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.


 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.


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.


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.


Dimitri Khalezov’s 9/11thology: The “third” truth about 9/11

Dimitri Khalezov has recently released a new massive PDF 9/11thology: The “third” truth about 9/11. Khalezov’s position is that three 150 KT underground nukes destroyed the WTC buildings aka “the big nuke theory” as it were. As most readers of this blog are aware I am a proponent of the mini-nuke theory. Fetzer and I have written an article entitled Busting 9/11 Myths: Nanothermite, Big Nukes and DEWs  that spells out the differences between the various theories of the World Trade Center’s destruction on 9/11.

Having said all of that Dimitri has done some excellent research on 9/11 and he makes a tremendous case for underground nuclear detonations on 9/11. He is certainly correct in that regard. Any serious 9/11 researcher should read this.

You can download the .zip file here. It’s a 137 MB download so be patient!

URGENT address of Dimitri Khalezov

THE FULL EDITION OF MY BOOK on 9/11thology called “The Third Truth about 9/11” is READY NOW!

Nuclear demolition of the World Trade Center explained there in more detail than it used to be, with a lot of newly discovered evidence added. Other 9/11 aspects such as the Pentagon missile attack, shooting down of Flight 93, Anthrax letters, mini-nukes’ “car”-bombings, as well as the 9/11 cover-up, shilling, and falsifying English dictionaries are addressed too. This time I made it into a real encyclopedia of 9/11 and that of nuclear terrorism in general.

If you wish to see some readers opinions, click here.

However, before you proceed to the download links, I would like you to read the following urgent address of mine, published five days prior to New Year celebrations (26 of December 2013):

Dear readers and readers to be.

You could still find direct download links for the full edition of my book on this page below. They are there, still, though, I am considering removing them any time soon.

I am sorry to inform you that since I made the full version of my book available for free download at the end of August, 2013, it was downloaded by more than 20000 (twenty thousand) people, at least a third of whom, according to my estimation, must have read this book.

However, despite the book was not actually “free”, but merely “free to download”, and this was stated clearly in its text, only a very few people have appreciated this step of mine.

During 4 (four) months that passed since, merely 20 people have paid for my book in one way or another.

Moreover, out of these 20, about a third were old friends of mine and people who used to donate even before downloading the book.

That is to say that the level of appreciation of my work was incredibly, ridiculously low – below 0.01%.

To be honest with you, even before that I knew that people were ungrateful in general, but I did not expect that awful digit of grateful people to be only 0.01%. At the worst case I was hoping that every fifth reader would appreciate it, or, at least – may be every tenth reader…

Look, folks, 0.01% is just a ridicule.

Are you so poor that you can’t afford paying a few bucks for the book that opens your eyes in regard to the most important perpetration of the 21st century, which is the 9/11 affair?

Well, I do believe that there are people who are poor like that (perhaps, somewhere in Darfur or in East Timor), but not in the capitalist West where everyone has a salary of at minimum several hundreds USD, but usually – a couple of thousands USD or more. I would like to remind you that in the West a lunch costs a few bucks, yet no person usually misses his or her lunch on account of being “too poor”. Everyone has his lunch 365 times a year, irrespectively of whether his is “poor” or not and irrespectively of whether he is “in debt” or not. Even those who are in debt always manage to find those few bucks to increase their debt and so – they pay for their daily lunch. Do you agree with this observation?

The book I am talking about is well over a thousand pages, and, with additional materials, it runs to almost a thousand and a half. To read it will take a few weeks of continuous reading, or a few months of casual reading.

So, that means those who read it, managed to find a lot of time to read it.

But why they don’t find just another couple of working hours making a few bucks for me, its author, and why don’t they find yet another hour – to find the way to transfer these few bucks for me?

Don’t you realize, folks, that my book was created during working hours of mine and I would like to have some cash for it – exactly like you do while working during the working hours of yours?

As I mentioned in the text of the book, I did not set the price – I left it entirely up to its reader. If you feel that my book costs merely 2 dollars – just send me these 2 dollars. If you feel it costs more – send me more. But a few bucks is what I really expect from every reader – just as would any other author expect from his or her book. Even if you are very poor and even if you are in debt – you could easily sacrifice a couple of lunches in order to express your gratitude for the material that requires a few weeks to read (have you ever heard of “fasting”? – it will also make you healthier in the process of expressing your gratitude 🙂

I would like to remind you that I am not greedy. I am sure that “naked man comes into This world and naked he will depart”. I duly realize that I am a mortal. However, as any other mortal in This life, I need some funds to pay for my food and living expenses (not to mention that I would like to have some extra funds to continue my research and to create more books, as well as to translate this book to other languages). Note that I have no salary, no pension pending my old age, no professional job, just nothing. I am a poor foreigner who lives in Thailand where foreigners are not allowed to do any unskilled work. That is why I can not work as a construction worker or as a dish-washer. I have no income whatsoever, except from donations and from payments for my book.

My financial situation is so desperate, that if not a couple of old good friends of mine who sent me money this time, I would not be able to survive these three months and by the New Year 2014 I would become a street beggar, while all my web sites, including this one, would disappear (have you ever heard that to host a web site also costs something?)

Do you realize it, my dear readers? I published the most explosive book of the 21 century that was, moreover, downloaded by over 20 thousand of eager readers, and yet, I was almost kicked out of my room (I do not rent an “apartment”, but merely a “room”; I can not afford anything bigger) because of not being able to pay for it. Do you find this situation normal, my dear “grateful” readers?

Below you could see all means you can use to send me the payment for the book (or to donate if you wish to donate).

There is my personal bank account in one of Thai banks in Bangkok, so you could use a standard international money transfer;

There is a way to send me a check of a foreign bank (in any currency) by a snail-mail or by a courier;

There is a way to send me cash via Western-Union system;

There is a way to send me funds via WebMoney (electronic money);

There is a way to send me funds via Bitcoin (electronic money);

At the worst case, you can send me money via PayPal;

Finally, if nothing of the above works for you, and yet you wish to donate, please, contact me personally and we will figure out the solution.

All details regarding to these modes of payment are listed on the web page here.

Sincerely yours,

Dimitri Khalezov.


26 of December 2013

P.S. Happy New Year!   

My former urgent address is available on YouTube:

Sincerely yours, Dimitri Khalezov.

Busting 9/11 Myths: Nanothermite, Big Nukes and DEWs

wordpress analytics

by Don Fox (with Jim Fetzer)

On the 12th observance of 9/11 there are still many questions surrounding the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings.

The Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) put forth by NIST and the 9/11 Commission posits that 19 hijackers (5 of whom turned up alive AFTER 9/11) flew commercial planes in to the Twin Towers and the damage from the impacts of the planes and resulting fires caused the Towers to collapse at free fall speed.

These magical planes also caused a third skyscraper (Building 7) to collapse at free fall speed in a vacuum some 25 minutes after the BBC had announced that it had collapsed even though no plane had hit it.

debris ejected from North TowerObviously the government’s account is blatantly false. It stands to reason that if the government’s account of the events of 9/11 is not physically possible then it cannot be historically accurate. Historical events on the level of 9/11 shape the future for years, even generations to come. You will not be able to properly understand current events if you do not understand 9/11.

Once you come to the realization that the Zionists and Neocons in the Bush Regime acting at the behest of Israel were responsible for 9/11, the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria make a lot more sense.

The Big Lies of 9/11 have been used to launch wars of Zionist Aggression abroad and erode our civil rights here in the US. The 9/11 Wars have killed over a million innocent civilians and drained the US treasury of trillions of dollars. All so that Israel can maintain hegemony over the Middle East.

In recent years these Big Lies have given way to several Alternate Myths. As the OCT loses credibility alternative theories such as nanothermite, directed energy weapons and Big Nukes have tried to bridge the gap. Just as the OCT has imploded so will these Alternate Myths.

The “Collapse” Theory

 According to the government, the Twin Towers collapsed because the intense heat from the jet-fuel fires caused the steel to weaken (or, in some versions, the trusses to bow) to the extent that the top floors collapsed onto lower floors (or the trusses to collapse on other trusses), in a cascade of floors (or trusses) falling upon one another until both buildings were completely destroyed. Here is a schematic representation of the official theory, but there are also animated versions:

TTofficial1-320x289For anyone who has actually looked at the video sequence of their destruction, however, this theory is easily the least defensible. Gravity operates in one direction: down! But the Twin Towers are exploding in every direction from the top down. The buildings are being converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust. And when it was done, there was no stack of pancakes: they were destroyed below ground level! And, even worse, on the truss version, the core columns would have remained standing, like the spindle on a 45rpm record player after the records had been played.

Moreover, NIST studied 236 samples of steel from the Twin Towers and discovered that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500*F and the other three not above 1200*F. Insofar as UL had certified the steel used in the towers to 2,000*F for three to four hours without incurring any adverse effects (either weakening or melting) and the fires in the South Tower only endured for about a hour and in the North an hour and a half, they could have burned forever at those temperatures and not caused any damage. If we want truth, we must consider other 3>

Major and minor dust samples

The group that dominates A&E911 and produced “Explosive Evidence”–Richard Gage, Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and Neils Harrit, especially–have insisted that the key to understanding 9/11 is tiny chips of unexploded energetic material found in dust samples from apartments in the vicinity of “Ground Zero”, to which they refer as “nanothermite”. The catch turns out be that nanothermite is a feeble explosive that has 1/13 the force of TNT, the universal standard. Research by T. Mark Hightower, a chemical engineer, moreover, has shown that it only has a detonation velocity of 895m/s, which is far from the speed of sound in concrete and steel, which are 3,200m/s and 6,100m/s, respectively. Since it is a law of materials science that an explosive cannot destroy a material unless it has a detonation velocity equal to or greater than the speed of sound in that material. You can’t get there from there.

The-Myth-of-Explosive-nanothermiteIn 2002 Jeff Prager tried to prove 19 Muslims hijacked four planes and attacked us. By 2005, he realized this was false, sold his business, left the US and began to investigate 9/11 full-time. (See his 9/11 America Nuked.) In “Proof of Ternary Fission in New York City on 9/11″ he observes (1) that dust samples are the best evidence of what happened on 9/11; (2) that the US Geological Survey samples taken over a dozen locations show how various elements interacted prove that fission reaction(s) had taken place; (3) that Multiple Myeloma in the general population at a rate of 3-9 incidents per 100,000 people, but the rate was 18 per 100,000 among first responders; (4) that other cancers relatively unusual cancers have appeared among the responders, including non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, prostate, esophageal and blood and plasma cancers; and (5) that, as of March 2011 no less than 1,003 first responders died from various cancers.

The elements that have been found in these dust samples provide an astonishing array of proof that the destruction of the WTC was a nuclear event. How ironic that dust samples, which have been touted as the key to understanding 9/11, ARE the key, but not those studied by Gage, Jones, Ryan and Harrit! Consider the range and variety of the elements in the US Geological Survey’s dust samples, found at “Environmental Studies of the World Trade Center Area After the September 11, 2001 Attack” (Open-File Report 01-0429). Here’s a link to the chemistry table and another to the DOE report, “Study of Traces of Tritium at the World Trade Center” (UCRL-JC-150445):

Barium and Strontium: Neither of these elements should ever appear in building debris in these quantities. The levels never fall below 400ppm for Barium and they never drop below 700ppm for Strontium and reach over 3000ppm for both in the dust sample taken at Broadway and John Streets.

Thorium and Uranium: These elements only exist in radioactive form. Thorium is a radioactive element formed from Uranium by decay. It’s very rare and should not be present in building rubble, ever. So once again we have verifiable evidence that a nuclear fission event has taken place.

Lithium: With the presence of lithium we have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of Uranium to Thorium and Helium, with subsequent decay of the Helium into Lithium has taken place.

Lanthanum: Lanthanum is the next element in the disintegration pathway of the element Barium.

Yttrium: The next decay element after Strontium, which further confirms the presence of Barium.

Chromium: The presence of Chromium is one more “tell tale” signature of a nuclear detonation.

Tritium: A very rare element and should not be found at concentrations 55 times normal the basement of WTC-6 no less than 11 days after 9/11, which is another “tell tale” sign of nukes.

No Denying Nukes

Indeed, the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11 appears to have been a nuclear event. 1/3 of the Twin Towers and a thousand bystanders were completely vaporized. Some 1,400 cars were toasted in the vicinity of the WTC. Chunks of debris were ejected hundreds of yards. No desks, chairs, computers or toilets were found in the rubble of the Twin Towers. Temperatures at Ground Zero were between 600 and 2,000°F for six months after 9/11.

The clinchers though are the USGS dust samples and the Department of Energy (DOE) water samples. The USGS dust samples not only show elevated levels of elements such as uranium, thorium, barium, strontium, yttrium, chromium, copper, zinc, sodium and potassium, they show that the quantities of a dozen elements rising and falling predictably over a dozen sample locations. The only process that can explain this is nuclear fission. The DOE collected water samples from the basement of Six World Trade 11 days after 9/11 that contained tritium at 55 times background levels. This proves nuclear fusion took place.

Dimitri Khalezov recently published an article where he makes the case that three 150 kt nukes were detonated 100 meters underground on 9/11 (aka the Big-Nuke Theory). In order to maintain the viability of his theory he states that several pieces of evidence including seismic readings, toasted cars and photographs were faked. Our approach has been to come up with a theory that fits the evidence rather than having to claim this photo or that report was faked. The WTC Mini-Nuke Theory explains what was observed at Ground Zero. Khalezov’s Big-Nuke theory simply cannot account for the gross observable evidence.

Recap of the Mini-Nuke Theory

After reading Dimitri’s article it appears that he believes that we are stating that merely one or two mini-nukes were placed in the basement of the Twin Towers and that was responsible for all of the destruction. Obviously that scenario could not explain what is observed at Ground Zero. Our philosophy is that the destruction was caused by multiple low-yield nuclear bombs and not three big ones. The perpetrators objective was to nuke the WTC buildings without making it look like they nuked the buildings. This schematic is not intended to illustrate the specific way in which it was done but rather to give a visual indication of some of the available options: demolition+plan3The WTC Mini-Nuke Theory postulates that there were perhaps 5-11 mini-neutron nukes placed the core columns of the Twin Towers as well as several underground mini-nukes. There were a series of underground explosions before each Tower starts coming down. The mini-nukes in the core columns were detonated sequentially from top to bottom and configured to explode upward. The top to bottom demolition sequence was intended to simulate a free fall gravitational collapse which was the cover story.

If they took out one cube of 10 floors per second, then the time of destruction of the North Tower would have been 11 seconds and of the South–where the top three cubes tilted and were blown as one–9, which agrees with NIST’s own time estimate.The charges were shaped to explode upward so that the bombs in the top of the building would not destroy the bombs below before they had a chance to explode. Mini-nukes exploding upward also serves to explain the low seismic readings of 2.1 for the South Tower and 2.3 for the North Tower.

Some may question whether mini-nukes can be configured to explode directionally. Shape charging explosives has been around for a long time. Friedwardt Winterberg of Cornell University has proposed using deuterium microbombs to transport payloads between planetary orbits. This amounts to exploding mini-nukes in a cylindrical tube to direct the blast to propel the spacecraft. This explains what is observed in the destruction of the Twin Towers: material is being ejected upward and outward, 1/3 of the buildings are completely vaporized, and steel, cement and gypsum are converted into a pyroclastic surge cloud that covers Lower Manhattan in fine dust. Retained heat from the underground mini-nukes produce the high temperatures that persisted for six months after 9/11. Conventional explosives were used as well in the Twin Towers but mini-nukes did the heavy lifting.

In the case of Building 6 mini-nukes were detonated in the basement of the building and configured to explode upward. This explains the scooped out crater in the center of the building and the tritiated water found in the basement 11 days after 9/11.

Building 7 was also a combination of conventional and nuclear demo charges. Unlike the Twin Towers, no above ground nukes were used on 7. Conventional charges took out the support columns of the building which caused it to fall at free fall speed in a vacuum and three mini-nukes detonated in the basement vaporized much of the contents of the building. This explains the low seismic reading of .6. We will have a full break down on Building 7 in a future article.

What Would 150 Kiloton Blasts Have Done?

As a comparison to Khalezov’s theory let’s use the Storax Sedan nuclear test which was a 104 kt nuke detonated 190 meters deep. It lifted a dome of earth 90 m (300 ft.) above the desert floor before it vented at three seconds after detonation, exploding upward and outward displacing more than 11,000,000 tons of soil.

nuke1000The resulting crater is 100 m (330 ft.) deep with a diameter of about 390 m (1,280 ft.). A circular area of the desert floor five miles across was obscured by fast-expanding dust clouds moving out horizontally from the base surge, akin to pyroclastic surge. The blast caused seismic waves equivalent to an earthquake of 4.75 on the Richter scale.Sedan_Plowshare_CraterThere were no giant craters observed at Ground Zero in New York so on this point alone Khalezov’s theory can be rejected.

The Winter Garden: Where DEWS, Nanothermite and Big-Nuke Theories Go To Die

Atriumdestroyed1The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down and the inside out. No big flash was visible and no other buildings were flattened by the blasts so by definition any above ground nuclear detonation had to be low yield. Photos and videos of the destruction of the Twin Towers clearly show that there were indeed above ground nuclear detonations. As we can see below the chunks of debris that are being ejected from the North Tower into the Winter Garden originated several stories above the top of Building 7. Other material is being ejected straight up; the North Tower is clearly being demolished by an above ground mini-nuke. The bottom 60 floors of the North Tower are clearly still intact when the material that landed in the Winter Garden was ejected. Khalezov’s account of large underground nukes simply cannot account for the observed top down demolition of the North Tower.

The Winter Garden was destroyed on 9/11 from debris ejected from the North Tower. Judy Wood denies that explosives were used to demolish the Towers and that through some unknown process they simply turned to dust where they once stood. This is patently absurd. The Twin Towers exploded and Wood cannot account for a 300 ton chunk of debris being ejected into the Winter Garden 600+ feet out. It was traveling at an estimated 70+ miles per hour. Judy Wood’s DEW non-theory has no explanatory power for the destruction of the WTC buildings and can be rejected.

Since nanothermite is not explosive it cannot account for the destruction of the Winter Garden. Nanothermite has no ability to explode concrete or steel or eject steel assemblies weighing hundreds of tons up at a 45° angle and out into the Winter Garden. The nanothermite theory can also be rejected.

The Winter Garden is the end of the line for any theory except the mini-nuke theory.

Six World Trade: The Mini-Nuke Poster Child

Six World Trade Center was the US Custom House, an 8 story building that stood between the North Tower and Building 7. The new One World Trade Center stands on the site where Six World Trade once stood. Khalezov’s theory does not even take Building 6 into account even though the building was clearly nuked. Before either Tower came down on 9/11 a 170 high meter plume of smoke was seen rising from the building: WTC6 explosionThe blast left a giant crater in the middle of the building:

WTC_6_from_overheadTritium was found at levels 55 times background in the basement of the building 11 days after 9/11. Firefighters sprayed a million liters of water on Building 6 diluting the water samples. Per Ed Ward’s breakdown had the water samples been collected on the evening of 9/11 there could have potentially been 6 BILLION tritium units present. That is the equivalent to a leaking nuclear power plant. Temperatures were so high that “cement flowed like lava” according to the plaque in the New York Police Museum:


EXIT signs, gun sights and cold fusion cannot explain the tritium found in the basement of Building 6. The only thing that can explain this evidence is a thermonuclear explosion. It is apparent that one or more mini-nukes were detonated in Building 6. A 150 kiloton nuke buried under another building cannot account for the damage inflicted upon Six World Trade. Neither can thermite, cold fusion or a Judy Wood style DEW.

Cars Were Toasted by Above Ground Nukes

meltddTed Twietmeyer’s post on Rense’s website sheds considerable light on the toasted cars. Vector forces show that the source of the EMP that toasted the cars (and neutrons per Ed Ward) is clearly above ground.

Khalezov’s Big-Nuke Theory falls short in several areas: It cannot account for evidence of above ground nuclear detonations, low seismic readings of the destruction of WTC-1, 2 and 7, the lack of giant craters at Ground Zero, the destruction of WTC-6 and the 1,400 toasted cars. The WTC Mini-Nuke Theory can account for all of these things without resorting to claiming seismic reports and photographs were faked or that the police and FBI were burning their own cars. Khalezov is correct that the destruction of the WTC buildings was a nuclear event. He is much closer to the mark than are the thermite sniffers and DEW cultists.

The time has come to reject all of the Myths surrounding 9/11 and come to grips with what really happened: the Zionist / Neocon Cabal nuked buildings in Lower Manhattan to justify Zionist Wars of Aggression in the Middle East. The Killing Machine will keep going with wars in Syria and Iran if we are unable to reject the lies and myths and face up to the truth of 9/11.


2 + 2 = Israel Nuked the WTC on 9/11

wordpress analytics

By Don Fox (with Jim Fetzer)

“[I]f New York was outsourced to the Mossad and if the Twin Towers were nuked, then the nukes that were used must have been Israeli….[N]o alternative explanation is reasonable.”–Jim Fetzer

How many wars is the US supposed to fight for Israel? How many of our sons and daughters must die? How much of our national treasury and moral standing must be squandered to insure Israeli domination of the Middle East?

Does any serious analyst actually believe that the Syrian government–which has been routing the rebels for the past several months–would jeopardize its standing in the eyes of the world by launching a gas attack when he has no reason to do so?

Does anyone believe that doing so on the eve of the arrival of a UN inspection team would be rational? Are the American people so stupid and gullible that we are going to fall for the same “song and dance” from the nation’s leaders who so completely misled us about the massive surveillance being conducted by the NSA?

The lied to us about Iraq. They lied to us about Libya. They lied to us about Iran. And what could be more obvious than that they are lying to us again about Syria? The US is wreaking havoc in the Middle East for Israel. We have become Israeli liars, enforcers, stooges and dupes!

The absurdity of the American position by claiming that it needs to punish Bashar Assad for the violation of international law was apparent today when Charles Heyman, a former British officer who edits The Armed Forces of the UK, observed that attacking Syria without a mandate from the UN Security Council would itself be a gross violation of international law, rather like the claims made during the Vietnam war that “they had to destroy the village in order to save it”! Under Barack Obama, the US has become an international joke.

Some historical background

We know that 9/11 involved close collusion between the neo-cons in the Department of Defense and the Mossad to create a pretext for the US to invade the Middle East and deconstruct the modern Arab states by converting them into statelets to promote the domination of the Middle East by Israel. We know that New York City appears to have been outsourced to Israel and that the destruction of the Twin Towers, unlike WTC-7, can only be explained on the basis of sophisticated arrangements of mini or micro nukes. We have proven this again and again and again. It is beyond reasonable doubt.

The most powerful proof, ironically, comes from dust samples collected by the USGS, which substantiate the presence of elements that would not be present in this form had the destruction of the Twin Towers not been a nuclear event. Those include:

Barium and Strontium: Neither of these elements should ever appear in building debris in these quantities. The levels never fall below 400ppm for Barium and they never drop below 700ppm for Strontium and reach over 3000ppm for both in the dust sample taken at Broadway and John Streets.

Thorium and Uranium: These elements only exist in radioactive form. Thorium is a radioactive element formed from Uranium by decay. It’s very rare and should not be present in building rubble, ever. So once again we have verifiable evidence that a nuclear fission event has taken place.

Lithium: With the presence of lithium we have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of Uranium to Thorium and Helium, with subsequent decay of the Helium into Lithium has taken place.

Lanthanum: Lanthanum is the next element in the disintegration pathway of the element Barium.

Yttrium: The next decay element after Strontium, which further confirms the presence of Barium.

Chromium: The presence of Chromium is one more “tell tale” signature of a nuclear detonation.

Tritium: A very rare element and should not be found at concentrations 55 times normal the basement of WTC-6 no less than 11 days after 9/11, which is another “tell tale” sign of nukes.

But the proof also includes the dramatic incidence of cancers associated with nuclear events, where, as Jeff Prager has observed, (a) Multiple Myeloma in the general population at a rate of 3-9 incidents per 100,000 people, but the rate was 18 per 100,000 among first responders; (b) that other cancers relatively unusual cancers have appeared among the responders, including non-Hodgkins lymphoma, leukemia, thyroid, pancreatic, brain, prostate, esophageal and blood and plasma cancers; and (c) that, as of March 2011 no less than 1,003 first responders died from various cancers. Those familiar with the available evidence who continue to deny that 9/11 was a nuclear event would appear to be either cognitively impaired or deliberately deceptive.

How it was done

Unlike WTC-7, which was destroyed by a classic controlled demolition, where all the floors fell at the same time, none of its floors were blown apart, and there was a stack of debris equal to 12% of the original height of the 47-story building (about 5.5 floors of debris). The Twin Towers were blow apart sequentially from the top down, they were converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust, each floor remained stationary until its turn came and, when it was over, the buildings had been destroyed below ground level: there was no stack debris (which should have been around 12 floors high). They did not collapse. They were blown apart using mini or micro nukes, which too many have continued to deny for too long.

Indeed, if we assume that it was done by blowing one ten-floor cube per second, then the time for the destruction of the 110-floor North Tower would have been approximately 11 seconds, which is the time estimate of NIST. And when we note that the top three floors of the South Tower had begun to tilt and were blown as one, then the time for its destruction would have been approximately 9 seconds, which is also in agreement withe the time estimate of NIST. This appears to have been roughly how it was done, where we will continue to fine-tune the sequence as we continue.

But what is most striking is that we know the Twin Towers were nuked and we know that New York appears to have been outsourced to the Mossad. What we have now realized–it is like adding “2″ and “2″–is that, if New York was outsourced to the Mossad and if the Twin Towers were nuked, then the nukes that were used must have been Israeli. And that by itself may explain why New York was outsourced to the Mossad. Israel has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel does not allow inspectors. Unlike the US, whose nuclear arsenal is tightly controlled, Israel could use its nukes–as it appears to have recently done in Syria–without having to answer to anyone and without any risk of detection. Indeed, we have now proven this beyond a reasonable doubt, because no alternative explanation is reasonable.

Did Israel Nuke the WTC on 9/11?

By Don Fox

There are voices in the 9/11 Truth Community who believe that determining the exact cause of the World Trade Center building’s destruction is unnecessary and perhaps even a waste of time. One often hears comments that the official government account is blatantly false and that should be sufficient to get a real investigation launched into the events of 9/11. However the track record of government investigations into government crimes is rather poor (see the Warren Commission and the House Select Committee on Assassinations). Since an honest official investigation into 9/11 with subpoena powers is not likely to happen the task has fallen to private citizen researchers to determine what really happened that awful day.

Before you can determine WHO committed a crime you first must determine HOW it was done. No doubt that the events of 9/11 were some of the most outrageous crimes ever committed so the effort to determine HOW it was done is certainly justified. 9/11 has radically changed the world and certainly not for the better. In order to understand how the post 9/11 world actually works, determining WHO and HOW it was done is are vital questions. Merely stating that “9/11 was an inside job” is not good enough.

The major alternative theories of the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings include the directed energy weapon (DEW) (non) theory (associated with Judy Wood and Andrew Johnson), the nanothermite theory (associated with Steve Jones, Kevin Ryan and Richard Gage), the big nuke theory of Dimitri Khalezov (150 kt subbasement nukes) and the mini-nuke theory (associated with Dr. Ed Ward MD, the Anonymous Physicist, Dr. Bill Deagle, Jeff Prager and myself). We have determined that the mini/micro nuke hypothesis best fits the evidence. See the Mystery Solved and the Mini-Neutron Bomb articles for a full break down of the WTC Mini-Nuke Theory.

 Nuclear Bombs Narrows Down the List of Suspects

Very few groups have access to nuclear bombs. Officially there are five countries designated as Nuclear Weapons States: China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and the United States. Three more countries have conducted nuclear weapons tests: India, Pakistan and North Korea. There is another country who refuses to confirm or deny that it has nuclear weapons: Israel. Though it is believed that Israel has produced enough weapons-grade plutonium for 100-200 nuclear warheads. Former President Jimmy Carter has stated that Israel has more than 150 nuclear weapons.

Of these Nuclear Weapons States which ones would have had the motive, means and opportunity to detonate nuclear bombs in downtown Manhattan? The Twin Towers were destroyed by a very sophisticated arrangement of mini-nukes that were placed in the core columns of the buildings, detonated sequentially from top to bottom and configured to explode upward. This arrangement allowed the nukes in the upper floors of the buildings to explode without destroying the bombs beneath simulating a free fall collapse. This was the epitome of an Inside Job!

I think we can safely rule out China, France, Russia, the UK, India, Pakistan and North Korea. None of these countries would have had access to the core columns of these giant skyscrapers required to pull of this feat. Had the Towers been destroyed by an ICBM or a sub-based missile then some of these other Nuclear States may be suspects.

Certainly the United States military and intelligence community had the ability to pull off 9/11. The United States is the world’s leading nuclear superpower with the most advanced nuclear weapons arsenal. However the United States is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and several treaties (SALT, START I, START II, START III and New START) with the former Soviet Union/Russia.

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also referred to as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), obligates the five acknowledged nuclear-weapon states (the United States, Russian Federation, United Kingdom, France, and China) not to transfer nuclear weapons, other nuclear explosive devices, or their technology to any non-nuclear-weapon state. Nuclear weapon States Parties are also obligated, under Article VI, to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.” Non-nuclear-weapon States Parties undertake not to acquire or produce nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices. They are required also to accept safeguards to detect diversions of nuclear materials from peaceful activities, such as power generation, to the production of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. This must be done in accordance with an individual safeguards agreement, concluded between each non-nuclear-weapon State Party and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Under these agreements, all nuclear materials in peaceful civil facilities under the jurisdiction of the state must be declared to the IAEA, whose inspectors have routine access to the facilities for periodic monitoring and inspections. If information from routine inspections is not sufficient to fulfill its responsibilities, the IAEA may consult with the state regarding special inspections within or outside declared facilities.

The United States nuclear arsenal is subject to inspections. Is it possible that some “loose nukes” made their way from the US stockpile to Ground Zero? It is possible but not a slam dunk by any stretch of the imagination. It appears more likely that nukes from an uninspected, rogue facility like Dimona would be used in an operation such as 9/11.

 All Roads Lead to Dimona

Per Israel has not joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and is widely viewed as the first and only country in the Middle East to possess nuclear weapons. Believing a nuclear weapons deterrent to be essential vis-à-vis Israel’s Arab adversaries, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion instituted a nuclear weapons program in the mid-1950s as part of his “activist defense policy.” Consistent with Prime Minister Levi Eshkol’s declaration that “Israel will not be the first nation to introduce nuclear weapons to the Middle East,” Israel maintains a policy of “nuclear ambiguity,” or “nuclear opacity,” refraining from overt admissions that it possesses nuclear weapons, nuclear tests, or threats to its adversaries that explicitly involve nuclear weapons. Israel has also made extensive efforts to deny other regional actors the ability to acquire nuclear weapons, most prominently in the air strikes against Iraq’s Osiraq Reactor in 1981 and Syria’s suspected reactor near Al-Kibar in 2007.

President John F. Kennedy was deeply concerned about Israel using the Dimona nuclear plant to produce nuclear weapons. Kennedy wrote a letter concerning Dimona to Prime Minister Levi Eshkol on July 4th, 1963:

Dear Mr. Prime Minister:

It gives me great personal pleasure to extend congratulations as you assume your responsibilities as Prime Minister of Israel. You have our friendship and best wishes in your new tasks. It is on one of these that I am writing you at this time.

You are aware, I am sure, of the exchanges which I had with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion concerning American visits to Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona. Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister’s strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel’s willingness to permit periodic visits to Dimona.

I regret having to add to your burdens so soon after your assumption of office, but I feel the crucial importance of this problem necessitates my taking up with you at this early date certain further considerations, arising out of Mr. Ben-Gurion’s May 27 letter, as to the nature and scheduling of such visits.

I am sure you will agree that these visits should be as nearly as possible in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project. [3-1/2 lines of source text not declassified]

Therefore, I asked our scientists to review the alternative schedules of visits we and you had proposed. If Israel’s purposes are to be clear beyond reasonable doubt, I believe that the schedule which would best serve our common purposes would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, and thereafter at intervals of six months. I am sure that such a schedule should not cause you any more difficulty than that which Mr. Ben-Gurion proposed in his May 27 letter. It would be essential, and I understand that Mr. Ben-Gurion’s letter was in accord with this, that our scientists have access to all areas of the Dimona site and to any related part of the complex, such as fuel fabrication facilities or plutonium separation plant, and that sufficient time be allotted for a thorough examination.

Knowing that you fully appreciate the truly vital significance of this matter to the future well-being of Israel, to the United States, and internationally, I am sure our carefully considered request will have your most sympathetic attention.


John F. Kennedy

US inspectors DID go to Dimona however they were not allowed to tour the entire facility:

Under pressure from the newly elected American president, Israel reluctantly agreed in 1961 to U.S.-Israeli bilateral inspections of the Dimona nuclear facility. The inspections at Dimona were tightly controlled by the Israelis, and restricted to the first floor of the facility. U.S. inspectors were not allowed to bring their own technical instruments, take measurements, or see the control room, instead being shown a mock-up. It was later learned that the Israelis went so far as to wall-up elevator banks down to the underground reprocessing facility in order to evade discovery. When inspections ended in 1969, the visits had never produced any evidence of weapons-related activity or a plutonium-reprocessing facility, but inspectors often were left highly suspicious of illicit activities.

The Nixonian Compromise

The sham of US “inspections” continued until Nixon struck a deal with Golda Meir whereby Israel would not openly declare or test its nuclear capability and the US would cease inspections and stop pressuring Israel to sign the NPT.

The gap between JFK and Nixon in regards to the Israeli nuclear program was enormous. Kennedy was not going to let Israel dictate terms to him. JFK was determined to stop Israel from producing nuclear weapons. If it turns out that Israel DID nuke the WTC buildings then there is a direct historical path from JFK’s assassination to 9/11. Had JFK lived to serve a second term Israel’s nuclear program may have been dismantled before they could have nuked anybody.

Mordechai Vanunu worked at the Dimona plant and took photographs inside the facility in 1985. Vanunu revealed that indeed Dimona was producing nuclear bombs. Vanunu’s whistleblowing got him 18 years in the hoosegow; the first 11 ½ were in solitary confinement.

Production model of nuclear weapons core

Nuke Weapon CoreDimona’s plutonium separation control room

Control RoomBy the late 1970s Israel was believed to have produced thermonuclear weapons, mini-nukes in the 1980s and neutron bombs by 1995. While Israel’s nuclear arsenal was no match for the United States or Russia, Israel was certainly capable of pulling off the nuclear destruction of the World Trade Center buildings.

Why Were Israelis Dancing on 9/11?

Mike Rivero has an excellent post about the Dancing Israelis:

The New York Times reported Thursday that a group of five men had set up video cameras aimed at the Twin Towers prior to the attack on Tuesday, and were seen congratulating one another afterwards. Police received several calls from angry New Jersey residents claiming “middle-eastern” men with a white van were videotaping the disaster with shouts of joy and mockery. They were seen by New Jersey residents on Sept. 11 making fun of the World Trade Center ruins and going to extreme lengths to photograph themselves in front of the wreckage. Witnesses saw them jumping for joy in Liberty State Park after the initial impact. Later on, other witnesses saw them celebrating on a roof in Weehawken, and still more witnesses later saw them celebrating with high fives in a Jersey City parking lot.

According to ABC’s 20/20, when the van belonging to the cheering Israelis was stopped by the police, the driver of the van, Sivan Kurzberg, told the officers: “We are Israelis. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are your problem.”

Later the Dancing Israelis appeared on an Israeli talk show:

One of them declared that he was there to “document the event.” Who knew there was going to be an event to document? The actions of the Dancing Israelis lead a reasonable person to conclude that they were Mossad agents. It certainly appears that the Dancing Israelis knew the buildings were going to be nuked. They were cheering and high-fiving after the extremely sophisticated nuclear demolition sequence was pulled off to near perfection.

Are the Shills Really Trying to Cover Up Israeli Nukes at the WTC?

The hysterics of the Wood Cult and the other nuke denying shills makes a lot more sense if indeed they are covering for Israel’s rogue nuclear weapons program. The shills will throw ANYTHING out there to divert people from looking at nukes: hurricanes, directed energy weapons, Steve Hutchison’s lab and nanothermite – anything to keep your eye off the ball. If you disagree with Judy Wood, Pete Santilli, Andrew Johnson, Emmanuel Goldstein, Thomas Potter or any other members of The Cult you will be subjected to attacks, intimidation and even death threats!

Richard Gage does not allow discussion of any explosives except nanothermite. But of course nanothermite is not an explosive! This has been demonstrated again and again by T. Mark Hightower, who is a chemical engineer, and Jim Fetzer, who have published three articles about it, namely:  “Has nanothermite been oversold to the 9/11 Truth community?”, “Is ’9/11 Truth’ based upon a false theory?”, and “Nanothermite: If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit”.  These have been out for years and demonstrate conclusively that nanothermite cannot possibly have been responsible for blowing the Twin Towers apart.  Yet Richard Gage and A&E911 continue to promote the theory that it was done by nanothermite:

Some Sobering Thoughts

9/11 was the most historically significant event since the Kennedy assassination. Understanding current events is impossible if you do not understand 9/11. The 9/11 scam was used to justify foreign wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, the TSA assault on travelers and the loss of civil rights for American citizens. The biggest question is who was really behind the events of 9/11?

The destruction of the WTC buildings was a nuclear event. Only a handful of countries are considered Nuclear Weapons States. Of those countries only the United States and Israel would have had the necessary access to the buildings to plant the bombs. However the United States nuclear arsenal is subject to inspection by international organizations so the odds of the bombs coming from the US stockpile are much lower than the rogue Nuclear Weapons State Israel.

Israel neither confirms nor denies that they have nuclear weapons but it’s an open secret that they have several hundred nuclear devices. Israel does not allow inspectors into the Dimona facility. When the US inspectors showed up in the 1960s, the Israelis cemented the elevator banks shut so that they could only inspect the first floor. These are not the actions of a Nuclear Weapons State with nothing to hide. The 9/11 wars have primarily benefited Israel. Who had the motive, means and opportunity to nuke the World Trade Center Buildings? The answer is as obvious as “2″ plus “2″.

Hard Evidence Supports the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used to Demolish the WTC Towers

wordpress analytics

by Don Fox and Jeff Prager 


Steve Jones penned a letter in 2006 attempting to repudiate the theory that mini-nuclear bombs were used to demolish the WTC Towers. Closer examination of his letter finds that Jones cherry-picked and even glossed over key pieces of evidence collected from Ground Zero to arrive at his faulty conclusions.

Here is a summary of the key points in Jones’ letter:

1. 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.

2. The fact that radioactive iodine concentrations were actually lower in the upper/WTC debris-filled layers.

3. Radioactive hot-spots in NYC were found to be due to radium, which is traceable to industrial uses (not bombs). This in itself does not rule out mini-nukes, but these data certainly do not support the mini-nuke hypothesis.

4. Lioy et al. report that radioactivity from thorium, uranium, actinium series and other radionuclides is at or near the background level for WTC dust.

5. 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.

6. No fatalities due to radiation “burning” were reported near ground zero. William Rodriguez survived the North Tower collapse.

7. No observed melting of glass due to the collapse-process of the Towers.

8. One more: The mini-nuke idea fails completely for WTC 7 where vertically-directed plumes of dust were absent during the collapse, and the building fell quite neatly onto its own footprint. (Molten metal was observed under the WTC7 rubble as well.)

The WTC Mini-Nuke Hypothesis

Our hypothesis is that World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2 were demolished by a series of very low-yield micro nuclear devices that were planted in the center columns of the buildings and detonated sequentially from top to bottom and configured or directed to explode upward in order to simulate a free fall collapse. A mini-nuke or series of mini-nukes were also detonated in the basement of WTC 6 and three mini-nukes appear to have been detonated in the basement of Building 7 as well.

The bombs appeared to be fission/fusion devices that had powerful but limited blast effects and had little lingering radioactivity which suggests that they were neutron bombs. There is compelling evidence for both fission and fusion at Ground Zero.

While it is possible that energetic compounds such as nanothermite (NT) or more likely conventional explosives such as RDX or HMX were also used there can be no doubt that the main causal mechanism for the destruction of the WTC buildings was mini or micro nuclear bombs.

We have recently published an article that has a complete breakdown of the US Geological Survey’s dust samples and the Department of Energy’s water samples which formed the basis for our conclusions. That article can found here:

Tritiated Water:

From Steve Jones’ letter: Traces of tritiated water (HTO) were detected at the World Trade Center (WTC) ground zero after the 9/11/01 terrorist attack. A water sample from the WTC sewer, collected on 9/13/01, contained (0.164±0.074) nCi/L of HTO. A split water sample, collected on 9/21/01 from the basement of WTC Building 6, contained 3.53±0.17 and 2.83±0.15 nCi/L, respectively. These results are well below the levels of concern to human exposure…”

Tritium from a thermonuclear (fusion) bomb would be way above these trace levels of a few NANOcuries per liter. (A nanocurie = nCi, 1 billionth of a curie. That is a very tiny amount of radioactivity.)

Jones goes on to state: The graphs below show that hydrogen-bomb testing boosted tritium levels in rain by several orders of magnitude. (Ref.: )

Image368Tritium_precipThe data clearly demonstrate the large amount of tritium released due to hydrogen bombs, the first of which was tested in 1951. Thus, tritium is a tracer for hydrogen bombs, the “smoking gun.” Can proponents of the WTC-mini-nuke hypothesis explain how large releases of tritium did NOT happen on 9/11/2001?

Jones is absolutely correct when he states that tritium is the “smoking gun” for a hydrogen bomb detonation. If tritium is detected in large quantities at Ground Zero, there is no way to deny the detonation of thermonuclear devices. It is vitally important to correctly interpret the data in the DOE report. So to help us make sense of the DOE data Ed Ward breaks down what is meant by “traces of tritium” in the basement of WTC 6:

1. Trace definition as it applies to quantity: Occurring in extremely small amounts or in quantities less than a standard limit (In the case of tritium, this standard level would be 20 TUs – the high of quoted standard background levels.)

2. The stated values of tritium from the DOE report “Study of Traces of Tritium at the World Trade Center”. “A water sample from the WTC sewer, collected on 9/13/01, contained 0.164±0.074 (2ó) nCi/L (164 pCi/L +/- 74 pCi/L – takes 1,000 trillionths to = 1 billionth) of HTO. A split water sample, collected on 9/21/01 from the basement of WTC Building 6, contained 3.53±0.17 and 2.83±0.15 nCi/L ( 3,530.0 pCi/L +/- 170 pCi/L and 2,830 pCi/L +/- 150 pCi/L), respectively. Pico to Nano converter – Nano to Pico converter –

3. 1 TU = 3.231 pCi/L (trillionths per liter) or 0.003231 nCi/L (billionths per liter) – – (My original TU calculations came out to 3.19 pCi/L, but I will gladly accept these referenced minimally higher values. )

4. In 2001 normal background levels of Tritium are supposedly around 20 TUs (prior to nuclear testing in the 60’s, normal background tritium water levels were 5 to 10 TUs – ). However, groundwater studies show a significantly less water concentration: Groundwater age estimation using tritium only provides semi-quantitative, “ball park” values: • <0.8 TU indicates sub modern water (prior to 1950s) • 0.8 to 4 TU indicates a mix of sub modern and modern water • 5 to 15 TU indicates modern water (< 5 to 10 years) • 15 to 30 TU indicates some bomb tritium But, instead of “5 to 15 TU” (which would make the increase in background levels even higher), I will use 20 TUs as the 2001 environmental level to give all possible credibility to the lie of “Traces”.

5. Let’s calculate the proven referenced facts. Tritium level confirmed in the DOE report of traces of tritium = 3,530 pCi/L (+/- 170 pCi/L, but we will use the mean of 3,530 pCi/L). 3,530 pCi/L (the referenced lab value) divided by the background level of 20TUs (20 X 3.231 p (1 TU = 3.21 pCi/L) = 64.62 pCi/L as the high normal background/standard level. 3,530 divided by 64.62 pCi/L = 54.63 TIMES THE NORMAL BACKGROUND LEVEL. 3,530 pCi/L divided by 3.231 pCi/L (1 TU) = 1,092.54 TUs

6. This is my ‘fave’ because lies tend to eat their young. Muon physicist Steven Jones states in regard to 1,000 TUs: “The graphs below show that hydrogen-bomb testing boosted tritium levels in rain by several orders of magnitude. (Ref.: ) – Yet, calls the EXACT SAME LEVELS quoted in nCi/L as “Traces” and “These results are well below the levels of concern to human exposure”. Interesting isn’t it? Concern for human exposure is IRRELEVANT here and why Dr. Jones uses it is unknown.

7. Thomas M. Semkowa, Ronald S. Hafnerc, Pravin P. Parekha, Gordon J. Wozniakd, Douglas K. Hainesa, Liaquat Husaina, Robert L. Rabune. Philip G. Williams and Steven Jones have all called over 1,000 TUs of Tritium, “Traces”. Even at the height of nuclear bomb testing 98% – after thousands of Megatons of nuclear testing – of the rainwater tests were 2,000 TUs or less.

8. It is also important to note that the tritium present was diluted by at least some portion of 1 million liters of water accounting for BILLIONS of TUs.

An important point that Jones glosses over is the dilution of water in the basement of WTC 6. If not for copious amounts of water sprayed on the WTC site and two days of rain and water leaking through the damaged sea wall undoubtedly the concentration of tritium would have been higher than the measured 55 times normal background levels.

Ed Ward’s Breakdown of the WTC Rain and Fire Hose Water, 4 Million Gallons of


WTC 6 = 1 acre (approx)

WTC site = 16 acres. Rain = 4 million liters. 4/16 = 1/4 of a million

liters deposits in WTC 6 in its 40 ft (depth) by 120 ft (diameter) crater.

WTC 6 was hot – see thermal images 2nd article on WTC Nukes.

Firemen = 12 million liters. Firemen would mostly be spraying the hot areas.

There are about 5 acres that gradually increase to maybe a total of 6 to 7 acres, but let’s be generous and say they sprayed 8 acres (this will lower the total amount of Tritium Units estimate).

8/16 = 1/2 of 12 million liters = 6 million liters spread over 8 acres = 3/4 of a million liters per acre

Rain plus Firemen = 1 million liters in WTC 6 in the 40 ft. (depth) by 120 ft. (diameter) crater.

1 liter of the pooled water = 1,106 TUs X 1 million liters of water = 1.1066 BILLION TUs JUST IN WTC 6 (no other places were checked.)

This completely ignores 104 Million Liters (30 Million Gallons) pumped out of the bathtub and the drain water of 51 TUs. 120 million liters X 51 = 6.120 BILLION TUs.

This completely ignores the amount of Tritium in gas form that escapes into the atmosphere and gets massive dispersal.

Jones’ statements on the tritium levels are disingenuous. Jones fails to address WHY so much tritium is in the basement of WTC 6 in the first place. A 170 meter high plume of smoke was seen rising from the building, a giant crater was left in the middle of it and “temperatures were so intense that concrete melted like lava around anything in its path.” There can be little doubt that a thermonuclear explosion(s) occurred in Building 6.

If one denies nukes then something else must be responsible for all of the tritium found in the basement. The authors of the DOE report attempted to attribute the tritium to EXIT signs, watches and night sights on weapons that were stored in the building although that explanation is absurd in light of what we know happened to Building 6. Jones also fails to take into account all of the rain and fire hose water that diluted the tritium. If the water samples would have been collected on the evening of 9/11 what would the readings have been then?

Iodine-131 in the Hudson River Sediments

Sediment cores pulled from the Hudson River near the World Trade Center site just a month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks contain a thin layer of metal-rich ash and pulverized debris. The top 3 cm of silt contained layers with unnaturally high concentrations of copper, strontium, and zinc from the towers, says Sarah D. Oktay, a geochemist… “Oktay and her colleagues also found that the sediments contain small but measurable quantities of iodine-131, a human-made radioactive isotope with a half-life of about 8 days.

Jones himself points out that the samples were collected a month after 9/11 and iodine-131 has a half-life of 8 days. This statement can hardly be used to rule out nuclear fission as most of the iodine-131 from the WTC demolition would have already decayed by the time the samples were collected. And the “high concentrations of copper, strontium, and zinc” ARE indicative of fission (and ternary fission) as we point out in our Mystery Solved article.

Radioactive “hot spots” in New York City

From a news article: “Radioactive ‘hot spots’ threat to city”, BY


“WASHINGTON – A helicopter survey revealed 80 radioactive “hot spots” in New York City, including a Staten Island park with dangerously high levels of radium, a congressional report disclosed yesterday…The GAO did not identify the park, but Brian Feeney of the National Park Service said a 1-acre section of Great Kills Park on Staten Island, part of Gateway National Recreation Area, had been shut down in August 2005 after federal officials discovered old industrial equipment contaminated with radiation.

We’re not sure that these hot spots Jones references have anything to do with 9/11. They could very well be due to industrial waste unrelated to the destruction of the WTC buildings. This point neither proves nor disproves the mini-nuke hypothesis.

Radioactive Isotopes

The USGS study of dust samples show elevated levels of uranium and thorium, elements that are always radioactive and the DOE water samples contain elevated levels of tritium. All of these elements were documented in levels that were far above background.

Neutron Activation

All nuclear weapons (especially FUSION/Hydrogen bombs) release copious high-energy neutrons which will activate steel and other materials, as the neutrons penetrate building materials. This is called neutron activation and cannot be avoided. Much of the induced radioactivity remains for decades. Moreover, the fall-out from even small nuclear weapons is highly radioactive. So we measure the level of radioactivity as proof (or disproof) of the use of nuclear bombs. Several months ago, I tested WTC dust samples (from an apartment at 113 Liberty Street, NYC [1]) and a solidified metal sample (from the Clarkson University WTC monument [1]) for radioactivity using a Geiger counter. (Daedalon Corp., model EN-15.) I found ZERO RADIOACTIVITY (meaning nothing above background). This experimental evidence goes strongly against the mini-nukes hypothesis since measured radioactivity was simply at background levels. I used the same counter to measure the radioactivity of sand gathered from a nuclear-bomb test site decades ago for comparison – and the Geiger counter showed (2.94 +- 0.15) counts/sec. (The fused-sand was in fact from a New Mexico test site where an atomic bomb was detonated in 1945.) This demonstrates unequivocally the presence and long life of radioactive residues due to nuclear bombs, and the ability of the sensitive Geiger counter to measure that radioactivity. The sand still yields high Geiger-counter readings decades after the nuclear bomb blast, yet the WTC dust and slag and steel yield nothing. In addition, a steel member from the WTC (again from the Clarkson University WTC monument [1]) was recently tested for neutron activation by the author. The WTC steel showed 100 counts in 4m 26s, or (0.38 +- 0.04) counts/second. The background counting rate showed 100 counts in 4m 18s, or (0.39+- 0.04) counts/second. These data overlap within the statistical error, meaning that zero counts over background were seen from the WTC steel.

Jones is doing an apples/oranges comparison here. The atomic bomb tests in New Mexico in 1945 were fission devices. The old atom bombs produced a lot of radioactivity by fissioning heavy elements. The devices used at the WTC on 9/11 were likely neutron bombs that used very little uranium and reduced radioactivity by up to 95%. The WTC bombs were also much lower yield than the kiloton+ devices tested in New Mexico. Per Sam Cohen there will be no lingering radioactivity from the neutron bomb.

According to world renowned nuclear physicist Dr. Christopher Busby, and based on his assessment of elements found in craters in Fallujah, Iraq, Lebanon and Ground Zero, the devices used are close to pure fusion devices in which little radioactivity after detonation would be seen. Radioactivity would be present from Tritium H3 which together with He-4 is the product and some short lived gamma radiation from neutron activation products (e.g. Ca-45 from the Ca in concrete, Fe-55 from the steel). These would be radioactive for a few days only.

The concentration of Uranium is a key. This is slightly too high in the dust and much too high in the girder coatings. The activities for 2.7, 3.2, 4.7 and 7.57 are 33, 40, 58 and 93Bq/kg. The graph in the USGS data/Chemistry Table 1 shows that there is too much U on the girder coatings. Normal levels of U are about 12, at most 40Bq/kg.

Dr. Jones never addresses the uranium levels as they relate to increases and decreases, predictable increases and decreases, across 12 USGS sampling locations with the other dozen+ elements. The 12 sampling locations all contained strontium as well as many other fission pathway elements, all of which correlate properly using the Product Momentum Correlation Coefficient to indicate fission occurred in NYC on 911.


Jones also neglects to mention all the vehicles that were “toasted” in the vicinity of the WTC. Ted Twietmeyer has an article on Rense’s website about the melted vehicles. Twietmeyer attributes the vehicular damage to EMP which would be generated by neutron bombs. Ed Ward states that “I believe some of what he attributes to EMP was done by neutrons – in particular his linear evaluations (angle computations) would seem more neutron than EMP. EMP should tend to flow around – seems to be a correlation of dust cloud carrying EMP. So the linear blockage of cars protecting other cars would seem to be more appropriate for neutrons.”


So it appears that neutron bombs exploding in the Towers are responsible for the vehicular damage which serves to further reinforce our mini-nuke theory. The USGS dust samples also show signs of neutron activation per Jeff Prager:

The natural balance of elements at the WTC samples has changed into heavier isotopes. Some nuclear force has been able to inject neutrons into the nucleus of various elements present at the WTC area. See the table below.

List of Elements in the USGS analysis of WTC debris that should show readily detectable Neutron Activation:

Element Isotopes Isotope Percentages in Nature Mean Percentage in USGS analysis
Silicon 28 Si 92.23%, 29 Si 4.67% 15%
Carbon 2 C 98.9%, 13 C 1.1% stable 2%
Sulfur 32 S 95.02%, 33 S 0.075% 3%
Iron 56 Fe 91.72%, 57 Fe 2.2%, 58 Fe 0.28%  1.63%
Nickel 58 Ni 68.08%, 59 Ni 1/2 life 7600 years, 60 Ni 26.22%, 61 Ni 1.14% 37 ppm
Niobium 93 Nb 100%, 94 Nb 1/2 life 20,000 years 8.3 ppm
Beryllium 9 Be 100%, 10 Be 1/2 life 1.5 mil years 3 ppm
Potassium 39 K 93.256%, 40 K only plant animal 0.5%
Titanium 48 Ti 73.8%, 49 Ti 5.5% 0.25%
Chromium 52 Cr 83.79%, 53 Cr 9.5% 116 ppm
Cobalt 59 Co 100%, 60 Co 1/2 life 5 years 6 ppm

For an example, Iron is expected to have the Fe (58) isotope, which contains two additional neutrons, 0.28% naturally, but somehow there were 1.63% of these heavier, but still stable iron isotopes in the WTC sample.

A Note on Pulverization

Jones collected dust samples from Janette MacKinlay’s apartment which was near the South Tower. Jones states that the dust contained larger chunks so that disproves the mini-nuke hypothesis. A couple of points here: first, the smallest particles would have been carried a mile or more away from Ground Zero. No known samples were collected that far away so one cannot conclude that fine particles were not produced by the Ground Zero detonations. Secondly, we are not claiming that the buildings were completely pulverized into nano-sized particles. Indeed a 300 ton chunk of the North Tower was ejected 600+ feet into the Winter Garden as documented in the movie 911 Eyewitness. Could conventional explosives account for this? Perhaps but the quantities of conventional explosives required to perform that feat would not be practical to have been placed in the buildings undetected.

300 ton chunk of debris smashes into the Winter GardenPeople and Glass as Detectors for Nuclear Bomb Radiation

Finally, people themselves become “detectors” for the radiations associated with nuclear bombs. Glass also is known to melt in the intense heat of a nuclear bomb blast. All nuclear bombs produce copious x-rays, gamma-rays and fast neutrons, which are fatal at close range with a distinctive ‘burning’ of the victims. This applies to fusion as well as fission bombs.

This person had severe burns indicative of nukes:

P200333-1Jones attributes molten material at Ground Zero to thermate. Jones also portraits the temperatures at Ground Zero as occasionally spiking and not a constantly high temperature. Jones’ view contradicts people that worked the site for months:

Not only was this laborious for the firefighters, but the working conditions were hellish, said Greg Fuchek, vice president of sales for LinksPoint Inc. of Norwalk, Conn.

For six months after Sept. 11, the ground temperature varied between 600 degrees Fahrenheit and 1,500 degrees, sometimes higher. ‘In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel,’ Fuchek said.

It should be noted that the sole reason for constructing a nano-style thermitic material is to increase burn rate creating a rapid burning material that uses all of its source material in milliseconds. A nano-thermite is specifically designed to burn rapidly and exhaust its supply of fuel immediately. It CANNOT burn for more than a few seconds at best, let alone minutes, hours, days, weeks and months.

Could thermite heat a several acre area to a 600 – 1,500 °F temperature for six months? Absolutely not. The only thing that could explain this is fission/fusion. No other fire can burn underground that long.


There were massive underground explosions before the North Tower was demolished. It appears that mini-nukes were used to demolish the foundations of the WTC Towers and the residual heat from the explosions caused the elevated temperatures.

As an example of retained heat from a nuclear explosion, Ed Ward references The Project GNOME detonation on December 10, 1961 near Carlsbad, New Mexico:

Measurements of an earlier underground detonation had indicated that roughly 1/3 of the energy was deposited in the melted rock at temperatures above 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. This information encouraged hopes that a nuclear detonation in a dry medium might cause heat to be stored long enough to permit efficient recovery. GNOME was developed with the idea that a nuclear detonation in a salt deposit would create a large volume of hot melted salt from which heat might be extracted. The possibilities to be investigated for the production of power were the tapping of the steam created by detonation itself and the generation of high-density, high-pressure steam by the circulation of some heat-absorbing fluid, like water, over the heated salt. This generated steam would be used to drive a steam or hot gas turbine coupled with an electric generator.

When workers reentered that cavity on May 17, 1962, they found temperatures around 140 degrees Fahrenheit but only small amounts of residual radiation. The earlier intense radiation had colored the salt of the cavity wall various shades of blue, green, and violet.

A nuclear bomb will only explode 1-6% of its fissionable material. The unexploded fissionable material at the WTC appears to have been going through a low-level fission process and as it fissioned it burrowed deep underground. This is known as the China Syndrome and may have been responsible for some of the hot spots. Only nuclear bombs can explain this phenomenon. Hundreds of dump trucks of dirt were hauled in and out of Ground Zero to clean up the mess similar to the Chernobyl meltdown.

Building 7

There is evidence that three mini-nukes were detonated in the sub-basement of Building 7 as well. An anonymous video shows the destruction of Building 7: It appears that conventional demolition charges were used to take out the support columns in the building. But as the building “collapses” massive pyroclastic clouds erupt once again covering Lower Manhattan in a fine dust powder.

Ed Ward observes: So, I went back and examined the thermal images – no evidence of tampering was noted (nothing like the crude blackening of WTC 6). Indeed, there is minimal heat right after 7 was demolished and it still looks more like WTC 2 residue. But, very shortly after that, 3 large heat zones appear – linear, even spaced – 1 dead center and one on each side. It just took a while for the heat to transfer up. This would correlate with 3 surface to slightly sub-surface micro nukes in WTC 7. Set to explode just after/during the regular demolition would account for the more lateral flow of the pyroclastic flow.


The hard physical evidence presented strongly supports the hypothesis that mini-nukes destroyed the WTC Towers:

1. Tritium levels in the basement of WTC 6 are 55 times greater than background 11 days after 9/11 and after substantial water had been sprayed into the area. Only a thermonuclear (fusion) explosion can account for tritium levels this high. Temperatures in Building 6 were so high that “cement flowed like lava.” Nothing but a NUCLEAR EVENT can cause ‘tritium’ formation – basic physics fact.

2. Three Massive WTC Craters – See us government LIDAR proof: It’s 100% classic textbook nuclear event residue – ZERO ANOMALIES. Proven 9-11 Nukes

3. The damage done to WTC 6: a 170 meter plume of smoke seen rising from the building, a massive crater left in the center and cement that was so hot it “flowed like lava” is consistent with the use of mini-nukes.

4. Uranium, always radioactive, under scanning electron microscopy was found at 7.57 parts per million (93 Becquerels per kilogram) in the dust taken from the girder coatings by USGS personnel. Normal uranium content on earth is between 12 Bq/kg as a low and 40 Becquerels per kilogram as the maximum high making this girder coating uranium level between 2 and 7.75 times the expected level. What is the source of the increased levels of uranium found in this girder coating dust that was then surrounded by tons of building construction?

5. There are significant uranium anomalies elsewhere. Readings of 2.7, 3.2, 4.7 and 7.57 or 33, 40, 58 and 93Bq/kg are found in the USGS dust samples.

6. Lithium: The graph of thorium versus lithium including the Girder Coatings has exactly the same form as the graph showing thorium versus uranium, also including the Girder Coatings. Without the two Girder Coatings the correlation of thorium to lithium in the dust is completely linear. We therefore have compelling evidence that this fission pathway of uranium to thorium and helium, with subsequent decay of the helium into lithium, has indeed taken place. It is out of the question that all of these correlations which are the signature of a nuclear explosion could have occurred by chance. This is impossible.

7. Only nuclear fission explains the correlations and predictability of levels of numerous elements found by the USGS.

8. A 300 ton chunk of the North Tower was ejected upwards at a 45° angle and out 600 feet into the Winter Garden. Only extremely powerful explosives can account for this. It would be nearly impossible to plant enough conventional explosives to perform this feat.

9. 1,500 °F and sometimes higher ground temperatures six months after 9/11 cannot be explained by nanothermite or conventional explosives. Below ground nuclear detonations and nuclear criticalities reacting underground explain the high temperatures that persisted for months. An Impossible “Fire” (Combustion Process). See Laws of Physics for Fire/Combustion Process and Dr. Cahill’s data on ‘anaerobic incineration’.

10. Five Acres (1.2 Billion Pounds = Weight of Residue of 3 WTC Buildings (WTC 1, 2, 6 and 7) of WTC Land Brought to Searing Temperatures in a Few Hours by an ’Anaerobic, Chlorine Fueled “Fire” – Impossible by Basic Laws of Physics. See US government Thermal Images proof – See: Update

11. Engineers estimate that 1/3 of the Twin Towers were completely vaporized. 3 Billion pounds of building instantly turned into 2 Billion pounds of micronized dust. Only the mini-nuke hypothesis can explain this.

12. First Responder Sgt. Matthew Tartaglia reported in 2005 that his teeth were falling out – a common symptom of nuclear radiation exposure.

13. WTC employee Felipe David reported “hanging skin” another common symptom of nuclear radiation exposure after the North Tower was demolished.

14. 16 inch steel Spires that withstood 1/2 a Billion pounds of building falling on them and 15 seconds later suddenly turn into limp noodles and partially vaporize.

15. Hiroshima effect cancers in responders and locals. Nothing else known to man can leave ALL the WTC debris and this particular evidence in the length of time needed, except a third generation Micro Nuke – Mini Nuke – Nuke. It’s 100% classic textbook nuclear event residue – ZERO ANOMALIES.