Thursday, March 27, 2008

More On the Immediate and Continous Radiation Lowering, and Shielding, Techniques Used at the WTC, after 9/11

by The Anonymous Physicist

Recall I have stated that the acts of trucking in (and out) of sand/earth, that began the very morning after 9/11, were likely done to lower the radiation levels at the WTC. I have hypothesized that Mayor Giuliani got the word from the federal perps to do this after the perps knew of the radiation/China Syndrome at “Ground Zero.” The perps knew this because they knew the types of nukes they had used, and had either agents on the ground assaying radiation levels, or had planes or satellites doing this from above. Hosing down the rubble pile with water also began as soon as they got the trucks and crews down there to this. This continued for months, as the photographic evidence clearly indicates.

Now I would like to present to you some corroboration that these two methods are used to lower radiation levels, and /or act as shielding, for people in the vicinity of nuclear radiation.

The Safety Handbook of the Alberta (Canada) Forest Products Association describes what to do in case of various emergencies. In the case of radiation exposure, it says for Shielding: Use shielding between yourself and the source of radiation. Equipment, concrete blocks, and PILES OF DIRT OR GRAVEL often provide makeshift shielding.” As Judy Wood’s site indicated (for incorrect reasons, of course) trucks began carrying sand/earth in—and out—of the WTC the next morning. Carrying away the sand/earth may have had the same purpose as selling the WTC steel to China did—to hide the radioactive evidence.

Wiki has several articles that are relevant here too. First this article“ states how paper and water can shield people from radiation: “Alpha radiation is the easiest to shield, because the very massive alpha particles can be stopped even with a leaf of paper. Beta radiation (electrons) is more difficult… shielding must be accomplished with low density materials, e.g. plastic, wood, WATER or acrylic glass.”

The importance of shielding from beta radiation emitted by fissile material is indicated in another wiki article here http://en.wikipediaorg/wiki/Nuclear_fission “Most nuclear fuels undergo spontaneous fission only very slowly, decaying mainly via an alpha/beta decay…. Fission products tend to be beta emitters…”

The following source appears to be written by someone well familiar with the ins and outs of nuclear reactors, and an almost rabid proponent of them—- which I am not. He states how well water can reduce radiation levels in a nuclear reactor: “24 inches of water reduces radiation by a factor of 10 -- therefore it is called a tenth thickness…”

The photos and text from Joel Meyerowitz’ book indicate that the water hosing down of the rubble pile was a massive, continuous effort for months. I would add that water hosing, and the subsequent steam seen emitted many times, also carried away heat as well as lowered radiation. The water’s temperature is raised, and then more energy is used up in the conversion to steam—very much like what happens in a nuclear reactor.

Now these sand/earth and water treatments were of limited use against the fissioning fragments at the bottom of the rubble pile, and in the sub-basement areas of the towers and WTC7. But here distance and inaccessibility acted as shielding for the vast majority of the responders. Only a few were allowed access to the basement areas, it is known. So it is clear that until carted away, the radioactive fission fragments at the WTC (aka the China Syndrome)--causing the great heat in the rubble pile (for threee months), and the even greater temperatures, and flowing molten metal up to six months, after 9/11, underneath the towers and WTC7--had continuous radiation-lowering, and shielding, methods applied to them.

Undoubtedly even more cancers and radiation sicknesses would have resulted among responders, and the local inhabitants, if these sand/earth, and water, measures were not undertaken. These methods lowered the radiation exposure to responders, they provided “makeshift shielding, ” and they also carried away heat. I am not stating this was done out of any concern for the responders, or New York metro area inhabitants; but rather to try to hide the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome aftermath. But the evidence of all that can be found in the archived articles at and

What we should never forget, at this point, is what was learned in the long-term studies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors It took decades for many survivors of those nukes to get cancer or other illnesses. The already known 400 (as of 2006) blood, lymph and thyroid cancers—all common among people exposed to radiation--among 911 responders is likely, and sadly, a drop in the bucket, compared to what may be coming. And, as far as I know, studies to see if there has been an increase of cancer, and/or other immune disorders, among the millions of New York metro inhabitants, since 9/11/01, have not been undertaken.

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Exposing The “Red Mercury” Nuclear Scam, & Its Possible Use In Future Bogus Wars, & Other Crucial Matters On Nuclear 911, and About Mercury

by Anonymous Physicist

There is a great need to expose all the limited hangouts in the 911truth field, and in the general conspiracy movement. After seeing recently that a scam exists in the nuclear field, I feel compelled to expose it.

Now there is much on the net on “pure fusion” nuclear “devices.” This issue, as I have written, may be a red herring to distract from the nuclear fissioning fragments of the China Syndrome, by the release of data by the govt indicating tritium was found at the WTC. Tritium, however, can be a booster for fission reactions, and need not indicate “pure fusion.” Nonetheless, pure fusion devices have been discussed, and will be here. Now the PTB have certainly had enough decades to produce pure fusion, so I am not opposed to their existence, but it seems that the intel assets have been busy with hangouts explaining how this might be accomplished. Theoretically, pure fusion, for a large scale bomb, is a difficult thing to accomplish, because you need three things 1. Tremendous, rapid energy input — other than a fission trigger -- to overcome the forces keeping the nuclei away from each other, 2. Proper spatial configuration, 3. Proper temporal “technique.” The last two are needed so as to control the reaction to maximize a uniform and rapid method of detonation/fusion commencement. Note: Cold fusion is supposedly “pure fusion,” but appears to be unusable for bomb use. Cold fusion appears to be a slow process with insufficient yield for bomb use. But we should never forget the intel asset sent in to destroy cold fusion at its birth,

One hangout put out-- as a non-fission trigger for attaining nuclear fusion in a bomb-- is the “red mercury” scam. As usual, the intel agents accomplish several things at once with this scam. The “father” of the “red mercury” scam is none other than the “father” of the neutron bomb, Samuel Cohen, PhD. Now a neutron bomb is described variously as a fission-triggered fusion bomb:, or alternatively as a fusion-boosted, fission bomb: As an aside, note how the wiki article states that President Kennedy— whom I called the Peacegiver-- and President Carter, halted production of the neutron bomb. I have also seen the neutron bomb described as a “pure fusion” bomb as well, by the Anonymous Finnish Military Expert.

Thus we have three very different descriptions of what a neutron bomb is!? But “red mercury” or anti-matter were described as triggers for the alleged pure fusion, in the last description; and with respect, I want to show that these are unlikely, or impossible. So it is questionable/doubtful that neutron bombs are “pure fusion” bombs though there are other methods that may be used to achieve fusion without a fission trigger— including lasers and sound wave energy. So the Powers That Be (PTB) may well have non-fission-triggered fusion bombs— but their hypothetical existence may have been used as a red herring to divert from the China Syndrome aftermath at the WTC— which arose from fissioning bomb components, as pure fusion in theory can not give rise to a China Syndrome of indefinitely heat releasing radioisotopes. And the “red mercury” scam may have been put out to set up 911 nuclear researchers/proponents.

Now the main article on the red mercury scam was written by Sam Cohen and Joe Douglass, titled, “The Nuclear Threat That Doesn't Exist - Or Does It?”

Let us now examine “red mercury,” and these two authors putting out this hangout. It was immediately clear to me that this alleged “red mercury” (if it exists at all) could not trigger fusion, for a bomb. Red mercury is allegedly a mercury antimony oxide compound that is either red, or claimed to have been made in the USSR— hence the red or Communist aspect. Red mercury is also said to be a “ballotechnic” compound with “special properties.” Now the Physics of this matter is that any chemical compound, including a “ballotechnical” one, is a million times too weak to initiate fusion reactions. One physicist already had an article demonstrating this. Red mercury is said to be enhanced only via radiation from a nuclear reactor-- thus providing an excuse to deny ownership of nuclear reactors to certain countries— and an excuse for warring with any country that has, or wants one! (Personally I wish all countries did not have nuclear reactors for environmental, and other, reasons. Creating the deadly radioactive wastes that last up to billions of years is an abomination, especially when so many other energy sources abound.) So claims of red mercury are an excuse for conflict and war. And indeed people have been arrested for falling for the scheme, and allegedly trying to buy/obtain red mercury— even though no person anywhere has ever proven either 1. it even exists and/or 2. it can be a trigger for fusion!

Let us now examine these two authors, Cohen and Douglass, and the heart of this intel op/hangout. Cohen, wiki demonstrates, has a horrific record as a cold warrior/warmonger/”red” baiter. He called for the USA to nuke Vietnam, with his beloved neutron bombs, during that war of American aggression. (The so-called Gulf Of Tonkin incident never occurred. Just as the American regime, with its perennial wars of aggression, is today perpetrating war on Iraq and Afghanistan, for bogus reasons.) Cohen, in 1979, also gets the “Peace Medal” for creating the neutron bomb, from Pope John Paul II. So we see that the so-called Prince of Peace hands out a “peace medal” to the creator of a bomb that only kills people, and does not appreciably damage property!? Another indication of how London and Rome control mankind, as I have written here numerous times. Cohen has also been ranting more recently on the alleged North Korean nuclear bomb. Note the initial reports of the alleged N. Korean nuclear detonation of 2006, were that it fizzled-- sound familiar?-- and had a very tiny yield, and/or may well not have been a nuke. See, e.g. But that won’t stop Sam Cohen, or his handlers, from ranting on N. Korea’s alleged nukes. The PTB want excuses for perennial wars.

This brings us to Joseph Douglass, Jr., PhD. He has been a government “national security analyst.” I have not been able to find where Douglass worked for the govt. Sometimes this means the NSA, as officially, there is “No Such Agency.” Now the red mercury article by Douglass and Cohen was also used as an excuse for war on Iraq, claiming Saddam Hussein (a CIA asset all his adult life) had obtained/was trying to obtain red mercury and nukes, and was going to use them on America, or its allies. Much of Douglass’ career has also been as a “red baiter.” His earlier book was called “Red Cocaine.” Laughably, it purported to demonstrate that the American cocaine epidemic was a red/Commie/USSR and Red China op, when any honest researcher knows that the American regime itself brings in, and controls, the drug trade. So Douglass went from his “red” cocaine to “red” mercury. Clearly these two men are intel assets whose life-long M.O. is to blame everything that the American regime, and its masters in London and Rome, and beyond, do on reds/Commies.

“Red mercury” appears to be nothing other than a scam; and these two “authors” are scam artists, intel assets, and warmongers. These two are analogous to other intel agents who try to claim all evil, and all nefarious events, come from “Zionists.” These monsters are easy to spot, because of their “broken record” method/orders to keep putting out the very same ludicrous hangout. Again, this is much like the intel assets for the O.C.T., and “DEW” hangouts, who likely have the same intel controllers, as they continue to lie and claim that during and after WTC demolition, “there was no heat, no loud sounds, no explosions, no ground shaking,” etc. This despite my proving these to be lies, numerous times, including here with the sworn statements of the responders:

Similarly, we are not likely to see the “red mercury” hangout disappear, as the PTB, and their intel lackeys, apparently think it is a good scheme for red baiting/warmongering/setting up “terrorists” for arrest, even though the thing they might allegedly try to obtain doesn’t even exist. A good way of throwing away the key on someone that was set-up, perhaps because he knows too much truth? The bogus red mercury scam may soon be used to set someone up from Iran, and claim that he was trying to obtain, or create, a nuclear fusion bomb for Iran. Thus providing an excuse for the American regime to start War on Iran. Indeed, the “red mercury” scam even allows the PTB to resurrect the old red/Commie scare if and when it wants to! But just as I have indicated that “Hitler was a British agent”
(see, the old USSR/Red Menace was itself also controlled out of London! Indeed this book, just cited, referenced Stalin being trained/tortured/controlled out of London’s Tavistock “Institute,” just a few years before Hitler was there, getting the same “treatment.” So the “red” menace, and “red” mercury will not go away, even though they are indications of far deeper matters.

Now anti-matter has also been proposed as a possible triggering source for a “pure fusion,” or fission-less, bomb. I am sure it’s only a matter of time before the PTB create a Matter/Anti-Matter bomb. This may have already occurred. This would be bad news for humanity, as this type of “device” would have approx. 1000x the energy yield of fission or fusion— it could be a country-destroying, or world-destroying weapon, and may never be announced, as its intention would be clear! (See
Its great energy arises because 100% of the mass (via E=mc2) of the matter and anti-matter nuclei, in a reaction between them, becomes energy (presumably gamma rays). While in fission or fusion, smaller and larger nuclei are created, respectively, and only less than 1% of the mass of the starting nuclei is converted to energy. A matter/anti-matter bomb does not have the first of the three concerns listed above to make a nuclear bomb— no large repulsive force need be overcome. But instead, it is vastly more difficult to manage the other two factors— spatial and temporal techniques to shield the anti-matter from matter so as to allow a rapid, uniform reaction. Now there are two concerns regarding the possible use of anti-matter as a trigger for fusion. 1. It appears extremely difficult to create conditions meeting the two necessary criteria, and 2. If it were possible to use anti-matter as a trigger for fusion, why would you want to? Because if you could control anti-matter to this extent, you would then use it for a pure matter/anti-matter bomb, which would have approx. 1000x the yield, compared to using it to “merely” trigger fusion. So to sum up, “red mercury” as a fusion trigger is impossible, and may not even exist; and the use of anti-matter as a fusion trigger appears to be improbable or implausible.

So we have seen that red mercury is a scam put out by obvious, warmongering intel assets. And a pure matter/anti-matter bomb with its immense yield, which is neutron-free, would also not give rise to the observed China Syndrome of high heat released for months afterwards at the WTC. As I have reported, much eyewitness and material proof of neutron bombardment took place, thus it appears unlikely that a pure matter/anti-matter bomb was used, as this would not release neutrons, to my knowledge.

Finally, in addition to deciphering what the evidence indicated happened on 9/11, and its aftermath, I feel compelled to warn what the abundance of intel assets in the 911 community and the larger community will try to pull on 911 nuclear truth advocates. It is crucial to try to predict future ops against the 911 nuclear truth community. I saw recently from the website of nuclear 911 advocate Bill Deagle, M.D. that he stated the following. He had tried to get his WTC sample analyzed. His page states, “After Dr. Deagle MD’s request, Dr. Durakovic's family and Dr. Yamamoto PhD in Japan received death threats for even attempting to perform gamma spectroscopy with germanium detectors & neutron activation studies that require the presence of a neutron source from a nuclear reactor. Testing will proceed despite death threats!”

As an expert on the wider conspiracy, and one of the few who was nearly killed myself-- via mercury poisoning of my home, and thus myself-- and one of the few current conspiracy experts who isn’t himself an intel “asset”, I will give you two examples of how the PTB can interfere. First, in the late 1970’s, Marita Lorenz handed in documents to the House of Representatives Committee on Assassinations containing direct proof and evidence of CIA involvement in killing President Kennedy, including the involvement of E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis and others— she had been dragged along with them unknowingly beforehand. The Committee then took a break. (Months earlier, the original Committee Chairman Henry Gonzalez-- a friend/supporter of President Kennedy-- and its first attorney, were both railroaded off the Committee, and CIA stooges had replaced them.) After the break, when Ms. Lorenz referred to the proof/evidence she had just given the Committee, she was told, “What proof, what documentation, what evidence?” It was gone. So much for a Congress, and for Justice in America.

So they could have already broken into Deagle’s place where the sample is, and replaced it. They certainly broke into my home numerous times without my knowing it, until later for my revealing that Secret Service Agent William Greer had not only killed President Kennedy, as Bill Cooper had shown, but analysis I showed-- an audio and video version of he Zapruder film-- proved Greer fired twice, first hitting Connolly as well. My murderers placed a mercury compound all over my home, that gassed and poisoned me for two years, and destroyed my health, and my life. The federal agents/perpetrators even removed a sample that had the mercury in it from my home that had undergone analysis by a state lab, and was going to be evidence. This time they brazenly removed this evidence from my home, when I said on the phone I was going to have it all investigated. So I never did. After all, who am I going to call for help, when the agencies that should be protecting us, were the ones killing me and interfering with due process. Indeed, they had removed the evidence, which they knew about from tapping my phone calls to police, to the EPA, and to other agencies that wanted to help but were called off, by the Gestapo intel agencies intercepting my calls. So this was my second example— myself. My being massively poisoned, brutally assaulted, car chased, wire-tapped, all for once publicly showing in 1992, an audio as well as video version of the Zapruder film.

So I just wish to caution the 911 nuclear truth community about this matter of getting some supposed WTC steel analyzed by some nuclear lab, as it is so easy to have a set-up. E.g., all it takes is someone at some lab to not reveal such death threats, and pretend to do a scientific analysis say on a different sample surreptitiously given to them by the regime, and report negative nuclear results. Such a bogus “analysis,” unless it were exposed— which would be difficult under the circumstances— would then appear to cause great harm to the 911 nuclear truth community. The point is the PTB will never allow release of direct proof of their nuking the WTC on 9/11, and will resort to any means to prevent such direct proof from being released to the public. And it is very easy to get set-up, in many different ways. They could have already switched the samples. Hint to Bill Deagle: Cuba might, I say might, be the only country not totally controlled by the PTB now, if you actually have a real sample at this point. To the rest of the 911 truth community, I warn you of this turning out to be a set-up against the nuclear truth of 911. This is unfortunately an easy thing to do, via complete interception of all communications by the Gestapo agencies, and the switching or alteration of any samples, possibly even before first handed in. Be wary, be wise, be well.

Bookmark and Share

Breakthroughs Towards Attaining A Complete Understanding of the Nuking of the WTC on 9/11, and its China Syndrome Aftermath: Part II

by The Anonymous Physicist

This is part of my continuing efforts to decipher, and expose, the details of the American regime’s nuking of the WTC on 9/11/01, and the China Syndrome aftermath of high heat emitting, radioactive/fissioning fragments at, and under, the WTC. As I have detailed herein (see the archived URL’s noted at the bottom), the China Syndrome documentation includes massive evidence of high temperatures, melted boots, flowing molten metal, and much more. Inherent in this, was the perpetrators’ crucial need to keep the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome aftermath, hidden from Americans (and the world.)

Now any nuke that might be significantly larger than expected, and thus might blow through a building, and be videotaped, had to be prevented, as the nuclear op would be clear to all. Now you might think that if a larger nuke than expected became visible, the regime would just say that Osama bin Laden (aka Tim Osman of the CIA) had obtained nukes after all. But they couldn’t, because they had already put out the (CGI) “plane hits”, and it is not plausible that anyone would go to all the trouble of hijacking planes, and “flying them into the towers”, if they had already planted nukes therein! The perps would lose their coveted “plausible deniability.” So it was crucial to use nukes that might be underpowered, or even fizzle (as this could be [and was] corrected later); and not to use nukes that might have a larger yield than predicted. And better to have many smaller ones— redundancy— which could be corrected as needed— as was WTC7. I have stated that the bogus “towers are leaning,” said on the air by the regime’s intel operators/”reporters” was related to the fall-back position of using larger nukes in the sub-basement of the towers— which would not be visible-- to knock the towers over, if the intricate top to bottom scenario, with many smaller nukes, fizzled completely.

In more detail, uncertainty in the lower boundary of destructive nuclear yield, was far more tolerable, than uncertainty was, in the upper boundary of yield. The former is OK, as even fizzling (insufficient yield) could be, and was, “corrected” later— a la WTC7.

How might this relate to the fission vs. fusion issue? Perhaps either fusion bombs cannot be made with very low yield-- or perhaps more likely-- a very low yield cannot be guaranteed for fusion devices, as well as it can be for fission devices. Note the Castle Bravo H-Bomb test of March 1, 1954, where “The 15 megaton [thermonuclear] bomb delivered a force far more powerful than expected”. This leads me to the “official” tritium finding— and release-- from the USGS (aka the UCal/Berkeley/Livermore) study. See also William Tahil’s analysis of this, and his perhaps, crucial findings and analysis of levels found of Strontium, Barium, and other elements, of the fissioning of Uranium or Plutonium.

Now regarding the tritium, there are three possibilities:
1. Tritium was used as a booster in fission nukes at the WTC, and/or
2. Tritium was used in fusion nukes at the WTC, or
3. The Tritium finding is bogus, a straw man.

Now you might ask why would the federal regime release data that might indicate the use of a fusion device at the WTC? Precisely because of the existence of the China Syndrome aftermath! And stating there was tritium could be a straw man, in the sense that 911 researchers would be diverted into believing that fusion (only) devices were used— including the so-called, hypothetical “pure fusion” nukes, and therefore there could be no China Syndrome aftermath, as that requires fissioning fragments. (At the same time, of course, different intel assets would claim that the tritium finding doesn’t mean anything.) So the pure fusion debate could be a red herring. Recall earlier, I have written that whenever the federal regime releases something that seems very damaging, it will likely turn out that the truth is far worse, and is being hidden. The bottom line is that the federal regime could have easily prevented the release of the tritium finding, if it were genuine. All they had to do is to claim the usual “national security” excuse to censor anything. Recall I have asserted, and demonstrated, that the 2nd AVIRIS WTC ground temperature data is false, as well as the seismic records. Anything that indicated the China Syndrome has been particularly censored.

Anything and everything coming from the federal regime must never be taken on face value. Indeed, statistically, one would be better off assuming any statement, assertion, or data regarding any very important issue, is a lie. The regime knew from the outset that the China Syndrome had begun. This was either from knowing this as WTC destruction happened, or from its intel assets on the ground, or from satellites or planes high overhead— assaying heat or radiation spectra. The feds then informed their stooge/mayor, Giuliani, who immediately ordered the trucking in and out of sand/earth, and hosing down of the grounds, to lower the radiation levels.

I find it fascinating that one of the proponents of the nuclear WTC hypothesis repeatedly cites the tritium finding, but has never once written the words, “China Syndrome.” We must also be aware of how the regime easily keeps these words from being mentioned in the MSM, and had its assets waiting in the wings with their hangouts to hide this. I refer again to the thermite and “DEW” hangouts. The thermite physicist ludicrously claims that thermite would maintain molten metal temperatures for months. While the DEW engineer claims that each time the firemen/responders hosed down the very hot rubble pile, and steam (photographed) and hissing sounds were emitted, that instead “cold molecular dissociation clouds” appeared, or the latest “New Physics” gibberish (it will never end: the sign of an intel op)-- the “Hutchison effect.”

So in trying to obtain a complete understanding of the nuking of the WTC on 9/11, and the China Syndrome aftermath, I can state the following. There is a good probability that numerous low yield (mini- or micro-nuclear) fission bombs were used. There is the possibility that the tritium “finding”, that was released by the govt, may be a straw man to lead researchers to the red herring of “pure fusion”, and away from the evidence of the China Syndrome. In all likelihood, the regime has kept proof of radiation release at the WTC during demolition, and the later China Syndrome from public release. The ludicrous hangouts of thermite and DEW were created to hide the China Syndrome, and the nuking.

Some of the people of New York City have learned well the nature of their regime, and have bought Geiger counters (which are of limited use). The regime knows this, and is trying to ban the possession of Geiger Counters by the citizenry. So the citizens are trying to determine directly for themselves if they will be hit with any more nukings of their city. What possible reason would the regime have for denying them this right— other than the obvious, nefarious one? The current NYC stooge/mayor Bloomberg’s own Police “counter-terrorism deputy commissioner,” R.A. Falkenrath, makes it clear with his own words from the last URL. The restriction is so that “we know where these detectors are located…” Translation: They want to make sure that there will be no WORKING Geiger detectors nearby at the time the regime does its next nuking of NYC. Those of you who understand all that I have written here, will realize that “counter-terrorism experts” like former “reporter” John Miller that I exposed herein, are likely long term deep undercover intel “assets.” They are the terrorists themselves, and/or working directly for the regime’s terrorists who have done, and will do, the next nuking— or other use of a WMD against the citizenry.

But the people are obviously catching on. And I hope with my articles herein, that we can see more and more clearly exactly what they did on 9/11, and its aftermath. Please post this and my archived articles on the nuking of the WTC, and the China Syndrome aftermath at and at all forums and blogs. And tell your friends and neighbors. The life you save may be your own. While this mass murdering, terrorist regime may desire to ban Geiger counters, and guns, the people have learned that the way to counter this is for everyone to get them now, and never give them up.

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

On The Existence of Mini- or Micro-Nukes, Fizzled Nukes, 9/11 & The China Syndrome

by The Anonymous Physicist

This author, among a few others, has claimed that numerous mini- or micro-nukes were used to destroy the WTC. There may appear to be a conflict between the “official” listing of minimal critical masses for small nuclear fission bombs, and the claims of very small yield for such nuclear devices. Now we have sources, like this Wiki article state that about 10 kg. (kilogram) for Plutonium, and 15-50 Kg for Uranium are their minimal critical masses. I have seen other sources put 2 Kg for the minimal critical mass for Plutonium. At the same time, we have a gov’t physicist at a Congressional hearing, in 1998, who said, “These experiments involve the actual testing of extremely low yield fission devices (as low as the equivalent of several pounds of TNT) within a confined environment.” Such a very small fission yield directly implies a critical mass far below that claimed to be the minimal critical mass for any fission device; thus there appears to be a conflict. How can it be resolved?

Obviously one or the other side may be lying. The official listings and equations for finding the smallest critical mass for a given radionuclide can have been made much larger than they really are—ostensibly to deter nuclear proliferation among “newcomers.” Or the physicist testifying to Congress could have lied to scare people. Although the Congress did pass legislation barring the production of such extremely small yield nukes. Needless legislation was passed, if this were impossible; but this doesn’t prove anything, due to the nature of Congress.

Now regarding mini-nukes, as far back as the 1950’s, the USA had the Davy Crockett mini-nuke (fission). It was called a recoilless rifle with a range of 2-4 km. It’s yield was down to 10 tons of TNT. This is 0.01 Kt (kilotons), or about 1/1000 of the Hiroshima blast. Thus it can be called a mini-nuke. Note that this low yield appears to be from less than the “official” minimal critical mass claimed. One would think that with an additional 45 years before 2001, and with the advent of technological breakthroughs, such as nanotechnology--which the military would have had decades before civilian use--ultra-small nukes would be obtainable, unless truly forbidden by the Laws of Physics.

The Wiki article admits, at one point, that “critical mass depends inversely on the square of the density.” And there are greater explosives now to implode the material to a greater density, than they did in 1945. As the critical mass equation has the density inversely squared, this could provide for a great shrinkage of the minimal critical mass. There are other relevant things in the wiki article on critical mass. There is the “fudge factor, f”. And they admit that “sophisticated nuclear weapons programs can make a functional device from less material than more primitive weapons programs require.” But wiki, which has been called a CIA front, does list the minimal critical masses I cited above.

Can these opposing views be reconciled? How could a micro-nuke be made? At first thought, one might conclude that one would indeed use nanotechnology to emplace Uranium or Plutonium atoms one at a time optimally, to obtain as small, and compact, a nuke as possible— and this may be feasible. But then I realized this may be approaching the problem from the wrong direction. Instead of trying to see how that physicist at the Congressional hearing could build a fission bomb, with a yield of only a few pounds of TNT, from a very tiny amount of Uranium or Plutonium, I may have found better ways.

Now we know, e.g., that the Hiroshima bomb had 80 generations of neutron capture/emission. One neutron yielding 2-3 neutrons with each successful capture by a Uranium nucleus, and so on. 99% of the 13-15 Kt of TNT release is said to have occurred in the last 10 generations of neutron emission. That is because of the exponential build-up to the massive numbers of neutrons at the end. So instead of thinking very tiny, what is to stop the following? Start with an Hiroshima bomb, or the smaller Davy Crockett nuke. Then stop the last few generations of neutron emission/capture to have either of these bombs have a much lower yield. This can probably be attained in numerous ways. 1. A somewhat hollow core or 2. Emplacing one or more spherical shells (or whatever geometry is required) of a neutron absorbing material, at the appropriate radii, to either terminate criticality near the end (or earlier for a very small yield), or go barely critical (as opposed to the initial super-criticality), or possibly sub-critical somewhere in between to halt, or slow, the reaction. 3. Employ ACTIVE nanotech devices to halt a critical reaction, even after it has begun.

The first method is somewhat obvious, so let’s examine the second and third methods. Regarding neutron absorbing shells, we know that the properties of neutron absorbing materials are well known from the nuclear reactor industry. In fact, such a tiny nuclear bomb is almost in between a nuke and a nuclear reactor. I think this is very attainable. Now for the third method. As the time scale between each of the 80 generations of neutron capture/emission is said to be 10 nanoseconds, and nanotechnology operates at nanometer distances, it is thus possible that active, not merely passive, means could be employed to act on this related time scale. Thus it may be possible to build in active methods to curtail, or halt, a chain reaction, even after it has begun. As they have nano-engines, they could have nano-lasers that could “de-implode” the critical mass, even after it has begun! Thus no laws of physics would be violated. So it appears likely that there may be numerous ways to attain micro-nukes-- including with the earlier noted increased density—despite official claims that may be highly exaggerated, or outdated, of 2-10 kilogram masses, etc.

Indeed these methods may make it easier to produce small yield nukes out of fission only, and not have any fusion. And tiny nukes were needed, at the WTC, so as to not obviously nuke through the whole building at once, or Manhattan for that matter. So if only fission nukes could be made so small, we can see how the redundant emplacement of many of these could have given rise to the China Syndrome, beginning on 9/11. Indeed these small nukes that employ methods to “damp” them down, may be difficult to standardize. That is, a little too much damping, and it stops the chain reaction before any significant yield is attained. Thus I now have a third possible causative factor that may have led to fizzled nukes! E.g., they would have used the lowest yield nukes in the smaller buildings, and possibly many of these same devices were placed in the larger towers—or several larger ones, as I originally wrote. Again, I have asserted, all micro-nukes in WTC7 fizzled in the morning. See

And WTC6, with it’s nearly perfect spherical hole, looks like JUST ONE mini-, or micro-nuke exploded there. If this one had fizzled, they would have had to do a WTC7 later in the day, for WTC6 also! What I am saying is that they likely tried to have several go off (redundancy), but that spherical hole indicates just one went off, and came close to being too large, if you know what I mean. Many smaller ones— to hide the nuking, was the order of the day— if possible. And these methods, to reduce the minimal critical mass, may make these micro-nukes very sensitive to fizzling. So this hypothesis of how to make a micro-nuke, may be coherent with the rest of my hypotheses, including fizzled nukes in WTC7 and the towers, and the subsequent China Syndrome of high heat generating radioactive fragments, and the three month long hot, large, rubble pile, and the six month long very high heat underneath the towers and WTC7. The latter due to insufficiency of the radiation-lowering methods of sand and water.

I might even speculate that the fizzled North Korean Nuke (of 2006) may have been given to them by none other than the American regime. And it was one of the WTC-type small nukes— with the same fizzled result! See This is part of the op of having a bogus enemy for a possible bogus future war.

So we may have a cohesive body of knowledge tieing together micro-nukes, fizzled nukes—among the ones that did go off--on 9/11, and the subsequent China Syndrome at New York City’s World trade Center. Unlike Hiroshima, all this arose because the American regime needed to hide the nuking of New York City from its residents! But the nuclear cat is out of the bag, and making its presence more and more known every day.

Bookmark and Share