When it comes down a Nuclear hypothesis, It was Khalezov that started it with his 150 kt Underground nukes. People like Gordon Duff, Jim Fetzer, Donald Fox and Jeff Prager started promoting it. When the 150 kt Underground theory made no sense and was easily dismissed. They simply switched it to “mini nukes” and/or “Neutron Bombs”. I’m not a nuclear scientist but then again, neither is Duff, Fetzer or anyone else at VT. Let’s look at some research which disproves a nuclear theory.



Hard Evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used
on the WTC Towers.
The hard physical evidence presented is strongly against the hypothesis that mini-nukes destroyed the WTC Towers:
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.)”
ERROR: ‘Nuclear Devices Were Used to Destroy the Twin Towers’

“Several months ago, I tested WTC dust samples and a solidified metal sample for radioactivity using a Geiger counter: I found ZERO RADIOACTIVITY. This experimental evidence goes strongly against the mini-nukes hypothesis since neutron activation levels were zero.

I also tested some sand gathered from a nuclear-bomb test site decades ago for comparison – and the Geiger counter showed hundreds of counts per minute. This also shows the long life of the radioactive residues due to nuclear bombs – the sand still yields high Geiger-counter readings decades after the nuclear bomb blast.”
Theories that Nuclear Weapons Destroyed the Twin Towers
“A Litany of Flimsy Claims”
9-11 Disinformation from Gordon Duff
Debunking 9/11 Mini-nuke Hypotheses
Richard Gage on 9/11 mini-nukes
150kt Nukes Demolished Wtc ? – debunking of Dimitri Khalezov’s ridiculous claims
Debunking the debunkers. Interesting argument: famous
physicist Jan Zeman vs infamous impostor Dimitri Khalezov.!_Debunking_the_debunkers-_famous_physicist_Jan_Zeman_vs_infamous_impostor_Dimitri_Khalezov.pdf


Too Classified to Publish: Bush Nuclear Piracy Exposed

VT Nuclear Education: Undeniable Proof of 9/11 as a Nuclear Event
On this link, myself and other researchers have dis proven the claims made by VT.


Let’s compare a nuclear explosion to that of the Towers collapse. I notice distinct differences. Huge Flash, Shockwave, Mushroom cloud, Fiery inferno, etc.

Sedan Crater

Sedan (nuclear test) 104 Kt

“The radioactive fallout from the test contaminated more US residents than any other nuclear test. The Sedan Crater is the largest man-made crater in the United States, and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.”
The first underground physics experiment near Carlsbad was Project Gnome, December 10, 1961
“largest manmade (nuclear) crater in the USA. 104 kilotons. 390 meters diameter”
7 (Crazy) Civilian Uses for Nuclear Bombs


Everytime I come across a Nuker, they never seem to want to give me their Top 5 claims that support a nuclear hypothesis. They usually just post a Veteran’s Today link yet they can’t even explain it themselves. they also seem to go back and forth between underground nukes and 4th generation suitcase nukes. So here are some questions I have for the Nukers.

1) What are yout Top 5 Claims that prove 9/11 was a Nuclear event?
2) How did these nukes create different style demolitions between the Towers and Building 7?
3) If nukes were used, why has no one suffered from radiation poison? How did the dozen or so people trapped in stairwell B survive these nuke blasts?
4) How does a Nuclear device planted under the towers start the collapse 90 floors up?
5) How are nukes similar to the sound/seismic analysis of the tower collapses?
6) How many people died on 9/11 and since, from radiation cancer?
7) Explain all the witnesses that heard multiple explosions?
8) Why do nukers also tend to promote holograms hitting the towers?
9) Why didn’t these Nukes effect other buildings?
10) How did the Nukes get 75 feet below the towers?


The “Nuke” theory is the trilogy of disinfo. First, there was Judy Wood and her “Space Beams and DEWs”, then there was Simon Shack’s “No Planes and Holograms” and to complete the trifector, we have Veterans Today “Underground and mini nukes”. All three theories were created to discredit the movement. The Nukers have changed their theory several times already, which makes it very suspect. Jim Fetzer, Gordon Duff, and the rest of the VT boys are living up to their founders words. “40% of everything on Veterans Today is patently false.” There is no hard evidence to support a nuclear hypothesis.





1st claim: “Cars from 9/11 destroyed by Nuclear EMP”

The cars were not “destroyed by Nuclear EMP” the cars caught on fire from being pounded with debris and burned in flames. The burnt cars are no different looking then any other burnt car. As for the rust, it builds up under paint and New York being next to a Salt Water. Their cars would experience more rust then normal.

DISINFO: “Toasted Cars”

2nd Claim “Radioactive fallout found by the U.S. Geological Survey in samples from 35 sites surrounding the WTC for nearly a mile.” “Cerenkov Radiation.”

Cherenkov radiation is found in nuclear reactors under water! Not on 9/11.

“Cherenkov radiation:
“At full power (200 kilowatts), the Missouri S&T Reactor core produces approximately 6.4 trillion fissions per second. Each fission event liberates a tremendous amount of energy, a portion of which is carried away by fission products which then decay and produce high-energy beta particles. Often, these beta particles are emitted with such high kinetic energies that their velocities exceed the speed of light (3.0×108 meters per second) in water. When this occurs, photons, seen to the eye as blue light, are emitted and the reactor core “glows” blue.”

Here is the USGS’s own summary. Where does it mention by products of Radiation Fallout?


“Dust Components

The dust samples were largely made up of a mix of materials commonly used in building construction or found in office buildings: particles of glass fibers, gypsum wallboard, concrete, paper, window glass, etc.”
NO RADIATION detected.

National Environmental Health Association:

“Within minutes of the crash, McKinney sent a radiological health inspector to check the site for any radiation sources. He reached Richard Borri, a senior scientist in the department’s office of Radiological Health, who like most people from DOH, was on his way to work when the first tower was hit.”

Borri checked the World Trade Center site for signs of radiation before and after the collapse of the buildings. Radiation could have originated in industrial radiology sources, such as the installing beams of the huge office buildings, which may have contained some radioactive elements from x-rays taken, and from depleted uranium used in ballasts in aircraft wing tips (such counterweights in airplane wing tips give the most weight for least volume, says Borri). It might also be left from any medical or dental offices.

The far more serious threat, of course, was the chance that one of the hijackers might have carried a suitcase of radioactive materials or a dirty bomb, a conventional bomb spiked with radioactive material. Such a bomb has been compared to TNT, strapped to a container of plutonium or plutonium-contaminated waste. This kind of a device would not produce a nuclear explosion, but it could spread deadly radioactive matter across a swath of city.

According to Borri, the fear with a dirty bomb is that hundreds, maybe thousands, could die from radiation poisoning and cancer, and the area could be poisoned for years. (Plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years, says Borri.)

That was fortunately not the case, Borri found, using a portable liquid scintillation counter, which measures radioactivity like a Geiger counter. The high-tech portable gadget he carried, one of the few available in the United States, is far more precise than its century-old cousin, the Geiger, counter with a much more refined ability to detect any kind of radioactivity.”

“Although Borri didn’t turn up any problematic radioactive readings by the end of the day, his work would be supplemented by the federal Department of Energy, whose technicians remained on site and continued to sample. [Only during the last days of the Ground Zero cleanup would radioactive testers find any evidence of radioactive emissions, from a pharmacy laboratory located within one of the buildings.]”
The Energy from a Nuclear Weapon
Reactive Molecular Dynamics Simulation of a Buckybomb

“Abstract. Energetic materials, such as explosives, propellants and pyrotechnics, are widely used in civilian and military applications. Nanoscale explosives represent a special group because of high density of energetic covalent bonds.”

3rd Claim: “Radiation-only cancers…could only be caused by high level exposure to radiation.”, “multiple myeloma”, “Leukemia”

Most of the cancers are lung cancers, which we can assume is from breathing in the dust. Multiple Myeloma and Leukemia are not cancers that can only be caused by Radiation.

Multiple Myeloma

“Although the exact cause isn’t known, doctors do know that multiple myeloma begins with one abnormal plasma cell in your bone marrow — the soft, blood-producing tissue that fills in the center of most of your bones. This abnormal cell then starts to multiply.”


“Leukemia, like other cancers, results from mutations in the DNA. These mutations may occur spontaneously or as a result of exposure to radiation or carcinogenic substances. Common examples of non-radioactive carcinogens are inhaled asbestos, certain dioxins, and tobacco smoke.” -Wiki

Here are some biological effects from radiation that none of the victims suffered after 9/11.


Asbestos could also have surely caused the cancers and lung sicknesses combined with all the other mix of harmful chemicals. Like Carbon Nano Tubes.

Case Report: Lung Disease in World Trade Center Responders Exposed to Dust and Smoke: Carbon Nanotubes Found in the Lungs of World Trade Center Patients and Dust Samples

4th Claim: “Elevated tritium levels at the World Trade Center”

Any use of nuclear devices would have produced vast amounts radioactive fallout detectable even at great distances from Lower Manhattan. No such contamination has been found. Nonetheless, advocates of the nuclear weapons theory claim that scientific reports examining the chemical composition of World Trade Center remains and dust support their theory. Two such claims concern the detection of tritium and uranium.

The passage indicates that the radioactivity of the WTC samples was only slightly above background levels, which is not surprising, given that small quantities of radionuclides are used in applications likely present in the Towers such as “Exit signs” and “Fire and Emergency Equipment”.

“As described in Section 3, HTO was detected at ground zero at the very low concentrations. Several sources of tritium were considered and analyzed, as consistent with the experimental data: i) EXIT signs in the buildings, ii) emergency signs on the airplanes, iii) fire and emergency equipment, iv) weaponry, and v) timepieces.”

“Typical emergency EXIT signs in buildings contain from several to several tens of Ci of molecular tritium. The maximum recommended tritium activity by ANSI standard is 50 Ci (22).” – Study of Traces of Tritium at the World Trade Center.
Veterans Today often cites the reports given by Dr Thomas Cahill

“In order to cause concrete and steel to turn to micron-sized dust particles at Ground Zero as presented by Dr. Thomas Cahill, UC Davis Delta Group, the speed of sound must be reached in those items. Dr. Cahill is one of the world’s premier atmospheric physicists.”

Here are the actual reports and NO WHERE does Dr Cahill mention Fission, Fusion, or Radiation anywhere. Check it out for yourself. Not to mention Cahill does not support the Truth Movement yet VT cites him as an expert witness to nukes.

Trade Center Debris Pile Was a Chemical Factory, Says New Study

References of Cahill’s testimony

5th Claim: “Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 12-22 kilotons each. SMALL compared to 150 kt nukes.”

Lets look at Hiroshima: Appr. 100,000 died throughout a population of 250,000 on the same day. Another 20,000 died within 2 days. New York which has a population of roughly 10 million yet only 3,000 died and mainly due to being trapped in the buildings. The nuke Khalezov claims brought down the towers were 10 X stronger than Hiroshima.

If you open this, you be able to see an interactive 360 degree view of Hiroshima shortly after the nuclear bombing in 1945. Although there is nearly complete destruction, several concrete structures that are heavily damaged, remain standing.,0.07,8.9


Steel reinforced concrete buildings subjected to the nuclear blast in Hiroshima still standing.

Korean Hibakusha, Japan’s Supreme Court and the International Community: Can the U.S. and Japan Confront Forced Labor and Atomic Bombing?

6th Claim: “Nukes don’t melt metal, it obliterates it.”

Then explain all this steel left over?
7th Claim: “Ground-zero is only used in connection with atomic explosions.”

“The term has often been associated with nuclear explosions and other large bombs, but is also used in relation to earthquakes, epidemics and other disasters to mark the point of the most severe damage or destruction. The term is often re-used for disasters that have a geographic or conceptual epicenter.”
8th Claim: “Mini Nukes were used to bring down the towers.”

What is the smallest nuclear explosion you can find?

Are Suitcase Bombs Possible?

“The smallest possible bomb-like object would be a single critical mass of plutonium (or U-233) at maximum density under normal conditions. An unreflected spherical alpha-phase critical mass of Pu-239 weighs 10.5 kg and is 10.1 cm across.

A single critical mass cannot cause an explosion however since it does not cause fission multiplication, somewhat more than a critical mass is required for that. But it does not take much more than a single critical mass to cause significant explosions. As little an excess as 10% (1.1 critical masses) can produce explosions of 10-20 tons. This low yield seems trivial compared to weapons with yields in the kilotons or megatons, but it is actually far more dangerous than conventional explosives of equivalent yield due to the intense radiation emitted. A 20 ton fission explosion, for example, produces a very dangerous 500 rem radiation exposure at 400 meters from burst point, and a 100% lethal 1350 rem exposure at 300 meters. A yield of 10-20 tons is also equal to the yield of the lowest yield nuclear warhead ever deployed by the US — the W-54 used in the Davy Crockett recoilless rifle.”
Here is the smallest nuke that we “know of”. Notice how it still release vasts amounts of Radiation. Something that we never saw on 9/11.

M388 Davy Crockett Operational Test
“The amount of energy released by fission bombs can range from the equivalent of just under a ton of TNT, to upwards of 500,000 tons (500 kilotons) of TNT.”

“All fission reactions necessarily generate fission products, the radioactive remains of the atomic nuclei split by the fission reactions. Many fission products are either highly radioactive (but short-lived) or moderately radioactive (but long-lived), and as such are a serious form of radioactive contamination if not fully contained. Fission products are the principal radioactive component of nuclear fallout.”

Here is an alleged video of a 1 ton tnt bomb. It still looks considerably more explosive then anything we saw on 9/11.

1 TON bomb
9th Claim: “Why do you think they called it Ground Zero? Because Nukes.”


“The term has often been associated with nuclear explosions and other large bombs, but is also used in relation to earthquakes, epidemics and other disasters to mark the point of the most severe damage or destruction. The term is often re-used for disasters that have a geographic or conceptual epicenter.”

I sometimes refer to my Home as ground zero after a play day with the kids. I assure you, there are no nukes planted under my home.
10th Claim: “Melted granite caused by nuclear explosion.”

DISNFO: “Melted Granite” caused by a nuclear explosion


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Go to Top