Also never forget the author of the bond novel's job during the war and the things he saw as part of a british nazi research recovery team served as the basis for the bad guys and technologies he wrote about in said novels.

It would also be extraordinarily foolhardy to think the general public knows anywhere close to the whole story behind world war 2 at this point when it's ADMITTED that there are still literal TONS if not HUNDREDS of tons of material that's classified to this day from the war! Combine this with the fact that ATS has members with TS: SCI clearances that freely admit there's to this day stuff from the manhattan project era that will NEVER be declassified, and things like the infamous buna plant that produced no buna yet sucked up MASSIVE amounts of power and never had a single bomb dropped anywhere near it! It's pretty clear that we don't know the whole story.

Not only that but the voluntary purge of many of the writings that were commonly available to students or the physics community before the war that had knowledge that's key to nuclear weapons happened in the US, and some of this material never really came back out of the blackhole it fell down post war.

While I tend to disbelieve some of the smoking gun stories for a variety of reasons I do think ample bread crumbs and in some cases ABSENCE of said bread crumbs in telling patterns exists which indicate there is much more to the story than the one sold for public consumption.

Catacomb

Agit8dChop
If the Nazi's had a bomb, they'd have used it the instant they lost Stalingrad and the Russians started pushing them back.

That isn't necessarily true, as the Germans had gas, but didn't use it in any military action that I am aware of...Hitler was very shrewd when it came to using non-conventional weapons. He had been gassed, and realized that sometimes these weapons could quickly get out of control and do more harm to his own troops, than the enemy. If his own scientists couldn't convince him that his own troops wouldn't be harmed, then I'm guessing he wouldn't use it.

Well of course, HItler wanted to win. Germany also had no advantage in chemical weapons over its enemies.

Germany had an advantage in rockets over its enemies and so fired every one they could. If Hitler had been informed that his best scientists had made a nuclear weapon, he'd ask "does Stalin have them?" and they answer "No" (the idea that USSR then could out-science Germany was preposterous), then it would be used immediately to win.

It also reveals a military fact, that chemical weapons are not very good weapons, but air or rocket delivered nuclear weapons are.

current93
Just adding my tuppence worth lol... This is purely my opinion, but it is shared by other nuclear physicists too...

Out of all the guys round the world who knew about the potential of an atomic bomb, there was one gentleman who stood out as being the one guy who would be able to get it to work. Werner Karl Heisenberg, and the Nazi's had him.

I really do believe that the fact the Nazi's never got to use an atomic device is to his eternal credit, and we owe a huge debt to him.

Like I say, just my opinion, but Heisenberg is an unsung hero of WWII

This isn't so. There isn't any evidence Heisenberg was sandbagging the Nazi bomb effort. Statements otherwise are driven by Heisenberg's obvious self-serving explanations. (After the war, nobody was a really a Nazi but they all knew OTHER Nazi's). They just didn't have the talent, capability or scale.

In one key issue: Fermi was better than Heisenberg. Theoretical computations showed that graphite should be an excellent neutron moderator for nuclear reactors, but experiments didn't agree. The Germans then when forward with using deuterated water which didn't work as well.

Fermi figured out that it was a small %age of impurities in the graphite caused by the common process used to refine it which was the problem, and with higher purified graphite it worked as predicted. In some way, slightly ironic because Fermi was more of an experimentalist than Heisenberg and yet believed the theory more than the experiment. Of course real experimentalists are also knowledgable about all the ways an experiment may be misleading.

As a result the US could produce plutonium.

mbkennel

current93
Just adding my tuppence worth lol... This is purely my opinion, but it is shared by other nuclear physicists too...

Out of all the guys round the world who knew about the potential of an atomic bomb, there was one gentleman who stood out as being the one guy who would be able to get it to work. Werner Karl Heisenberg, and the Nazi's had him.

I really do believe that the fact the Nazi's never got to use an atomic device is to his eternal credit, and we owe a huge debt to him.

Like I say, just my opinion, but Heisenberg is an unsung hero of WWII

This isn't so. There isn't any evidence Heisenberg was sandbagging the Nazi bomb effort. Statements otherwise are driven by Heisenberg's obvious self-serving explanations. (After the war, nobody was a really a Nazi but they all knew OTHER Nazi's). They just didn't have the talent, capability or scale.

In one key issue: Fermi was better than Heisenberg. Theoretical computations showed that graphite should be an excellent neutron moderator for nuclear reactors, but experiments didn't agree. The Germans then when forward with using deuterated water which didn't work as well.

Fermi figured out that it was a small %age of impurities in the graphite caused by the common process used to refine it which was the problem, and with higher purified graphite it worked as predicted. In some way, slightly ironic because Fermi was more of an experimentalist than Heisenberg and yet believed the theory more than the experiment. Of course real experimentalists are also knowledgable about all the ways an experiment may be misleading.

As a result the US could produce plutonium.

As I said bud, its my opinion and you have yours which is the way of the world

a reply to: sy.gunson

Just made a quick search after finding this article on MSN main page over here in the UK.
www.msn.com... gzs8?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=wispr
www.express.co.uk...

If the url does not come up I always then use the quote function (not to quote the post but so that I can copy and past the URL into the search bar, you know how finneky the ATS code is to some url's when they are long).

Anyway this bares out very well what your thread say's, that being that in 1944 a number of pilot's and even official's witnessed an apparently successful atomic bomb test in Germany, if this is the case then one has to wonder what happened, why did the NAZI's not make there V1 and V2 into atomic weapon's, maybe the bomb was too large and had cost too many resources or just maybe the scientist or some scientists behind it thought better of it and destroyed there own research or even killed themselves to prevent this happening as by this juncture in the war many German's knew that there Fuhrer was off his head and a small circle knew he was addicted to stimulant's and medicine's, it is also more than possible some of the scientific genius behind this had been forced into cooperation in this development only to realized what they had done and so decided to stop it at any cost.

The report's are vague however but I do believe it more than likely and it also ties in well with my own theory about Operation Highjump the military armada sent by the US and allies to Antarctica were the NAZI's may have held a secret facility even after the war in late 1946 only to according to some reports return with significant loss including the destruction of one destroyer and several air craft.

So were the Nazi's somehow put back in there development after an early success, perhaps through the scientists sabotaging there own work to prevent a homicidal mad man from using it and did they then continue there development of this wonder weapon with the intention of using it only to have the allies steal a march on them reducing the value of there trump card and so forcing them instead to come to some alternate arrangement.

Whatever the truth it look's like the second world war was actually a much closer thing than any one will ever admit.

a reply to: LABTECH767


ILL agree with you there LABTECH,


It was pretty much save your ass time at about the 1943/45 time off the war even the death marches from the Murder camps in Eastern Europe were under way.


FOX.

originally posted by: CovertAgenda
reply to post by AlphaHawk

 

Ok i will bite...Try dropping the hype and read...... weapons of mass DESTRUCTION

Why do you insist on calling chemicals weapons "weapons of mass destruction" when they are nothing of the sort? Historical evidence suggests that chemical weapons are actually not very good at killing people, and very rarely, if ever, cause "mass destruction". As the American terrorism expert David C Rapoport said a few years ago, chemical and biological weapons would 'be better referred to as "weapons of minimum destruction", since they're just not very good at destroying things or people in a war setting. '

But then you already knew the context to which i was referring... so...

en.wikipedia.org...

"In a separate study published in 2005,[45] a group of researchers assessed the effects reports and retractions in the media had on people’s memory regarding the search for WMD in Iraq during the 2003 Iraq War. The study focused on populations in two coalition countries (Australia and USA) and one opposed to the war (Germany). Results showed that US citizens generally did not correct initial misconceptions regarding WMD, even following disconfirmation; Australian and German citizens were more responsive to retractions. Dependence on the initial source of information led to a substantial minority of Americans exhibiting false memory that WMD were indeed discovered, while they were not. This led to three conclusions:

1. The repetition of tentative news stories, even if they are subsequently disconfirmed, can assist in the creation of false memories in a substantial proportion of people.
2. Once information is published, its subsequent correction does not alter people's beliefs unless they are suspicious about the motives underlying the events the news stories are about.
3. When people ignore corrections, they do so irrespective of how certain they are that the corrections occurred.

A poll conducted between June and September 2003 asked people whether they thought evidence of WMD had been discovered in Iraq since the war ended. They were also asked which media sources they relied upon. Those who obtained their news primarily from Fox News were three times as likely to believe that evidence of WMD had been discovered in Iraq than those who relied on PBS and NPR for their news, and one third more likely than those who primarily watched CBS."

Now back to the thread topics if you dont mind.

The US Navy "Operation Teardrop" was obviously about the hydrophone operation.
I was told once that "Linda" could not handle the truth so it can't be disclosed.
It might be against T&C to post the damning photographic evidence.