New Shill Policy Effective Immediately

Due to the influx of emails from government shills in my Inbox I am now instituting a new policy: all shills MUST donate to this blog BEFORE any emails are responded to. This includes (but not limited to) folks like Steve Jones, Christopher Bollyn, Judy Wood, Andrew Johnson, Thomas Potter, Mark Bilk, Peter Wakefield Sault, Simon Shack, OBF etc. The minimum donation is $1,000 for shills. Upon receipt of your donation I will respond to all emails within 48 hours.

Deconstructing Christopher Bollyn and Steve Jones

I have come to realize two central truths about the events of 9/11: Israel did it and they used nuclear bombs to demolish the WTC buildings. These are the two pillars of 9/11 research: Zionists and Nukes. If you come out with credible information that supports the involvement either of these pillars expect to be attacked. The attacks will be especially fierce if you come out with credible information on the nuclear demolition of the World Trade Center buildings. Gordon Duff recently published several articles in his VT Nuclear Education series on Veterans Today that confirmed that the World Trade Center buildings were nuked on 9/11. Right on cue the Zionist shill Christopher Bollyn came out and attacked Gordon for being a “Disinfo Toad” for supporting the WTC Nuclear Demolition Hypothesis. Of course Chris wasn’t able to refute the evidence for fission and fusion at Ground Zero. zionist-911

The Duplicity of Steve Jones

Many in the 9/11 Truth Movement consider Steve Jones to be a hero. Closer examination revels he is far from it. Jones is a nuclear physicist who denies nuclear bombs were used on 9/11. Once you understand the evidence for nuclear fission and fusion at Ground Zero the disingenuous of Jones becomes apparent. What better way to derail 9/11 Truth than to have a nuclear physicist who denies nukes? Steve has probably done more damage to 9/11 Truth than all of the other shills combined. Bollyn is a supporter of the Steve Jones nanothermite theory that has been thoroughly debunked numerous times.

Steve Jones wrote a paper in 2006 (revised in 2007) that is often cited by the nuke denying crowd: Hard Evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers. Jeff Prager and I wrote an article last year that refutes Jones’ paper point by point. For a complete breakdown see Open Letter to Steve Jones: Hard Evidence Supports the 9/11 Mini-Nuke Hypothesis and Mystery Solved: The WTC was Nuked on 9/11.

The Department of Energy Water Samples

The first thing Jones tries to refute in his paper is the tritium levels in the basement of WTC Building 6: “Observation of tritium (an important component of hydrogen-bomb fuel) at WTC sites at the few nano-curie level only. This is strong evidence against the mini-nuke hypothesis.” As we observed in our article Jones fails to account for dilution of the tritium by four million gallons of water. Why was tritium found in the basement of WTC 6 in the first place? Leaking gun sights or EXIT signs can’t explain what happened to that building:

maxresdefaultThere is a huge crater in the center of the building and it was so hot that firefighters has to spray millions of gallons of water on it. Clearly there was an explosion in the basement of WTC 6 and the presence of tritium confirms it was a thermonuclear explosion:

Tritium is a very rare isotope of hydrogen containing one proton and two neutrons. Tritium is radioactive with a half-life of 12.32 years. Also Known As: hydrogen-3, 3H.

Commercial uses of tritium account for only a small fraction of the tritium used worldwide. Instead, the primary use of tritium has been to boost the yield of both fission and thermonuclear (or fusion) weapons, increasing the efficiency with which the nuclear explosive materials are used. Tritium generation from fusion reactions is much higher than from fission. The tritium that is produced by a nuclear explosion is almost completely converted to tritiated water (HTO), which then mixes with environmental water. This is EXACTLY what we see in the basement of Six World Trade. Jones makes no effort to explain HOW the tritium got in the basement absent a thermonuclear explosion. Instead he just states that “these results are well below the levels of concern to human exposure.”

The USGS Dust Samples

The fifth point in Jones’ paper is especially egregious: Nuclear activation or residual “fall-out” radioactivity (above background) was NOT observed, in tests performed by the author on actual WTC samples. This result is consistent with the low Iodine-131 measured by independent researchers (point 2 above) and the low radionuclide counts (point 4 above) and again provides compelling evidence against the mini-nuke-at-Towers hypothesis.

Jones’ analysis of the dust samples collected from Janette MacKinlay’s apartment is suspect to say the least. Fortunately we have far more reliable data from the dust samples collected by the USGS.

If all you knew about 9/11 was all of the common fission products that show up on the chemistry table of the USGS dust samples: Arsenic, Rubidium, Strontium, Barium, Yttrium, Niobium, Molybdenum, Silver, Cadmium, Antimony, Cesium, Lanthanum and Cerium, you would be highly suspicious 9/11 was a nuclear event.

Let’s look at just four elements found in the USGS dust samples (barium, strontium, copper and zinc) and how they prove nuclear fission took place: From Jeff Prager’s nuclear fission break down in Mystery Solved:

Barium and Strontium: People might argue that strontium and barium could be found in building debris and they would be correct however strontium and barium could never, under any circumstances, be found as building debris constituents in a demolition in these quantities.

The levels never fall below 400ppm for Barium and they never drop below 700ppm for Strontium and they reach over 3000ppm for both of them at WTC01-16, Broadway and John Streets. Why?

Barium and Strontium are rare Trace elements with limited industrial uses. The enormous peak in Barium and Strontium concentration at WTC01-16 is readily apparent in the chart below. The concentration of the two elements reaches 3130ppm for Strontium and 3670ppm for Barium or over 0.3% by weight of the dust. This means that 0.37% of the sample was Barium and 0.31% of the sample was Strontium by weight at that location, WTC01-16, Broadway and John Streets. The Mean concentration for Barium including the very low girder coating samples is 533ppm and for Strontium it’s 727ppm. These are not Trace amounts. They are highly dangerous and extremely toxic amounts. They are also critical components of nuclear fission and the decay process.

Barium and StrontiumHere we’re plotting the concentration of Barium at each location against the Strontium concentration. The correlation between the concentrations of the two elements, Barium and Strontium is extremely high.

The Coefficient of Correlation between the concentration of Barium and Strontium at the outdoor and indoor sampling locations is 0.99 to 2 decimal places (0.9897 to 4 decimal places). So we have a Correlation Coefficient between the concentration of Barium and the concentration of Strontium of 0.9897, or near perfect. The maximum Correlation Coefficient that is mathematically possible is 1.0 and this would mean we have a perfect match between the two factors we’re examining and the data points would lie on a straight line with no variation between them. To obtain a Correlation Coefficient of 0.9897 with this number of measurements (14) around Lower Manhattan is very, very significant indeed. What this means is that we can say that there’s a 99% correlation in the variation in the concentration between these two elements. They vary in lockstep; they vary together. When one element varies so does the other. We can state with absolute mathematical certainty that any change in the concentration of one of these elements, either the Barium or Strontium, is matched by the same change in the concentration of the other. Whatever process gave rise to the presence of either the Barium or the Strontium must have also produced the other as well. Fission is the only process that explains this.

Zinc: In the graph below Zinc has been divided by a factor of 10 to avoid losing all the detail in the scaling if the ‘Y’ axis instead went up to 3000 ppm. The variation in Lead is matched by the variation in Zinc almost perfectly across all sampling locations, including the Indoor and Girder Coating samples.

The concentration of Copper follows that of Zinc with one distinct exception at WTC01-15, Trinity and Cortlandt Streets, just several hundred feet East of Building Four. There seem to be two Copper-Zinc relationships. If some of the Zinc was being formed by beta decay of Copper, then the high Copper at WTC01-15 could reduce Zinc, since formation of Zinc by that decay pathway would be retarded by material being held up at the Copper stage, before decaying on to Zinc. Therefore this graph does confirm that some of the Zinc was indeed being formed by beta decay of Copper.

This would at least be a very small mercy for the civilian population exposed in this event since the Zinc isotopes formed from Copper are stable, i.e. they are not radioactive.

zinc lead copper

The copper found in the Ground Zero dust is indicative of nuclear fission. If we plot the concentration of Copper against Zinc and Nickel, we obtain the graphs pictured here. The concentration of Nickel was almost the same everywhere, except for the peak of 88 ppm matched by the Copper peak of 450 ppm.

The Copper – Zinc relationship is very interesting, showing in fact two distinct relationships again depending on isotopic composition. There are two radioactive isotopes of Copper (Cu 64 and Cu 67) with short half-lives of 12.7 hours and 2.58 days respectively which decay into Zinc isotopes. The other two isotopes (Cu 60 and Cu 61) decay the other way by positron emission into Nickel and in fact Cu 64 goes both ways, into both Nickel and Zinc. This would explain why there strongly appear to be two Copper – Zinc relationships.

The decay of radioactive Copper by beta particle emission into Zinc would have been another source for the extraordinarily high concentrations of Zinc found in the World Trade Center Dust.

Looking at the data for Zinc we see that the Zinc concentration for WTC01-02, Water Street at the intersection of New York, is 2990 ppm and this immediately stands out. In fact, for the outdoor samples, Zinc is the most common Trace element at all sampling locations, with generally between 1000 ppm and 2000 ppm except for this spike of nearly 3000 ppm at WTC01-02.

This equates to an enormous concentration of Zinc. 0.1% to 0.2% of Zinc in the dust overall and at WTC01-02, 0.299% of the dust was Zinc. This exceeds the concentration of the supposed “non-Trace” element Manganese and Phosphorous and almost equals the elevated Titanium concentration of 0.39% at that same location.

What process produced the zinc?

If we include the data for WTC01-16, the Correlation Coefficient between the Zinc and Barium concentration is 0.007 to 3 decimal places, from which we can conclude that there is absolutely no correlation at all. But if we exclude that one sampling location, where Barium and Strontium concentrations peaked, the correlation coefficient between Zinc and Barium is 0.96 to two decimal places and between Zinc and Strontium, 0.66 to two decimal places. So what happened?

There is a very strong linear relationship between Barium and Zinc found at the World Trade Center. This may indicate that a closely related nuclear sub-process gave rise to them, which produced 3 times as much Zinc as Barium by weight. If so, that would be a very unusual nuclear event.

There is a lesser known nuclear process that accounts for this, which would be indicative of very high energies indeed. This process is known as Ternary Fission.

What does evidence for Ternary Fission in the dust samples mean to us in the 9/11 context? First, that the destruction of the WTC buildings was a very high energy event. Ternary Fission requires high energy levels. Two 110 story buildings were converted to dust in 9 and 11 seconds respectively. Ground temperatures were between 600 and 2,000 °F for 6 months after 9/11 – it takes a lot of energy to heat that much ground for that long – only underground nuclear explosions can explain this. Secondly, it sheds some light on the types of devices used. A hydrogen bomb is a two stage device. The fission primary stage is used to generate enough heat to start a more powerful fusion reaction of deuterium and tritium, the two heavier isotopes of hydrogen. Often times the primary fission stage is boosted with tritium and that appears to be the case here. A typical nuclear fission event will split the uranium nucleus into two unequal fragments typically around mass 95 and 137. Ternary fission splits the nucleus into three parts and true ternary fission splits it into three equal fragments (mass 30) or zinc. We see copper decaying into zinc in the dust samples but that doesn’t explain all of it. True Ternary Fission explains the high amount of zinc in the dust. We see evidence for fission-triggered fusion bombs in the dust and water samples.

Radiological Cleanup

With all of the radioactive fallout at Ground Zero it was necessary for the perpetrators to remediate the soil and decontaminate all material leaving. Seeing these pictures of the cleanup there can be little doubt nuclear bombs were detonated:

dump trucks

M291 resin is required in order to prepare for a full radiological decontamination at ground zero. Dozens of trucks immediately on scene the afternoon of 9/11 with this military grade decontamination material.

NNSA3

 NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration) Radiological Assistance Program members of Brookhaven, NY RAP Region 1 performing full radiological decontamination before leaving ground zero.

NNSA1The NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration) has protocol for the full radio-logical decontamination of all material leaving ground zero which even includes GPS chipping materials using the latest in satellite security.

NNSA2

NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration) Radiological Assistance Program members of Brookhaven, NY RAP Region 1 performing work at the radioactive landfill site at Fresh Kills, New York. Notice not just breathing protection from exposure to artificial ionizing radiation, but protection of eyes and even ear canals as well.

Iron-Rich Spheres

Did thousands of tons of nanothermite produce the iron-rich spheres at Ground Zero? Here is an excerpt from T Mark Hightower’s old blog and I have reposted it on mine:

Calculations can help define the magnitude of various theories. I am referencing a calculation that Niels Harrit emailed to me and various others on 7/26/2011. He calculated the amount of thermitic material that would have been necessary to account for the quantity of iron-rich spheres in the WTC dust, assuming of course that the iron reaction product of the thermite reaction was the source of the spheres. The range of thermitic material that he calculated was from 29,000 metric tons to 143,000 metric tons per Twin Tower, depending on the iron oxide concentration assumed for the thermitic material. These numbers are unrealistically high in terms of the quantity of thermitic material that could have or would have been loaded into a Twin Tower by the perpetrators before its destruction, in my view, but that’s not what I want to get into right here. I want to use this huge quantity of iron-rich spheres to illustrate an alternate explanation for their presence.

An intermediate value from Harrit’s calculation referenced above was that conservatively 11,660 metric tons of iron-rich spheres were present in the dust generated from the destruction of one Twin Tower. If we assume that the iron-rich spheres were mostly iron, with the iron source possibly being the structural steel rather than thermitic material, the energy required to convert this much iron to the molten state can be calculated. (It is assumed that the iron-rich spheres required a prior molten state for their formation.) Furthermore, if we express the energy in terms of the quantity of TNT equivalent based on its heat of explosion, these units can give us something to relate to in terms commonly associated with specifying the magnitude of nuclear explosions, kilotons. So if the calculation is done for just the energy necessary to melt the iron, on the order of 1 kiloton of TNT is the energy equivalent required. If we also include the energy necessary to heat the iron from room temperature to its melting point, then on the order of 4 kilotons TNT equivalent would be required. Of course there would be more kilotons than this to account for all of the other destruction in addition to just producing the iron-rich spheres, so we are definitely talking about something in the multiple kiloton range. This helps to illustrate the magnitude of what we may be dealing with in the destruction of the Twin Towers and points towards the possibility of nuclear devices.

Does Nanothermite Even Exist?

On 12/13/2012 I had occasion to call Gordon Duff and get his take on nanothermite. Gordon states in the audio clip below that his guys at Los Alamos told him that they couldn’t produce anything smaller than 10 microns and it couldn’t blow a hole in a piece of paper. They were able to produce some 6 micron nanothermite in zero gravity on the International Space Station that was exceedingly explosive. But they only produced a couple of grams! Not the thousands of tons needed to demolish the World Trade Center Buildings. If there is a factory out there producing 6 micron nanothermite Gordon is not aware of it.

Bollyn: I married an Israeli Intelligence Officer

In the audio clip below Bollyn states that he married an Israeli intelligence officer and he has lived in Israel off and on since he was 18.


ex-italian_president_francesco-cossiga_911_mossad_cia

The True Roles of Steve Jones and Christopher Bollyn in the 9/11 Cover Up

Jones and Bollyn vehemently deny that the WTC buildings were nuked on 9/11 in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Bollyn talks about Israeli involvement in the events of 9/11 but promotes the nanothermite theory which cannot be tied to Israel or anyone else for that matter. It is not physically possible to demolish a building using non-existent nanothermite.

Bollyn is a guy that married an Israeli intelligence officer, has spent years living in Israel, denies the obvious evidence of nukes on 9/11 and he calls Gordon Duff a Disinfo Toad. Chris has revealed himself to be a complete Zionist Shill. No one should take him seriously as a 9/11 researcher. We see your true colors Chris.

There can be no doubt that Steve Jones knows he is promoting a fraudulent theory to the public. Steve has managed to deceive many people in the 9/11 Truth Movement over the years. We’re on to you Steve and your days of relevance in the 9/11 Truth Movement are waning.

 

The GOP/Jewish Coalition: Presidential Hopefuls Pander to Zionist Billionaire Sheldon Adelson

I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. – Revelation 2:9 Adelson As the Obama Administration’s days in office start to wane, the process of vetting 2016 Republican presidential hopefuls is in full swing. Adelson has let it be known that he is looking for a Republican to back in the 2016 Presidential election. Right on queue Scott Walker, John Kasich, Chris Christie and Jeb Bush took turns pandering to the 80 year old hard core Zionist billionaire. Adelson and his wife spent more than $93 million on the 2012 elections so sucking up to Shelly is certainly worth the effort for a 2016 Republican presidential wannabe.

Business WeekWhat does Adelson hope to accomplish with his primary?

1. He wants to back an electable, mainstream Republican candidate. This is an implicit acknowledgement that he erred in backing a fringe figure in Gingrich last time around. Gingrich was the one who first launched the devastating “vulture capitalist” attacks on Romney (although the phrase is Rick Perry’s) that Obama later picked up. So this time, instead of personal loyalty, Adelson is focusing on electability. As notable as Adelson’s Vegas roster this weekend is the list of marquee names who are not there: Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee.

2. He really wants to stop Internet gambling. Adelson considers it a threat to his casino business. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham introduced legislation this week—drafted with Adelson’s lobbyist, according to the New York Times—that would shut down Internet gambling. Adelson also funds a Washington pressure group, the Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling, that has focused on enlisting the support of social conservatives. As Graham told to the Times, explaining why he had become the senate sherpa for Adelson’s interests: “I would say that Sheldon has aligned himself with most Baptists in South Carolina.”

Here is Adelson’s presidential dilemma: The Venn diagram of “Republicans who oppose online gambling” doesn’t much overlap with “Republicans who are electable.” The first group comprises mainly social conservatives, such as Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, and possibly Rick Perry, who would oppose gambling on moral grounds. None are remotely top-tier candidates who would widen the Republican Party’s electoral appeal. The candidates who conceivably could do that—Christie, Bush, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul—tend to be positioning themselves as forward-thinking, innovation-minded, tech-friendly Republicans who can appeal to a more modern and moderate segment of the electorate than the old GOP. In the past two weeks, Rubio has given speeches at Uber and Google (GOOG) in Washington, D.C. Christie has already legalized Internet gambling in New Jersey. An outright ban seems an unlikely position for them to suddenly adopt, even if a lot of money is on the line. Sheldon Primary

Pat Buchanan’s Observations

These two goals don’t seem too ominous – everyone wants to back a winner and what oligarch doesn’t want to protect his business interests? But does Adelson actually have a far more sinister goal? From Pat Buchanan’s blog:

But last fall at Yeshiva University, this “very rational guy” (Adelson) gave this response to a question from Rabbi Shmuley Boteach on whether he supports U.S. negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program:

“No. What do you mean support negotiations? What are we going to negotiate about? What I would say is, ‘Listen, you see that desert out there, I want to show you something.’ …

You pick up your cell phone and you call somewhere in Nebraska and you say, ‘OK let it go.’

“So, there’s an atomic weapon, goes over ballistic missiles, the middle of the desert, that doesn’t hurt a soul. Maybe a couple of rattlesnakes, and scorpions, or whatever.

“And then you say, ‘See! The next one is in the middle of Tehran. So, we mean business. You want to be wiped out? Go ahead and take a tough position and continue with your nuclear development.

“‘You want to be peaceful. Just reverse it all, and we will guarantee that you can have a nuclear power plant for electricity purposes, energy purposes.’”

Adelson’s response was recorded by Philip Weiss of Mondoweiss website who was at Yeshiva and filmed the interview. Weiss says the audience cheered Adelson’s proposed nuclear strike on Iran and no one on the stage, not Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens, peeped a word of dissent.

And this is a “very rational guy,” who doesn’t want “a crazy extremist to be the nominee”?

This is someone Republican presidential candidates must appease, if they don’t want tens of millions in attack ads run against them?

This is someone the Republican presidential hopefuls must hearken to now?

Again, so it would seem.

Chris Christie Makes His Pitch

Christie JerusalemGov. Chris Christie’s Speech at the Republican Jewish Coalition

During his talk before the few dozen members of the RJC, Gov. Chris Christie recounted his recent trip to Israel: “I took a helicopter ride from the occupied territories” and came “to understand the military risk that Israel faces every day.”

Christie’s effort at bonding boomeranged. An angry Morton Klein of the Zionist Organization of America confronted Christie to demand that he explain just what he meant by “occupied territories.”

For half a century, the United States has considered the West Bank occupied land where Israeli settlements are illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Whatever Christie’s response, it did not satisfy the ZOA or Klein who declared: “Either [Christie] doesn’t understand the issue, or he’s hostile to Israel.

Whereupon Christie, in a private audience with Adelson, apologized.

A source close to Adelson told Politico that Christie made clear “that he misspoke when he referred to the ‘occupied territories.’ And he conveyed that he is an unwavering friend and committed supporter of Israel, and was sorry for any confusion that came across as a result of the misstatement.”

The governor is a tough guy, but this sounds like groveling.

Is this what Republican presidential candidates must do now?

Kowtow to this fattest of fat cats who wants to buy himself an American war on Iran?

Typically the unseemly process of politicians selling themselves off to the highest bidder goes on behind closed doors but at the Republican Jewish Coalition aka The Sheldon Primary, the proceedings were on full public display.

Scott Walker: Battle Tested Zionist Shill

Scott Walker, the Wisconsin governor, pandered unabashedly by giving the Hebrew meaning of his son Matthew’s name and by mentioning that he displays a menorah at home along with the Christmas tree.

Walker RJC

Walker is no stranger to sucking up to Zionist billionaires – he has made a career out of toeing the Koch brother’s line in Madison and doing everything he can to crush what’s left of the labor movement.

Walker is an extremely divisive figure and he even had to face a recall election that he somehow managed to win. A large percentage of the Wisconsin populace hates Walker with a passion. It is difficult to see him winning a national election.

recall-walker-license-plate-dave-hoefler

John Kasich: From Moderate Republican to Zionist Sycophant

John Kasich can hardly be described as a hard core conservative. During his congressional career from 1983 to January of 2001 he supported the assault weapons ban, cut spending on the B-2 bomber and worked to close some corporate tax loopholes. As chairman of the House Budget Committee he was credited with balancing the Federal Budget.

Fast forward to the Sheldon Primary and Kasich is reduced to pandering to the Zionists:

Kasich, the Ohio governor, kept addressing his speech to “Sheldon,” as if he were having a private tete-a-tete with the mega-donor (Adelson and his wife spent more than $93 million on the 2012 elections) and not speaking to a roomful of people.

No doubt a veteran politico like Kasich is acutely aware of the need to stay on the good side of the Zionists. If they start running attack ads that will spell the end of any realistic chance he has at the White House.

Jeb Bush: The Prize Bull

Ari Fleischer, press secretary to Bush 43, and a member of Adelson’s RJC fiefdom, put it plain and simple: “The ‘Sheldon Primary’ is an important primary. … anybody running for the Republican nomination would want to have Sheldon at his side.”

December_jpg

One such man is Jeb Bush, son and brother to presidents, who was the prize bull at Sheldon’s cattle show. Daniel Ruth of the Tampa Bay Times speculates on Jeb’s motive in showing up:

“Would you slink into Las Vegas to schmooze gambling mogul Sheldon Adelson who regards GOP presidential nominees as if they were trophy heads mounted in his den, if you had no interest in the White House? Bush is not going to Vegas to catch Meat Loaf’s act at Planet Hollywood.”

The 2016 presidential hopefuls “are falling at his feet,” said a veteran Republican strategist of the 80-year-old oligarch. Each of those who came — Bush, Chris Christie, and Govs. Scott Walker and John Kasich — apparently auditioned, one by one, before the godfather.

The Bush family has a long track record of serving the Zionists. Bush is also polling at around 12.3% at the time of this writing so he is not far behind early leaders Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee.

Rand Paul: Elephant in the Room

At the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) meeting in Las Vegas this weekend, Paul was nowhere to be found, but his presence was felt in the form of a straw man — and frequent worry. Speaker after speaker, from former Florida governor Jeb Bush to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, laid into Paul’s more isolationist views on foreign policy. They never mentioned the lawmaker by name, but the message came across loud and clear.

The conference brings together some of the biggest names — and wallets — in Republican politics, most notably billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. At a private dinner for VIP donors in an Adelson-owned aircraft hangar holding one of his pair of Boeing 747s, Bush was asked about the growing isolationist wing of the Republican Party and replied there was no such thing — effectively casting Paul out of the fold, according to attendees.

Rand-Paul

Rand Paul has previously spoken of the need to end all foreign aid – even to Israel and the need to end all of the foreign entanglements that have cost the US taxpayers trillions of dollars and thousands of Americans their lives and limbs. These positions have caused a great deal of consternation amongst the Israel First crowd. After Rand’s trip to Israel he is backing off of his stance of cutting off Israel’s foreign aid. However there is still a great deal of distrust between the Zionists and Rand.

Darth Cheney: Endless Wars for Israel

Without naming names, Cheney also slammed the less hawkish members of his own party—such as Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)—for believing that the United States “can afford to turn its back on that part of the world,” referring to the Middle East. “One of the things that concerns me first about the campaign, that I’m worried about,” he said, “is what I sense to be an increasing strain of isolationism, if I can put it in those terms, in our own party. It’s not taking over, by any means, but there is without question a body of thought now that’s supported by many Republicans and some candidates that the United States can afford to turn its back on that part of the world.” Cheney complained that “some candidates” think that the Middle East is “not our problem … Bring the boys home. There’s no reason in the world for us to be involved in that part of the world.” But, he remarked, “anybody who thinks back on the problems of 9/11″ knows “it makes absolutely no sense at all for us to contemplate that course of action.”

001-0118213206-cheneyemperor

Cheney was a central figure in the events of 9/11. Cheney had no problem faking hijackings or nuking skyscrapers in New York to justify invading Iraq and Afghanistan. Over a million innocent people were killed in Iraq so that Israel can maintain its hegemony over the Middle East. Cheney and the Neocons are willing do almost anything so that Israel can maintain its dominance.

Looking at 2016 through the 9/11 lens

You cannot understand current events if you don’t understand what really happened on 9/11. Those who have studied 9/11 have concluded that it was a Zionist operation – the evidence is overwhelming. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars that followed primarily benefited Israel.

When we refer to Israel in the context of researching these types of events we actually mean the Rothschild criminal network which is the power structure that carved Israel out of Palestine. The Rothschilds control the major central banks of the world such as the European Central Bank, the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England etc. The Rothschilds have been in control of the world for a long time.

The Rothschild criminal cartel was behind the assassinations of Lincoln, FDR, JFK, RFK, World War I and II, Vietnam, the events of 9/11 and on and on. No informed person underestimates the power that Israel has to influence world events. If you are unfamiliar with the Rothschilds a good place to start your research is Daryl Bradford Smith’s Rothschilds Timeline.

911 fake real

 

If Israel has the power to assassinate US presidents – and they certainly appear to, they also have the power to influence elections. Adelson is making no secret of his desire to influence the 2016 Presidential Election. Is he spending all of this money merely to stop internet gambling or is he trying to get a stooge into the White House to start a war with Iran? Bamboozling the American public into yet another illegitimate war for Israel certainly fits the modus operandi of the Zionists.

It’s rather disgusting seeing Presidential contenders groveling to the Zionists. Almost as though we live in an alternate universe. Why must Americans grovel to the Zionists? Israel can’t survive without massive economic and military aid from the US. The US has provided Israel with $121 billion in economic assistance since World War II and fought countless wars to keep their despotic regime in power.

In a just world Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Giuliani, Zakheim, Silverstein and the rest of the 9/11 perpetrators would stand trial for war crimes. All of the foreign aid that the US has sent to Israel would be clawed back and our troops withdrawn from the region immediately.

But since the average American lives in a fog of Zionist propaganda we’ll most likely see yet another President elected in 2016 who will be beholden to the Zionists. A disastrous war with Iran may be the price of our national ignorance this time.

Does the huge quantity of iron-rich spheres in the dust point to nuclear or DEW hypotheses?

Originally posted by T Mark Hightower on 8/25/2011

Calculations can help define the magnitude of various theories. I am referencing a calculation that Niels Harrit emailed to me and various others on 7/26/2011. He calculated the amount of thermitic material that would have been necessary to account for the quantity of iron-rich spheres in the WTC dust, assuming of course that the iron reaction product of the thermite reaction was the source of the spheres. The range of thermitic material that he calculated was from 29,000 metric tons to 143,000 metric tons per Twin Tower, depending on the iron oxide concentration assumed for the thermitic material. These numbers are unrealistically high in terms of the quantity of thermitic material that could have or would have been loaded into a Twin Tower by the perpetrators before its destruction, in my view, but that’s not what I want to get into right here. I want to use this huge quantity of iron-rich spheres to illustrate an alternate explanation for their presence.

An intermediate value from Harrit’s calculation referenced above was that conservatively 11,660 metric tons of iron-rich spheres were present in the dust generated from the destruction of one Twin Tower. If we assume that the iron-rich spheres were mostly iron, with the iron source possibly being the structural steel rather than thermitic material, the energy required to convert this much iron to the molten state can be calculated. (It is assumed that the iron-rich spheres required a prior molten state for their formation.) Furthermore, if we express the energy in terms of the quantity of TNT equivalent based on its heat of explosion, these units can give us something to relate to in terms commonly associated with specifying the magnitude of nuclear explosions, kilotons. So if the calculation is done for just the energy necessary to melt the iron, on the order of 1 kiloton of TNT is the energy equivalent required. If we also include the energy necessary to heat the iron from room temperature to its melting point, then on the order of 4 kilotons TNT equivalent would be required. Of course there would be more kilotons than this to account for all of the other destruction in addition to just producing the iron-rich spheres, so we are definitely talking about something in the multiple kiloton range. This helps to illustrate the magnitude of what we may be dealing with in the destruction of the Twin Towers and points towards the possibility of nuclear devices or even possibly some more esoteric directed free energy technology such as what Dr. Judy Wood hypothesizes, in her book, “Where Did the Towers Go?” All WTC destruction hypotheses are speculative, and these are no exception, but these do seem to fit the magnitude of the iron-rich sphere data better than the nanothermite hypothesis. Dr. Judy Wood’s hypothesis is also a nuclear hypothesis of sorts, in that she refers to Low Energy Nuclear Reactions as a possible part of the esoteric technology used.

 

Contrasting uniformity and non-uniformity of WTC dust sample results of the Harrit et al. paper “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”

Editor’s note: This post originally appeared on T Mark Hightower’s blog. Mark has left public 9/11 research and I was asked to re-post some of his old articles. This is the first of a series of posts from Mark’s old blog.

T Mark Hightower

8/8/2011

ABSTRACT

Although the Harrit et al. paper claims great uniformity of results among all samples based on all the tests apart from the Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) tests, this is in significant contrast to the tremendous lack of uniformity reflected in the DSC results.

Also, although the paper contains a rather doubtful statement regarding its findings in one part of the paper, it concludes with a strikingly confident conclusion in the final statement of the paper.

THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE DIFFERENTIAL SCANNING CALORIMETER (DSC) RESULTS

There are some weaknesses in the Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) data that is presented in the paper (Harrit et al.) for the 4 dust samples.

There were 4 dust samples tested. Page 9 of the paper identifies them as

1 MacKinlay

2 Delassio/Breidenbach

3 Intermount

4 White

The DSC data is presented in the text of page 19, section 3, which refers to graphical results of Fig. 19 on page 20. One of the DSC traces is compared to a trace of published nanothermite data in Fig. 29 on page 25. The results are presented in Fig. 30 on page 27 in the form of bar graphs reporting units of kJ/g.

There is an oddity I want to point out before I get into the first weakness.

The data referred to on page 19 and in Fig. 19 appears to have not included sample 2 Delassio/Breidenbach, but instead has a MacKinlay 2 sample in its place to give a total of 4 samples tested. In Fig. 30 the 4 samples are clearly labeled as 1, 2, 3, and 4, so here it seems to imply that the 2 Delassio/Breidenbach sample is included. Interestingly, the numerical value of 3 kJ/g given in the text on page 19 for the MacKinlay 2 sample of Fig. 19 is the same or at least close to the same as the 2 (presumably) Delassio/Breidenbach sample of Fig. 30. Clarification from the authors should be sought to clear up this confusion.

So there were 4 separate dust samples, with multiple red/gray chips in each sample.

I will use the numerical values of energy release given in the text (page 19) as representing the values in the bar graph of Fig. 30 for the 4 WTC chip samples. These would be

Sample 1: 1.5 kJ/g

Sample 2: 3 kJ/g

Sample 3: 7.5 kJ/g

Sample 4: 6 kJ/g

As these four DSC data points are all we have, it is of note that there is tremendous scatter in this data. The average value is 4.5 and the standard deviation is 2.7. As two standard deviations is usually what is used when referring to a value being +/- some uncertainty, in rough terms, we would then say that the DSC data gives an average value of 4.5 kJ/g, with an uncertainty of +/- 100%.

It appears that only one red/gray chip was selected from each sample for DSC testing. If DSC tests had been done separately for multiple chips in each sample, then the question of whether the scatter in the data was present similarly within each of the samples could also have been addressed. You cannot find what you do not look for.

The paper offers some possible explanations for the scatter in the data. From page 19, section 3, it states,

“Variations in peak height as well as yield estimates are not surprising, since the mass used to determine the scale of the signal, shown in the DSC traces, included the mass of the gray layer. The gray layer was found to consist mostly of iron oxide so that it probably does not contribute to the exotherm, and yet this layer varies greatly in mass from chip to chip.”

Page 29, Conclusion 10. offers an explanation for higher total energy release than can be explained by the classic thermite reaction (true for samples 3 & 4)

“The carbon content of the red material indicates that an organic substance is present. This would be expected for super-thermite formulations in order to produce high gas pressures upon ignition and thus make them explosive. The nature of the organic material in these chips merits further exploration. We note that it is likely also an energetic material, in that the total energy release sometimes observed in DSC tests exceeds the theoretical maximum energy of the classic thermite reaction.”

If citing gray layer variation and organic content is not enough to explain the tremendous variation in the results, another explanation is added on page 27, section 6. I will quote an entire paragraph so you can appreciate the context.

“It is striking that some of the red/gray chips release more energy in kJ/g than does ordinary thermite, as shown in the blue bar graphs above. The theoretical maximum for thermite is 3.9 kJ/g [27]. We suggest that the organic material in evidence in the red/gray chips is also highly energetic, most likely producing gas to provide explosive pressure. Again, conventional thermite is regarded as an incendiary whereas super-thermite, which may include organic ingredients for rapid gas generation, is considered a pyrotechnic or explosive [6, 24]. As this test was done in air it is possible that some of the enhancement of energy output may have come from air oxidation of the organic component.”

So the DSC tests were done in air so extra oxygen was present to help liberate energy from any organics that might be present.

I know there is very little data to go on, just 4 DSC scans of red/gray chips, but with the scatter in the data and the explanations offered to explain it, I get the impression that the red/gray chips are tremendously lacking in uniformity. Or else there is much inherent error in the experimental apparatus.

By having air and therefore a source of oxygen present in the DSC seems to be an error in method since it allows for the input of energy from outside the substance that is itself being measured for its energy content. From Fig. 30 Chip 3 liberates considerably more energy than the high explosive HMX, and Chip 4 also exceeds the HMX value, but only by a little. The HMX provides its own oxygen within its chemical makeup, so it would not depend upon additional oxygen present to liberate its full energy. (Be sure not to confuse energy release with detonation velocity, an issue I am not dealing with in this write-up.)

I would like to see what a DSC trace of pure HMX would look like. It would probably look quite different because it would start to release its energy at a lower temperature, the deflagration temperature of HMX being 287 deg C. (page 238, “Explosives,” 6th edition, Meyer et al., 2007)

In summary, the DSC data is extremely limited with much scatter and has a potential method error. Drawing firm conclusions from it is extremely dubious.

QUANTIFYING EXPLANATIONS FOR SCATTER IN DSC DATA

Variability in proportions of gray layer within the red/gray chips and organics present in the red layer are cited as explanations for the scatter in the DSC data. Let’s quantify these explanations to see what kind of variability of the specimens might account for the scatter in the data.

The energy release for thermite is cited as 3.9 kJ/g. For the lowest value from the DSC tests, 1.5 kJ/g for sample 1, let’s first assume for the sake of illustration that this specimen had a low value because it had no organics in the red layer (in other words it is essentially pure thermite), and the gray layer being predominantly iron oxide as the paper says, acted as excess reactant and therefore was essentially inert providing no energy in the DSC test. In this case, the red layer would have to be present at 38 % by weight and the gray layer present at 62 % within the specimen. The math is 1.5/3.9 = 0.38. In summary, this would be assuming no organics, 38% red layer, and 62% gray layer.

The above calculation is done as a base case for comparison, even though its assumption of no organics in the red layer goes against the major thrust of the conclusion of the Harrit et al. paper that the red layer is a form of nanothermite that includes organics.

The next calculation is an attempt to quantify the high end of the DSC data, 7.5 kJ/g for sample 3. The presence of organics is cited as the explanation for the high value by the paper. Pure high explosive HMX has a energy release of 5.2 kJ/g, so even if sample 3 were 100 % HMX, this could not account for the higher value of 7.5 kJ/g obtained by the DSC test. So, for the sake of illustration, I am going to assume that the organic present in the red layer has an energy release of twice that of HMX, or 10.4 kJ/g. To help account for the high value of 7.5 kJ/g for sample 3, I am also going to assume that it contains no gray layer. In other words I am going to assume that sample 3 is 100 % red layer material. Setting x = weight fraction thermite in the red layer, the math is 3.9x + 10.4(1-x) = 7.5. Solving for x gives 0.45. So based on the above assumptions the red layer would have to contain 45 % thermite by weight and 55 % organic. In summary, this would be 100% red layer, no gray layer, with the red layer made up of 45% thermitic material and 55% organics.

Let’s now go back to the low value case, 1.5 kJ/g for sample 1, and assume that it is made up of red layer (containing 45 % thermite and 55 % organic from the previous calculation) plus gray layer of inert excess iron oxide reactant. In this case then, the specimen would have to contain 20 % red layer and 80 % gray layer. The math is 1.5/7.5 = 0.2. In summary, this would be 20% red layer (made up of 45% thermite and 55% organic) and 80% gray layer.

Therefore, a very high degree of variability among the red/gray chips is necessary to explain the scatter in the DSC test data, unless there is significant error in the experimental apparatus and technique.

This is in contrast to these statements from the paper concerning the great uniformity of results.

From page 15, right column, it states, “From these data, it is determined that the red/gray chips from different WTC dust samples are extremely similar in their chemical and structural makeup. It is also shown that within the red layer there is an intimate mixing of the Fe-rich grains and Al/Si plate-like particles and that these particles are embedded in a carbon-rich matrix.”

From page 23, upper left column, it states, “The results clearly show the similarities of the red/gray chips from the different dust samples from all four sites.”

ANOTHER WEAKNESS IN THE DSC DATA

On page 25 of the paper, it says

“The red layer of the red/gray chips is most interesting in that it contains aluminum, iron and oxygen components which are intimately mixed at a scale of approximately 100 nanometers (nm) or less. Now we compare a DSC trace obtained for a WTC red/gray chip with a DSC trace obtained for known super-thermite (see Fig. (29)).”

Note that in Fig. 29 the trace of the WTC sample is really not all that similar to the known super-thermite. The WTC sample cited in Fig. 29 is the MacKinlay sample, although it does not say whether it is the MacKinlay 1 or MacKinlay 2 sample. But from Fig. 19, where 4 WTC DSC traces are plotted, for the four samples, MacKinlay 1, MacKinlay 2, Intermont, and White, the two MacKinlay samples are the lowest energy release traces. The other two, Intermont (sample 3), and White (sample 4) have much higher energy release, and deviate even more from the known super-thermite trace of Fig. 29.

STATISTICAL WEAKNESS OF THE DATA PRESENTED IN THE PAPER

With the tremendous scatter in the DSC data presented in the paper, and its implication for extreme non uniformity of the red/gray chips that I have tried to quantify, the question needs to be raised on all of the other tests that were performed to characterize the red/gray chips, and whether additional tests should have been done on other of the chips within the samples, to see if those tests also would have shown such high levels of non uniformity.

OTHER QUOTES OF NOTE FROM THE PAPER

From page 25 of the paper, right column, first paragraph, the final sentence is

“We make no attempt to specify the particular form of nano-thermite present until more is learned about the red material and especially about the nature of the organic material it contains.” This statement expresses a lot of doubt about the findings.

From page 29 of the paper, final paragraph.

“Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.” This final conclusion statement of the paper expresses much less doubt.

The Harrit et al. paper cited in this article can be found here:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe