WORLD : On May 19th I wrote an article for Sputnik about the Khlemnitsky explosion. I had examined
gamma radiation data from detectors to the North West of the attack site, which showed
increases in radiation from points in Poland near the Ukraine border, and through Germany. I
concluded with the belief that a warehouse containing Uranium weapons supplied by the UK
had been hit and that the Uranium had exploded in a huge fireball, and that the particles
produced by the explosion had drifted with the wind at the time across Europe.
The article produced considerable argument on the internet, with a large number of self-
described fact-checkers and “experts” weighing it to say that my conclusions were nonsense.
This is how the internet is controlled these days. It was written off as a Russian Fake (e.g.
The fact is, that although Uranium is a weak gamma emitter, through its daughter Thorium-
234, there are other situations where the gamma signal will increase at detectors, principally
the natural radioactive gas, radon, which can increase during rainfall and low pressure
systems. A Polish lab claimed that the increased signal was from Radon, reporting the
presence of the Radon daughter Bismuth 214, as if to write off the claim of a Uranium cloud
passing across Poland. But, I pointed out that there were no low pressure systems at the time
that would explain the sudden increase in gamma. This is where the matter was left.
Uranium in air is not measured in Europe as far as I know, and the only data that is obtainable
is the Uranium in air data from the High Volume Air Samplers (HVAS) at the Atomic
Weapons Establishment (AWE) at Aldermaston in Berkshire. These were set up in the early
1990s following a public enquiry into a child leukemia cluster near the site. The law requires
AWE to measure Uranium (and Plutonium and Tritium) at regular intervals at positions near
the factory but also far from the weapons factory. I have used these data before to identify
Depleted Uranium from the Iraq wars that drifted to England.
So, to follow up the Khlemnitsky argument, I have just obtained Uranium data from the
AWE using a Freedom of Information request. They sent me the data in an Excel File, and I
used the graphical function of Excel to plot the data they sent. Fig 1 plots the filter levels for
three of the offsite locations. The results show that I was right. In the May15th -June 15th
Offsite Filters operating at the time, there is a very clear signal for the month following the
explosion. I have also obtained data for the onsite locations, and these also all show the same
It may interest those who believe that the media is controlled, that the same thing happens
with the scientific peer-review literature. I sent my paper on the increases in Uranium in air
from the Ukraine war to two journals which have published my papers before, papers about
the effects of Uranium. The first, International Journal of Environmental Research and.
Public Health totally refused to consider it. I then sent it to Conflict and Health, which sent it
to a reviewer, but refused to publish it. This is astonishing, given that I supplied the raw data
to both journals. I put the paper up on a preprints site where it received attention.
The graph in Fig 1 shows that the Uranium in air in South East England went up by about
600ng/cubic metre from particles released by the Khlemnitsky explosion. What does this
mean? The mean size of a Uranium particle is below 1 micron. An individual inhales about
24 cubic metre a day. So, if the particles were there for a month, or 30 days we can average
the lung intake as 0.432mg. Doesn’t sound much, does it? But it converts into 200 million
particles per person in the area, and of course in the track of the plume in the UK. Not good,
given the effects we found in Fallujah.
Fig 1. 4-weekly air filter results for Uranium, offsite samplers at Aldermaston, Tadley, and
Reading. Khlemnitsky Ukraine explosion was on 14th May 2023 (1805-1506) s Normal
background is 200.
My study of Fallujah, published in 2010 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20717542/)
showed that there was a huge increase in cancer and congenital malformation in babies, and
general horrifying signals of genetic damage in the population after the use of Uranium
weapons there in the second 2003 Iraq war. We later identified excess Uranium in the
mothers of the birth defect children using hair samples and mass spectrometry, tracking the
increases back to the 2003 exposures by cutting the long hair samples into sections, a kind of
historic ice core way of interrogating the past:
Clearly from our studies in Iraq, the genetic and cancer health effects of Uranium particles
are significant. Indeed, they are arguably the main cause of the cancer in the Hiroshima
victims who were exposed to Uranium particles in the “black rain”.
Levels in Poland, Germany, and everywhere else on its journey to England, will have been
much higher. But there are no measurements available
Fig 2 is the archived synoptic pressure chart for the 13th . This can be used to plot the
direction of the winds and the route the particles from the explosion took on their way to
Fig 2 Wettercentrale synoptic chart for 13th May 2023.
A weak high-pressure centre to the north west of Khlemnitsky centered in the Baltics caused
a south easterly airflow through Ukraine, which took the plume to Poland. Here, detectors
picked up the gamma radiation. It likely then turned westerly or south westerly under the
influence of another high-pressure centre centred in Scotland. (Winds low clockwise around
a High). The main concentrations will thus have been in Poland, Germany, Southern Sweden
and Denmark before it arrived in the Netherlands and Southern England.
It is clear that the many “fake news” websites and “experts” were totally wrong. This is one
instance where they can be shown to be wrong by Scientific data.
This report was referred to in a Sputnik piece published on November 10th
It has received little attention on the internet as it seems to have been suppressed by Google.
This is not surprising given its political implications.
by Christopher Bus
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AC.NEWS
Disclaimer: This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). AC.News will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article www.ac.news websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner. Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.