User Answers

REALLY!?!? … RED MERCURY, AGAIN!? PART TWO

Yesterday I began some long high octane speculation about the re-emergence of the red mercury story, in this short article from the Atlanta Journal Constitution that was shared by Mr. I.R.:

Downtown streets closed amid ‘red mercury’ investigation

I now pick up where I left off from yesterday, resuming an elaborate high octane speculation:

And now, red mercury resurfaces, in the context of a drill, and in the wider context of the anti-Russia hysteria in the West.

But again, why re-run the same scam, especially now? What convinced those prospective terrorist buyers of the substance to attempt to buy it in the first place?

This is the question that hovers over the whole affair, to my mind. That was my question then, and it remains my question now.

If one reflects carefully about all those 1990s red mercury stories carefully, they're a bit like the bearer bonds scandals of the 2000s: we're assured the bonds are fake, they don't really exist, and yet, the "counterfeiters" keep running the same scam over and over. And as I  have pointed out in that connection, counterfeiters never counterfeit things that don't exist: one doesn't counterfeit a seven dollar bill, attempt to spend it, and get real money in change. Counterfeits never work, without real antecedents, whether or not they exist in the public market, or a secret one.

The red mercury legend thus had for me all the components of the bearer bonds story; it was, and is, a kind of thermonuclear version of it. Which brings us back to the central question:

What convinced those prospective terrorist buyers of the substance to attempt to buy it in the first place?

Given the high stakes, I argued that there had to be enough to the legend to convince the purchasers, and their scientific experts, that the substance was real, and this is where it gets downright intriguing. According to the legend, red mercury was a heavy, gooey liquid like substance, cherry red or dark maroon--purplish red in color, that was created by the Russians as a chemical means of initiating thermonuclear reactions - in effect, a hydrogen bomb - without the need for an atom bomb as the "fuse" for the hydrogen bomb. In conventional scientific wisdom, the enormous radioactive heat-pressure gradients of a nuclear explosion are necessary to initiate a chain fusion reaction that accounts for the gigantic "wallop" of a conventional hydrogen bomb, capable of laying an entire county, or even several counties, waste. The selling point thus becomes obvious: one could become a thermonuclear power without having to become a nuclear power first. And sans the atom bomb component, the nature of the radioactive aftereffects changes completely, for most of the long-term deadly radioactive aftereffects of a hydrogen bomb come not from the fusion reactions as much as they do from the atom bomb "fuse" that sets it off.

But still, the question was, did the substance exist?

This is where - to my mind, thinking about these questions back then - it gets even more intriguing. Trying to reverse engineer the substance from the data available publicly about it, we had a gooey, heavy, liquid-like substance that was red in color, which indicated to my mind an oxide of some sort. A heavy gooey liquid like substance indicated the possibility of mercury in the compound, and indeed, that was its very name, red mercury. According to the legend, the Russians, having compounded the substance, then subjected it to neutron bombardment and capture by placing it in their reactors, a process which "loaded it up" with extra neutrons. Supposedly, when detonated, these neutrons bombard their target. In effect, according to the legend, the red mercury was allegedly a very powerful explosive in its own right, having the force of a tactical nuclear weapon.

My researches into the mysterious "Xerum 525" that allegedly powered the Nazi Bell (according to its legend), was also, conveniently enough, a heavy, gooey, liquid like red substance that was used to fuel the Bell (and, in my thinking, to also measure any minute time dilation effects it created). Interestingly enough, the Nazi Bell project and its mysterious serum was a story uncovered and publicized by the Polish research Igor Witkowski in his now famous book The Truth About the Wunderwaffe, at approximately the same time period that the red mercury stories began to percolate.

While I put nothing past the "intelligence" community and their ability to craft detailed, and seemingly disconnected stories, and holding out the possibility that the Nazi Bell and red mercury stories were two examples of such disparate and apparently disconnected and concocted stories, I pursued the avenue that one had to assume they were true, and to attempt to "reverse engineer" a possible science and technology tree behind them. If one could do so, then the stories themselves gained in credence. In this case, three strange facts presented themselves: (1) the claims of post-war Nazi scientist Ronald Richter in Argentina, to have achieved nuclear fusion reactions at far lower temperatures than standard thermonuclear chemistry at the time thought was feasible; (2) the fact that the Nazis had stockpiled massive amounts of thorium (which, according to the conventional narratives, was entirely for the purpose of creating thorium based reactors); and (3) the suggestions within the British recordings of the Nazi nuclear scientists - the "Farm Hall Transcripts" - that they were talking about some sort of "photoelectric" means of isotope separation, which by the time of the appearance of my book The Philosophers' Stone, I concluded had to be some form of chemical, tunable laser isotope enrichment.

Putting all this together, I argued that this technology could have been used to separate thorium 229 isomer, an isomer capable of spitting out massive amounts of gamma rays when destabilized, and with a relatively low destabilization threshold, and a known decay rate, concluded that the mysterious "Xerum 525" might have been some sort of mercury-thorium oxide compound, with the thorium component composed in part of the 229 isomer. The mercury component would be ideal for plasma research, and zapping it with massive amounts of electricity (taking a cue from Richter's comments in Argentina and his secret interviews with US Air Force representatives) might indeed destabilize the thorium isomer, creating massive radioactive pressures of gamma rays...

In short, the Xerum 525 might have been the kernel of the red mercury legend, and there was at least a putatively possible rationale behind it all. While researching all of this, I also discovered that Sam Cohen, the so-called father of the "neutron bomb" parted company with the vast amount of commenters, and believed that the red mercury legend might not be a purely fictional substance. We were told, at the time of course, that "neutron bombs" would "kill people, but leave the buildings standing." A lie, of course, since anything exposed to massive neutron bombardment will literally look like molecular-sized Swiss cheese, with billions of tiny holes punched through it: glass, for example, subjected to such bombardment, will still look the same, but can quite literally simply break apart if exposed to slight stress, such as the simple act of picking it up. (And for those paying attention, enter the "mini-nukes theory" for the destruction of the Twin Towers [and the higher than normal tritium background radiation counts] alleged near "ground Zero" in Manhattan.)

And then, shortly after this website was founded, I blogged about an unusual project conducted by DARPA (the Diabolically Apocalyptic Research Projects Agency, as we like to call it here, after a suggestion by Mr. J.B.). That project, according to the book Imaginary Weapons: A Journey through the Pentagon's Scientific Underground by Sharon Weinberger, was to create "isomer bombs", bombs of gigantic destructive potential, rivaling if not eclipsing, thermonuclear hydrogen bombs. In this case, the isomer in question was hafnium, but the principle was the same.

This has been, probably, my longest "high octane speculation" to date, but the bottom line is: I suspect there is more involved here than merely pure-and-simple fiction, and that there is nothing to it. I suspect, indeed, that there is something to it. The problem is, a very wide context and a great deal of dot-connecting is needed to see it.

And that's the rub. Which takes me back to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution article that began all this. Could it be, as the listener to Thursday's News and Views suggested, that the "red mercury story" was part of some drill? Certainly it could be. But given these speculations, it could also be a "message" from someone, to someone else.

See you on the flip side...

 

56 thoughts on “REALLY!?!? … RED MERCURY, AGAIN!? PART TWO”

  1. Wow.. Just read through these stories. . I have to admit.. As soon as Dr Farrel, as soon as you started talking about red mercury.. I tought about the Nazi Bell.
    AS you say, how would people be convinced to part with their money? This isnt SnakeOil Salesman.. we’re talking about multi million/billion?? sales.. NO ONE ANYWAY gets that much money out of their pocket without seeing proof. And if the product were false. If it were a hoax.. Than where is the army of enraged horse raping savage barbarians sweeping down from the hills to extract revenge for the theft of their millions…??

    I’m sticking with my original thoughts on the Bell. I believe (with what I’ve read.. I not a physicist) it has everything to do with Aether manipulation, gravity manipulation and (in my mind), therefore time manipulation.

    The time for Tinfoil is way past – The reality has more than bypassed anything anyone thought possible in science fiction, we all know this now and its staring us right in the face.

    Which might imply that the Russians got their hands on the Bell.. or maybe a survivor from Kammler’s purge..If the stories of Red Mercury all came out of Russia…Maybe no one could get close enough to destroy it like they did the Bellenzo’s..

  2. Phil the Thrill

    “Lost” must be a member of Gelatin, whose artsy-fartsy production, “The b-thing”, got a little notice some 16 or so years back.

    1. What on earth are you talking about?

      Oh and any said “production” would have been 15 years ago or so.

      Mini nukes are a distraction, and a preposterous one. Nor do phased array microwave systems do the trick either.

      Wood provided a clean energy source, it jibes with the experience of others in the field, the anti-gravity effects documented that day completely overlap with Hutchinson, leaving how to focus, tune, and transfer the massive energy in two parts instantly to lower Manhattan that day as the great mystery of the technology.

  3. Thanks, Joseph. I had not heard about “the Nazis had stockpiled massive amounts of thorium.” That leads-off into a whole new direction of thinking, particularly as Jimmy Carter shut-off all research into thorium-based reactors as soon as he got into office. (A likely pay-back for putting him in, in my humble opinion.) Were the mid-70s US-based researchers getting too close to some WWII ‘secret’?

    Other thoughts:

    On “red mercury was a heavy, gooey liquid like substance,” there is some basic physics involved there. Conventional explosives used in-the-field are mostly-solid, for usability reasons. Dynamite and C4, for example. However, there is a ‘cost’ for that, in that the chemical bonds which make a substance ‘solid’ are stronger than the ones which only hold a substance ‘liquid’. Those bonds have to be ‘overcome’ before an explosive reaction starts. Some ‘explosive’ that was engineered to be ultra-energetic might be right on the bleeding-edge of being liquid, i.e., “a heavy, gooey liquid like substance…”

    The other thing is ‘practical’. One might sell x-pounds of RM, but one would NEVER give-away the secret to producing it. (Imagine some psychopath with many USABLE mini-nukes. Oh wait, we have that.) I would imagine some sealed tube/vial/sphere rigged to explode if opened, and telling the ‘customer’ that fact. “Use it or not; those are your options.” I could even see certain unexplained, powerful ‘explosions’ around the globe as evidence of some folks ignoring that restriction…

    1. (The last thought led to: What if the original RM seller was not ‘conventional’? What if it came from SSP production, or even ‘in trade’ from further afield? The earthly seller would know of its properties, and might even have been given a ‘selling kit’ for marketing purposes. But, they would be ignorant of how to make it, and so reliant on their ‘vendor’. That would explain a lot, including the unexplained, powerful ‘explosions’ around the globe…)

  4. Tom Farrar Talley

    Did a little digging, Joe.. and found this update to the original story, which was published one day earlier.. and I couldn’t find more updates.. so, it ended there.

    Question > > When it is reported that “no one was arrested” .. and “Police did not say what substance actually was found” .. then what, if anything, does that tell you?

    I mean, they shut down streets.. call in first responders.. and no one is charged for anything? And there is no announcement to alert the public or calm the public, as to what the “red mercury” substance really was?

    http://www.ajc.com/…/arrests…/7OYCXYk9enyAGnfRU6rABI/

    1. Tom Farrar Talley

      Did a little digging, Joe.. and found this update to the original story. This article linked below was published one day after the original story. I couldn’t find more updates.. so, it appears to end there.

      Question > > When it is reported that “no one was arrested” .. and “Police did not say what substance actually was found” .. then, what, if anything, does that tell you?

      Atlanta authorities shut down streets.. call in first responders.. and no one is charged for anything? And there is no announcement to alert the public or calm the public, as to what the “red mercury” substance really was?

      http://www.ajc.com/news/crime–law/arrests-made-after-red-mercury-investigation/7OYCXYk9enyAGnfRU6rABI/

  5. The “TOASTED” cars did it for me. Judy Wood’ book will go down as one of the greatest pieces of engineering investigative science of all time. Whatever happened on 9/11 will be remembered as a moment when the world changed forever. Personally I believe what brought down the towers came from off world, that may seem crazy, but after reading Dr. Wood’ book, it was the obvious source, in my humble opinion. And to finish, an opinion is just a lack of knowledge.

    1. Those ‘toasted cars’ (and particularly the melted aluminum engine blocks, in some) were/are something that my mind rattles-over periodically. There IS some ‘clue’ there that Judy Wood has indeed turned-up. (I wonder if those cars ALSO ended-up in a Chinese smelter…)

      (There are also the ‘thrown’ steel beams that went right out of one structure and crashed-into another. Those are ‘minimized’ on our internet, but you can find the reports if you try…)

  6. Vomito Blanco

    If Trump commences his Syria invasion tomorrow on the first day of Passover, he could be in Damscus by Easter Sunday.

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Just mentioned Syria, an obvious Mickey Mouse set-up., in my moderated reply to Dana Thomas.

  7. Anyone remember James Burke tv series “Connections” and the episode Death in in the Morning towards the end of that episode. The suitcase nuclear device and that it was the nineteen seventies I think the show was broadcasted on PBS. One wonders what these mini-nukes would look like today what’s the old saying where there is smoke there is fire.

    1. Back in the day, “Connections” was one of my best-loved, must-see shows. I love the collective ‘readership’ here. Vast knowledge, and good wit.

      (And thank you, Joseph, for providing the space for us to collect…)

  8. Robert Barricklow

    At least a couple messages here.
    They’re seeding the groundwork for a possible false flag.
    They’re letting other know the seeding has begun.
    Now they’re waiting to see it any tripwires fire-off.
    Then collaborate further depending on developments.

    1. Laying the grounds for a false flag – sounds quite possible. After the “anthrax”, “ebola” and “sarin gas” scares, a little updating may be in the pipeline.

      1. Robert Barricklow

        The anthrax incident in DC was a no brainer. Startling how inept the press was… purposely[afterall, it’s run by the CIA].
        Surely, even idiots could have connected the dots. The ONLY two senators wanting to examine the PATRIOT ACT receiving the powdered letters? What an Orwellian title for an act of congress. Why didn’t the authors of that act receive any of the coveted comedy awards? They should have complained.

        And today with Syria?
        Another no brainer set-up.

        1. Robert, THANK YOU! Interesting you mentioned the Patriot Act. I did not make the connection about the 2 Senators who wanted to examine it who got the anthrax letters.

          It was written back in the early 90’s by The Rand Corporation. That sucker was shelf-ready for Dubya and one of the guys who worked on it was actually heard bragging. Of course Darth Cheney and other cockroaches were involved also.

          1. Robert Barricklow

            Watergug
            Definitely! They just blew the dust off it and a.s.a.p’d it through a dime-a-dozen rubber stamp congress/senate/prez. Two brave senators wanted to question yet another deadly scythe-like instrument of law cutting up what’s still left of the U.S. constitution; ironically, all this is being passed by a corrupted peoples’ government[in fact, it’s a fascist corporate subsidiary, simply termed public, that absorbs all the loses, while the private side of the corporate conglomerate reaps all the profits – two streams: a covert crime side and an overt public T.V. side.

          2. Robert Barricklow

            My reply to Waterbug’s post was sent to the holding cell. No doubt now – It’s sentient;
            not a bot – pure and simple censorship.

            t…t…t……That’s all folks.

          3. RB, congratulations and commiserations. Should I pun you were “Robbed” of free speech?

  9. Vomito Blanco

    I thought the era of false flags were over but we can’t rule out President Bait and Switch may allow his mossad honey trap son-in-law to pull one off using a hydrogen bomb that can be blamed on radical islam or even secular islam and the Russians who supplied them with the trigger. (People keep saying the Russian mafia is in cahoots with Putin but I’m not sure how that could be considering Putin is their obstacle for controlling all of Russia which is always their endgame. More likely they have had control of the red mercury supply since Yeltsin took over). I thought for sure Regent Kushner was going to bring in Rahm Emmanuel to head the pedophile inquisition (against the enemies of radical judaism) but perhaps he will oversee the use of the hydrogen bomb in the southside of Chicago where the shwantz have been giving him quite a headache and will surely make for good fodder and martyrdom in the crusade for Greater Israel.

    I’m still shocked that a reality show bozo who professed his undying allegiance to Israel on the campaign trail could betray the majority of his voters like that so quickly and I still have to wonder if Trump is the victim of some kind of entrainment technology or a victim of Dr. Feelgood-stien– recommended to him by his dutiful son-in-law. I’m just waiting for Hillary to be invited into the cabinet now or at least allowed to be Baron’s nanny. I even entertained the notion that Hillary somehow deposited her own consciousness inside Trump’s body and Trump’s own consciousness was dumped inside some beauty pageant contestant.

    I’m looking forward to the MSM and the progressive cult blaming the deplorables for WWIII that Trump will probably start. If anyone was on the fence as to whether red state deplorables should be thrown into gulags, this should convince them as to what a menace white heterosexual gentiles who embrace traditional cultures are. I’m even looking forward to that radioactive tsunami wave designated for the east coast that the Russians plan to retaliate with. When that day comes, I will drink my own little vial of red mercury that I have been saving for just such an occasion and then ignite the funeral pyre made up of fake bearer bonds that I will be laying on.

    1. Phil the Thrill

      Haha! I heard it suggested somewhere that false flag ops are as old as the ten plagues of Egypt.
      I don’t have any vials of red merc saved up. I was just gonna knock back a cocktail of Roundup and Drano. No bearer bonds, neither….my pyre is composed of plastic shopping bags and 100% polyester shirts.

      1. Excellent Phil! Sounds like your apocalypse demise is being supplied by your local dollar store!

        I wouldn’t be surprised if we finished off the neanderthals through a series of false flags.

  10. The elevated tritium levels are fact, not alleged, and come from the highly revealing report published by the US Geological Survey, which analyzed water and dust samples collected at the WTC site in the fortnight following 911.

    Back in the day I spent a lot of time digging into 911 and this report is crucial evidence of understanding what occurred.

    Not only did the USGS find very high levels of tritium in various collection pools, they also found such things as large amounts of >micronized< copper (now you know where all the copper phone wiring went to), as well as a number of exotic heavy metals that should set anyone's alarm bells ringing. Of course they did not test for the most glaring elemental residues left by nukes because they did not want to find them.

    Also, there was a great deal of discussion back in the day about the use of mini-nukes, and the USGS report sealed that for me. There was also an ancillary discussion of Cohen, red mercury and neutron bombs, and how the perps had managed to have such a relatively "clean" detonation of several nukes that day.
    Nothing was ever resolved, but it was clear that 5th generation mini-nukes were a reality, that they were very clean, and were being used all over the place without most people having any clue (Bali, Khobar Towers, OKC, etc.)

    1. There’s no evidence that mini-nukes were used to powderize the WTC building. The obvious absence of disintegrating people in the vicinity is a huge clue. Hundreds of people didn’t walk home, go to sleep, and die that day.

      Atomized copper, etc, can readily be explained by other technology, systems that would not liquify or disintegrate people.

      There was no big spike in radiation that day in Manhattan, Hoboken, Brooklyn, etc.

      1. I just cited some excellent evidence, along with the sublimation of the central core of steel columns, which fell apart like a stack of cinders in the wind. Sublimation was also documented on a number of the few steel beams retained from the site. Pouring vast amounts of water into the so-called bathtub on the wreckage (water is a moderator) is also a huge clue. The elevated cancer and leukemia rates of first responders and rescue dogs is yet another. The extremely high temperature, lingering hot spots in the wreckage, documented by NASA satellites is yet another.

        And since you always seem to pop up to try and deflect or deny only certain topics but otherwise remain conspicuously lost, I’ll also add that as evidence too.

        1. basta,

          No you didn’t cite excellent evidence, since there is zero evidence of people dying that day, or the next week, from exposure to neutron radiation, or any other kind of radiation either.

          Regards leukemia, that can have all sorts of causes; it’s not just a radiation induced cancer. And the health problems afflicting those who worked on the wreckage are hardly limited to “first responders”; it’s the people who worked there for months, breathing the crap, who got sick.

          There was NO massive spike in leukemia in the people who were at the WTC that day. There was NO “first responding” to do on Sept 12th. People who lived in Battery Park City don’t have massive incidences of leukemia. Stop pretending that the WTC complex was an isolated set of buildings on say an island 25 miles off the coast.

          You brought up a distraction. No, satellites didn’t record some radiation spike. I assume you’re referring some visible heat record. That has an entirely different explanation.

          Judy Wood explained what happened well enough and very very importantly provided an energy source for disintegrating the much of the matter of the WTC–including liquifying steel. (This softened steel which could easily have needed water too cool it. But there’s not solid evidence for claims of months long pumping of water into the site. There are internet rumors.) Now, her text is a mess, and she can only point to some of the parties who’ve achieved similar results on a small scale. She doesn’t point to a fairly obvious similarity to some of Wilhelm Reich’s work.

          As for odd byproducts, isotopes, those could readily result from this better physics. Again read Reich in detail. (As pure speculation also: the byproducts would have been easy enough to salt beforehand–sort of like making sure there are some conventional explosions to distract people.)

          The reason I post today, regards your comment, is I feel compelled to call out obvious distractions from an understanding of what occurred. A neutron spewing bomb did it is about as believable as JFK was shot from the back. No, it wasn’t a phased array of microwave system either. Albeit, that kind of weapon does exist, however the energy source would be obvious.

          1. Oh please, salting the wreckage to make it look like mini-nukes, but in reality it was the weaponized Hutchinson effect? Sorry, I think Judy Wood points out some very valid pieces of the puzzle, but they also are just as well and more easily explained with 5 gen, low-yield, clean nukes. The whole point of them is the low yield (down to less than 1 kt) and thus low immediate mortality, but it is well-documented that those who worked the site and the volunteers died off at a very high rate, impossible to justify by the events of the official story, nor by Judy Wood’s space beam.
            Also, you have the Columbia Univ. seismic evidence, two 2.3 Richter events corresponding in time with the explosions (detonations) in the sub-basements some ten seconds before each tower fell, the light smoke billow at ground level caught also on certain chopper footage just before “collapse.”

            You also have police in the vicinity who testified of being picked up and thrown for 10-20 yards by a hot blast wave, melted aluminum engine blocks nearby, and on and on. Believe what you want, but don’t talk nonsense.

          1. “You also have police in the vicinity who testified of being picked up and thrown for 10-20 yards by a hot blast wave, melted aluminum engine blocks nearby, and on and on. Believe what you want, but don’t talk nonsense.”

            Totally, unfamiliar with what Wood claims is all this says.

            Further evidence you’re not familiar with what Wood has to say and are simply going with mischaraterizations of her position: “nor by Judy Wood’s space beam.”

            Not salting the wreckage. Salting the building months beforehand.

            “Also, you have the Columbia Univ. seismic evidence, two 2.3 Richter events corresponding in time with the explosions (detonations) in the sub-basements some ten seconds before each tower fell, the light smoke billow at ground level caught also on certain chopper footage just before “collapse.””

            And I allowed for explosions, you don’t appear to have read my point. Not a surprise.

            “low-yield, clean nukes.” Is this a joke? Clean would mean no neutrons, so would be non-nuclear in any normal sense of the word. And no, some red mercury initiated hydrogen bomb, though “clean” would not have just limited itself to the WTC complex.

            You have a lot of reading to do, unless the point is to distract.

          2. goshawks:

            “Actually, I view it that basta and I are the ones pointing at the rocky knoll, and you are the one insisting on the ‘magic bullet’ theory…”

            That’s right, you’re pointing at the “rocky knoll” which doesn’t exist in Dealy Plaza.

            You meant Grassy Knoll.

        2. basta, thanks for fighting the good fight and taking the arrows accordingly. Much appreciated. (And right-on, evidenciary comments.)

          “And since you always seem to pop up to try and deflect or deny only certain topics but otherwise remain conspicuously lost, I’ll also add that as evidence too.” Nuff said, and thanks again for taking the ‘push-back’…

          I’ll just add to “5 gen, low-yield, clean nukes”: Low-yield may be an inevitable part of the design. The hydrogen will only keep fusing if kept higher than the needed P/T boundary; it will stop after that. (Self-limiting on Earth, thank God.)

          Normally, a ‘substantial’ U235 or Plut core will provide way-higher P/T than the P/T boundary, allowing the hydrogen-fusing to go on and on (Everready rabbit). But, it has the residual-radiation from un-consumed U235 or Plut ‘vapor’. However, you get guaranteed ‘high yield’.

          With just-enough U235 or Plut to get to the P/T boundary, the ‘yield’ will automatically be low. The fusion ‘candle’ will just flicker and go out. Just enough for the job (and probably ‘tunable’ for each op). This is the exact ‘opposite’ of the weapon-maker’s usual job – to maximize yield. The trade-off is that you get minimal leftover radioactivity…

          1. goshawks:

            ““And since you always seem to pop up to try and deflect or deny only certain topics but otherwise remain conspicuously lost, I’ll also add that as evidence too.” Nuff said, and thanks again for taking the ‘push-back’…”

            Ha, ha. The weakest claim of a series of weak claims by basta is what you cite.

            Again, no big spike in radioactivity in Manhattan that day, or the next. And you still can’t limit a nuclear weapon’s damage to one building complex.

          2. Lost, you seem to be (intentionally?) missing the basic concept of modern USABLE ‘nukes’. The Sep 11 blasts were ‘engineered’ to be as minimally-radioactive as possible. That was the core of their design. Also, as the blasts were deep underground (in the sub-basements) and had a building immediately fall on the remnant, there would have been minimal SURFACE radioactivity. However, as Basta pointed-out, unexplained high-heat from deep-underground and radioactive traces were unavoidable ‘clues’ (as were the later cancers).

            And also, you seem to be missing another basic concept of the Sep 11 mini-‘nukes’. They were NOT conventionally-designed nukes, built for Max Yield. They were built for ‘just enough’ yield. So yes, their effects could be ‘limited’…

            The perps were even clever: They made the still-radioactive sub-basement areas into ‘pretty’ moderator pools. The average weeping tourist does not know that water is a moderator for nuclear reactions, sopping-up neutrons. It is even ‘circulated’ with the waterfalls to prevent any concentration of heat and by-products in the explosion ‘ground zero’. Clever designing. (The design also keeps an investigator – with an outlawed Geiger counter – from getting close to the actual detonation points. Hmmm.)

          3. goshawks:

            “Lost, you seem to be (intentionally?) missing the basic concept of modern USABLE ‘nukes’. The Sep 11 blasts were ‘engineered’ to be as minimally-radioactive as possible. That was the core of their design.”

            But you’ve presented zero evidence for the use of nuke anything. While I and Wood have pointed out sources. And in my case, I pointed to someone who demonstrated crumbling stone–albeit over several months. This is a connection Wood has missed. The “Hutchinson” effect is mostly reported as limited to metals. But sticking with the Hutchinson effect, plenty of alchemical transmutations have been reported with that kind of thing.

            Also, no one in the rest of Manhattan, Brooklyn Heights, Red Hood Brooklyn, or Jersey City or Hoboken New Jersy reported hearing anything like a big explosion(s). Remember there were tens of thousands of people walking home across the Brooklyn Bridge when the towers crumbled.

            I can certainly imagine cleaner nuclear weapons, and more limited nuclear weapons. However I don’t see how to limit a nuclear weapon’s effectiveness to just the confines of the WTC complex. Also there was no spike in radiation in Manhattan, nor were the other indicators of anything like excess radiation in Manhattan that day or the next week. In fact there were indications of the opposite.

            “However, as Basta pointed-out, unexplained high-heat from deep-underground and radioactive traces were unavoidable ‘clues’ (as were the later cancers).”

            The cancers are easily explained by dustified building materials. Do you have any idea the poison in office carpeting and wall treatments? Sorry people were all over the place in the hole within a day or two and no one was dropping dead of radiation poisoning that week as he/she would have had there been anything like what you claim.

            Now I suggest you look at Tom Bearden’s claims about cold melting titanium for a solution, and remember it’s not actually cold, it’s just much cooler than normal melting of titanium. That takes care of a long lasting heat source, and completely explains draped metal formations–which are documented.

            It seems that you and basta have a great deal riding on something like a Warren Commission pre-determined conclusion.

            Again, hint, Judy Wood, in her confused manner provides a clean and usable energy source–one that entirely jibes with the weather in NYC that day. She doesn’t provide a method for focusing this source though. And I don’t expect she knows it. Ms Wood’s documentation of the burning engine blocks of cars more than a 1/4 mile away, while the body of the cars isn’t burning and none of the plastic/rubber is melting, is a huge clue that it wasn’t a nuclear weapon.

            So there’s a lot of intentional missing, but not by me.

          4. Lost: “It seems that you and basta have a great deal riding on something like a Warren Commission pre-determined conclusion.”

            Actually, I view it that basta and I are the ones pointing at the rocky knoll, and you are the one insisting on the ‘magic bullet’ theory…

          5. Aie – Where was I when this conversation turned up.
            I thought it was thermite that melted the steel beams..
            I dont know about Nuclear bombs.. I’d imagine the radiation poisoning to kill people on the ground within minutes. This is an atomic bomb we’re talking about. If they can get it clean enough not to throw out radiation.. Then they’ve already mastered cold fusion and why isnt Assad, Putin, Kim Jong Un, Xi Jinping, Rodrigo Duterte and every single Mexican Immigrant who dares so much as look in a northerly direction.. not already a a small pile of vaporised dust..
            Why hasnt Nato kicked Assad back into bedrock and pre-history if they have ‘clean nukes’ in place. They cant even get 60 cruise missiles to hit a stationary target. They had to rely on Arabs to drive a plane into the towers.. (unless you’re going full bluebeam and its all holographs and smokescreen..) I love the way you cant trust anything anymore.

          6. goshawks,

            You’ve pointed out zero evidence for the use of nuclear weapons.

            The weapons, nuclear, that limited themselves to the structural steel are fiction, also would have to have been thoroughly distributed throughout the towers. The fact that you bring up this preposterous idea says you’re A not familiar with the events of that day, and B have this deluded idea that there’s some spreadable nuclear weapon.

            The process of dustification is well enough documented. That you’re not familiar with it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Nothing particularly “futuristic” about this weapon or process–things like it were demonstrated at least as early as the 1890s.

            Sorry, Geiger counters aren’t against the law in Manhattan. Still not dealing with the missing massive deaths from cancer needed for the use of nuclear weapon. Also nuclear contamination doesn’t limit itself to one big pool over which water can be added to limit its effects. And people were all over the hole later that day, and were there for years.

            You seem mighty vested not finding an answer to what happened.

      2. @Lost – You should not make statements that are not true. “The obvious absence of disintegrating people in the vicinity is a huge clue. ”

        Bone fragments were collected from the roof tops of adjacent buildings and the most recent were 3 years after 9/11.

        1. goshawks:

          You keep missing the tens (hundreds) of thousands of people on the streets around the towers as they collapsed who didn’t disintegrate and walked home to Brooklyn or other areas of Manhattan.

          That massive crumbling buildings ground up people and already dead bodies doesn’t in any way prove the use of nuclear weapons.

          Stop acting as if the WTC complex was 25 miles off the coast on an island with no other inhabitants other than the few thousand people in the complex.

          1. Lost, I’ll repeat that I suggested to K. You need to go back to the top of the “5th gen, low-yield, clean nukes” comments by basta and start reading from the beginning. We are not talking about 1950s-style, garden-variety nukes here…
            https://gizadeathstar.com/2017/04/really-red-mercury-part-two/#comment-72088

            The fact that you refuse to ‘grok’ the difference between “low-yield, minimal-radioactive-residue, mini-hydrogen-bombs set off in a deep basement with the building sealing-it-off immediately afterwards” with a “surface- or air-burst, full-scale nuke” tells me that you are either grossly lacking in information or have another agenda.

            Keep up the good work; it tells the average reader who you work for…

          2. goshawks:

            ““low-yield, minimal-radioactive-residue, mini-hydrogen-bombs set off in a deep basement with the building sealing-it-off immediately afterwards” with a “surface- or air-burst, full-scale nuke” tells me that you are either grossly lacking in information or have another agenda.”

            This sealing off idea is joke right?

            More magic systems to limit radioactivity, yet you still can’t deal with the easy to document fact that the structure of the buildings’ top parts was destroyed from within.

            A bomb that goes off in the basement, seals up it’s contamination, but destroys the whole 1400 foot tower. Ha, ha.

            Distract, deny, yeah, there’s an agenda here, not hidden at all.

          3. Lost, the “magic systems to limit radioactivity” is called GRAVITY. Have you heard of it? The sheer ramming-impact of all those giga-tons of material falling-into will do the foundation pit will do a wonderful job of sealing-off most radioactive by-products within seconds. They will not be released into the environment. No doubt, that was the plan.

            Look up Gravity; you’ll be amazed what it can do…

          4. goshawks:

            Still ignoring the fact the towers powderized from the top down I see.

            Also no gravity does not account for massive steel towers turning to powder, that type of compressive force would smash towers out of the way. So that’s another problem with your nuclear weapons claim, the towers “fell” basically straight down as if there weren’t there any longer.

            The more you post the clearer it becomes that you’re not familiar with lower Manhattan or many the events of that day.

            So ironical that gravity is huge mystery.

        2. goshawks:

          “Lost: “It seems that you and basta have a great deal riding on something like a Warren Commission pre-determined conclusion.””

          “Actually, I view it that basta and I are the ones pointing at the rocky knoll, and you are the one insisting on the ‘magic bullet’ theory…”

          It’s spectacularly ironical that you wrote “rockly know”. Y’all are pushing the rocky knoll idea.

          The magic “nuclear” weapons is very much akin to the un-deformed bullet that hit two people and was “found” in Dallas.

          Please familiarize yourself with lower Manhattan and Dealey Plaza.

          1. Lost, actually it’s the reverse:

            Basta and I have pointed-out SOLID evidence for some form of ‘nuke’ (note the quote marks) that took-out the supporting structure of the Twin Towers, allowing them to fall neatly Straight Down. This is akin to all the JFK investigators assembling the available hard-evidence and deducing there was more than one shooter.

            You, on the other hand, attribute the collapses to ‘dustification’ by some futuristic weapon. To me, that seems more like the frantic handwaving of the Warren Commission to ignore the massive assembled-evidence and believe the ‘magic bullet’ concoction.

            (Note that I am not saying that SSP or other advanced technology does not exist; I am saying that OBSERVED EVIDENCE leans strongly to “5th gen, low-yield, clean nukes” taking-out the load-bearing structure.)

          2. goshawks:

            “Basta and I have pointed-out SOLID evidence for some form of ‘nuke’ (note the quote marks) that took-out the supporting structure of the Twin Towers, allowing them to fall neatly Straight Down. T”

            No, you have not, you’ve proposed a magic nuclear bomb that limited it’s damage and any radioactivity to only the world Trade Center Complex, and then made pretty much any radioactivity disappear.

            You’ve pretended the WTC complex was 25 miles off the coast on an islanded inhabited by only by 2700 people killed in the towers and say 40 people who escaped.

          3. Lost, again you try to dismiss the OVERWHELMING evidence by changing the subject:
            “You’ve pretended the WTC complex was 25 miles off the coast on an islanded inhabited by only by 2700 people killed in the towers and say 40 people who escaped.”

            Nope, the WTC complex was part of a carefully-staged demolition project with the aim of starting wars in the Middle East. Radioactive effects no-doubt were considered in the design of the bomb, and its location – and minimized. You don’t/won’t step into the enormity of the planning…

            As regards “a magic nuclear bomb that limited it’s damage and any radioactivity,” that is exactly what I am saying (minus the ‘magic’, of course). It’s been fifty years since old-style nukes/thermonukes were ‘perfected’. Do you really think that all research and ‘specialization’ just stopped since then? Old-style nukes/thermonukes were optimized for yield and for weight (being carried on aircraft or missiles). When you relax those restraints, much ‘massage’ of characteristics can be made. I suggest you search on ‘fizzle yield’ nukes, for example.

            The ‘magic’ you proclaim is simply fifty years of clandestine research. Just simple physics…

          4. goshawks:

            How is pointing to your distractions and inventions changing the subject?

            You still haven’t dealt with how the mythical clean bomb destroyed just the towers–which, clean or no, presents a huge problem for your case.

            Again, you’re pretending the complex was 30 miles off the coast on Catalina island, with only 2600 people in it and say 400 outside it.

            Still no spike in radioactivity in Manhattan that day, in fact indications of the opposite.

        3. @Waterbug,

          And the 20,000 people on the streets immediately around the collapsing towers who didn’t disintegrate, what about them?

          Fast crumbling buildings ground up bodies. What a shock. Not.

          It doesn’t prove any claim of nuclear weapons use.

          1. @Kahlypso:

            The technology used to dustify the WTC complex very likely has a good deal to do with physics that the Cold Fusion types have been discovering over the last 27 years.

            The point of launching cruise missiles at the airbase in Syria was to do little damage. But to at the same time put on a show.

Comments are closed.