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