Deactivating Bill Deagle's "Neutron Fuse"

In the Draft Bill recently circulated to a few members of Congress, ideas and hypotheses with no physical evidence (or very weak physical evidence that can be easily explained) are presented alongside the hypothesis for controlled demolition involving a thermite derivative and/or other not-so exotic explosives at the World Trade Center with equal sincerity. One hypothesis is that "micro-nuclear" devices were used to bring down the World Trade Center Towers, and the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. The Draft Bill references internet radio personality Bill Deagle as a major proponent of the micro-nuke hypothesis.

The Bill references Deagle's presentation last year at the Vancouver 9/11 Truth Conference. During his presentation, Deagle attempted to persuade the audience that the WTC and OKC were nuke demolition jobs. In the following slide, it appears that his mind is already made up about both instances;

Following Deagle's presentation, several people were concerned that Deagle was presenting as fact, a theory which had not even made it past the hypothesis stage. Some of the coordinators of the conference asked nuclear physicist Steven Jones, who also attended the conference, to question Deagle about his proofs. The following video documents the discussion, consisting of video recorded by Soul Tree Digital Entertainment, and myself.*

It's true that there is a lot of skepticism regarding the destruction that took place at the Murrah building. This report by Brigadier General Benton K. Partin argues that demolition charges were used at the Murrah building to destroy support columns, which caused the demolition damage at the builiding; "Bomb Damage Analysis of Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building". This report which is based on blast effects studies conducted at Eglin Air Force Base, suggests that the Anfo bomb that was detonated in front of the Murrah building would not have been able to produce the effects seen in Oklahoma; "CASE STUDY RELATING BLAST EFFECTS TESTS TO THE EVENTS OF APRIL 19, 1995 ALFRED P. MURRAH FEDERAL BUILDING OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA". There are many unresolved issues surrounding OKC.

However, neither Partin nor the Eglin blast study rely on the use of any size or type of nuclear device to explain the observed destruction. Partin presents his observations that cutter charges were used on interior columns of the Murrah building to cause the observed damage. There were also reports in the media on the day of the OKC bombing that unexploded bombs were removed from the building.

So, how did "micro-nukes" get into the mix? Apparently, a confidential "special op" source told this information to Deagle. Funny thing about "special op" types; they often provide information that is simply untrue, or is tainted in some way, or is designed to deflect a query into sensitive matters onto a road to nowhere.** When researchers spin their wheels, or spend hours and hours chasing phantoms, the carefully planted mis-- or dis-- information has been deployed successfully.

In the Vancouver video, it doesn't take long before Deagle tells us, "...I was told, at least by the mid-90s, they had up to 22 cities pre-wired with nukes..." and that tests were underway involving US Postal workers and city policemen in Philadelphia to administer vaccinations of some sort by gunpoint, and then he drops in an oblique reference to the Real ID act for good measure.***

I suppose all of this is possible, but these a priori postulations don't seem to have much foundation beyond the "insider" knowledge transmitted to Deagle by his "special op" sources.

In the case of the destruction of the WTC, dust and metal samples exist which can be tested. In Part 3 of the Vancouver video, Deagle and Jones discuss specific tests which can be done to prove that some type of nuclear reaction occurred at the WTC, these are tests above and beyond the ones referenced by Jones in his letter, “Hard Evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini-Nukes Were Used on the WTC Towers”, posted at the Journal of 9/11 Studies.

Apparently, these tests were conducted last summer. They are referenced in this article, "911 Ground Zero Tritium Levels 55x Over Normal". The tests were to be very specific, looking for "All Isotopes of the following elements";

Niobium 93 - 8 ppm in sample (+/- 50%) - Nb 93 for extremely rare Nb 94 ratio.

Beryllium 9 - 3 ppm in sample (+/- 50%) - Be 9 for extremely rare Be 10 ratio.

Cobalt 59 - 6 ppm in sample (+/- 50%) - Co 59 for extremely rare Co 60 ratio.

I suspect that the tests did not confirm the use of mini-nukes on 9/11, and this is why we haven't heard a peep about the test results for over a year. This absence of proof weighs strongly against the mini-nuke hypothesis.

Perhaps a closer examination of Bill Deagle's sources is in order. Mr. Deagle not only communes with Delta Force and Special Op types, but he also claims to have had one-on-one face time with the angel Gabriel. This vignette is one of many unsettling scenarios detailed by journalist Stephen Kimber in the Halifax weekly, The Coast (September 2007). Kimber's article, "The prophet in Clayton Park", is a very enlightening read, and should be required reading for anyone eager to tie their activism to Deagle's hypotheses;

"The story ... begins on Saturday, April 24, 1999, when an angelic visitor first appeared while Deagle was praying. "I prayed in tongues privately and, as always, heard the immediate translation in English of the audible voice of God," Deagle wrote of the experience. "God said, "If you are obedient and seek wisdom in prayer tonight, I will reveal to you a great revelation. Go to your vitamin cabinet and take two specific nutrient capsules and pray until you are sound asleep, and I will send forth the angel Gabriel from the Throne Room to show you what you must tell My People!!'" ...

...It wasn't Gabriel's only nocturnal visit to Bill's bedside. On another occasion, Deagle says Gabriel took him inside a secret facility within the North American Air Defence Command base in the Cheyenne Mountains of Colorado. "I told him that I had been in the NORAD facility before and wondered why he was taking me there," the world-wise Deagle explained later. But Gabriel told him this was a new, even more super-secret complex and showed him a "white, bubble-shaped button" labeled "Neutron Fuse."

"What do you think will happen when this system is activated and the president of the United States gives the order to push the white button?" Gabriel asked.

"I don't know," Bill reasonably answered.

Pushing the button, Gabriel explained, will trigger the shutdown of all communications on earth—except for a select few devices controlled by them. That will be the beginning, Gabriel declared, of "the Great Falling Away."

(A close observer of the slide posted above will note that Deagle could not refrain from advertising his "Nutrimedical" product... I'm assuming this is an evolution of the "nutrient capsules".)

But what about that Tritium referenced in the above article? Elevated levels of Tritium in the aftermath of the WTC attacks have been common knowledge since 2002, when the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory released their report, "Elevated tritium levels at the World Trade Center".

Proponents of mini-nukes on 9/11 have been promoting the existence of tritiated water (HTO) as proof of nuclear weapon usage, however, in the Lawrence Berkeley report itself, the scientists who wrote the report offer a solution for the presence of the HTO;

"It was determined by the Federal Aviation Administration, that Boeing 767 Serial Number 21873, operated by the United Airlines, Tail Number 767-222 N612UA, was delivered in February, 1983 with 43{.2} Ci of tritium in emergency EXIT signs and handles (Sabatini, 2002). The 43{.2} Ci of tritium is contained in 4 emergency EXIT signs (10 Ci each) and 4 emergency slide/raft handles (0.8 Ci each). The same activity of tritium was present upon April, 1987 delivery of a second Boeing 767 Serial number 22322, Tail Number 767-223ER N334AA, operated by the American Airlines. Since neither of these aircraft were modified after the[ir] delivery (Sabatini, 2002; Cashdollar, 2002), the total activity from the aircraft was 34{.3} Ci at the time of attack, accounting for [the]radioactive decay of tritium [was accounted for].

Weaponry was another likely source of tritium. As described in Section 1, several federal and state law enforcement agencies were housed at WTC, in buildings 6 and 7. ATF had two vaults filled with tactical weapons and guns (Miller, 2001; WPVI, 2001; Gardiner and Hurtado, 2001; note: the ATF vaults were in WTC 6, where our sequences 6,7 were measured). A total of 63 Police Officers died in the attack (IUPA, 2001). They may have been carrying pistols equipped with tritium night sights. In fact, many guns have been recovered from the debris (WPVI, 2001; Gardiner and Hurtado, 2001; Koppel, 2002), some of them in good condition. It would take only 20 weapons destroyed to obtain approximately 1 Ci of tritium (Section 4)."

The reports concludes;

"34{.3} Ci of tritium were released from the two Boeing 767 on impact with the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center. The limited measurements and modeling are consistent with an instantaneous (catastrophic) creation of HTO from the aircraft emergency signs, deposition of a small fraction of it at ground zero and water-flow controlled removal from the site. The modeling suggests that the contribution from the aircraft would imply the HTO deposition fraction of [3]%, a value which is judged somewhat too high. Therefore, the source term from the airplanes alone is insufficient to explain the measurements and modeling.

Several weapons were present and destroyed at [the]WTC. The modeling is also consistent with the second tritium source from the weapon sights (plus possibly tritium watches) where tritium was slowly released from the debris in the lingering fires, followed by an oxidation and removal with the water flow. Such a limiting case would require a minimum of 115 weapons and a quantitative capturing of tritium. Therefore, such a mechanism alone [seems in]sufficient, which indicates that the weapon/watch source complemented the airplane source.

So, this radioactive material can be accounted for without relying on mini-nukes, specifically, by Exit signs in the airplanes, and night sights on weapons that were present at the WTC.

The Draft Bill also notes that "massive amounts of strontium and barium were found in the dust" from the WTC. This is interesting information, but only suggestive of nuclear detonation if radioactive isotopes were detected.

The peak samples of strontium and barium which have spurred on mini-nuke enthusiasts are listed in this group of Chemistry Tables provided by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS);

However, mini-nuke enthusiasts do not reference the context of the Chemistry Tables, listed in the World Trade Center USGS Integration of Results and Conclusions;

"The results of analyses completed so far show a consistent picture: the samples are largely composed of gypsum, cellulose, and miscellaneous materials common in a building, with minor asbestiform minerals."

The dust is largely gypsum. There was a large quantity of gypsum wallboard used in the construction of the WTC. It seems pretty obvious that the wallboard was pulverized during the destruction of the buildings.

When gypsum is pulverized, strontium is one of the elements left in its wake. Specifically, Sr 86, Sr 87 and Sr 88 can be detected. (For an example of this phenomenon, see "Sulfur and strontium isotope study of some gypsum samples from southern Taiwan")

Since the USGS is so specific about gypsum as a primary component of the dust, it's very likely that the strontium they identified was stable, not radioactive like Sr 90. Anyhow, the onus is on the proponents of mini-nukes to prove that radioactive Strontium or Barium was found in the WTC dust before their hypothesis is taken seriously by anyone, let alone a Congressional investigation. (Stable Barium is a standard element used in Cathode Ray Television screens. Something tells me that there were probably a lot of gargantuan CRTs in the WTC in 2001, before flat-panel screens became standard issue. This surely accounts for some Barium in the WTC dust.)

And, as Ryan, Gourley and Jones note in their paper at "The Environmentalist";

"The presence of energetic materials, specifically energetic nanocomposites, at GZ, has the potential to explain much of the unusual environmental data seen at the WTC. Thermite, discussed briefly above, is such a pyrotechnic mixture that cannot be easily extinguished and is a common component of energetic nanocomposites. Unusually high detections of sulfur, silicon, aluminum, copper, nickel, iron, barium, and vanadium might all be explained by physical release of materials from such energetic nanocomposites."

So, like the inclusion of DEW ideas, the inclusion of the very shaky mini-nuke hypothesis, with Bill Deagle as the poster-boy for the concept, was a tragic error on the part of the authors of the recent Draft Bill.

* A glitch in the DVD provided to me from Soul Tree did not allow me to present the entire continuous discussion from one video feed; the last two parts of the YouTube are from my video stock, but the entire discussion is present, unedited. My single-camera low-fi version was uploaded last year to

** Peter Dale Scott's really bad experience(s) with Jack Terrell are a valuable reference here. Terrell won Scott's confidence, and then proceeded to implicate him in an operation that Scott would never have supported. The details are related in Scott's poem;

*** Real ID faces real opposition, but dropping it into the mix to prove that a false flag attack is on the horizon, without providing any context whatsoever, and referring to it as "tracker ID" is pretty useless. The ACLU and others have set up sites that examine the Real ID Act in detail:

Deagle is a mix of fantasy , science and false conspiracy

He is a fraud. Don't trust him.

Mixing some truth with a whole lot of lies.

Haven't we had enough of this sort of nonsense? He is poisioning the well of 911 Truth.

Its part of the planned disinfo campaign.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

"He is poisioning the well of 911 Truth."

Indeed. Get these people out of here. There is no reason to start theorizing about nuclear weapons/space beams/ "no planes" TV fakery; there exists enough credible, empirical, forensic evidence to start deconstructing the official 9/11 conspiracy theory without theorizing about EXACTLY how the towers fell.

~In Lak'esh
(Mayan: You are another me)

The NORAD Papers Have Already Proved 9/11 To Be An Inside Job

As a matter of fact there are The NORAD Papers ( that proves, using articles/documents dated from 2000 and before, that the official 9/11 narrative is a lie. NORAD did monitor and control American airspace on 9/11, as admitted to in the pre-September 11, 2001 articles/documents. The funny thing is, The NORAD Papers articles get little recognition. It would seem the 9/11 Truth movement loves to talk about thermite/thermate and the physics of how the towers fell, which tends to confuse the average person who first discovers 9/11 Truth, while forgetting the real empirical, historical fact that NORAD monitored and controlled American airspace.

The towers were obviously blown to pieces (while WTC 7 came down via standard demolition), however many individuals introduced to 9/11 Truth for the first time won't come to my conclusion on the towers; they don't know how buildings that high are supposed to fall. With The NORAD Papers, however, all one needs is to be able to read in order to determine whether or not NORAD monitored and controlled American airspace on 9/11.

Dean Jackson/webmaster
Washington, DC

great article, rep

thx for writing and posting.

And thx for the tip on the amazing PDS poem- i've never seen a poem with source cites (dozens) and a bibliography- priceless

He's such an obvious

He's such an obvious bullshiter.

Painful to watch

It's painful to watch but serves to demonstrate that 911Truth is serious about considering challenging points of view. Having said that, I believe it would be best to drop the topic and move on without him.

It would be "sabotage" to encourage Deagle to participate with 911 legal issues of any kind,

Drop him like a free-fall speed.


Don't be distracted.

This is a war of information! If the disinformation monstor rears its ugly head, fight him with twice the intelligence and ten times the energy. Argue with only the most convincing material. Transmit only the clearest message. Practice your pitch. There is no room for error, and there is no excuse for giving stage time to disinformers. If a disinformer makes headway with your audience then fight him with cool, logical arguments. Discover how he got through the filter and fix the problem. Otherwise, ignore him and move on. Much of the US and the world is waking up. This fight is heating up. Don't be distracted.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Is this a war of information or of psychology?

Where are the "Psychologists for 9/11Truth?"

Why are they hiding?

9/11 was a psyops and the psychologists are in hiding
(with VERY, VERY FEW exceptions)

WHY are the psychologists in hiding?

How do we reach them and get them involved?

Both of you guys make excellent pts.

" Argue with only the most convincing material. Transmit only the clearest message. Practice your pitch. There is no room for error, and there is no excuse for giving stage time to disinformers. If a disinformer makes headway with your audience then fight him with cool, logical arguments." - JohnnyMo

"9/11 was a psyops." - zmzmzm

911 Truth Brings Constitutional Sanity back to the forefront.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Integrate And Deviate

One thing that "extreme" theorists seem to have in common is that they agree with many plausible outcomes (integrating), then redirect focus onto theories that are plausible enough for fools to ponder and for reasonable people to ridicule. (deviating)

Mini-nukes! Space weaponry! TV Fakery!

The most remarkable aspect of such extreme theories is that they seem consistently well balanced - extreme ... but not too extreme.

What a nightmare moment this was...

I remain eternally grateful to Steven Jones for being so gracious and saving the day here. Deagle's proposed topic was "similarities between OKC and 9/11, which I felt would be a compelling discussion. When I found out the "similarity" between the two events was that he was proposing micro-nukes at both, my jaw hit the floor. He went on way past his alotted time, causing a disarray of scheduling for a few other speakers and films, and was, in my opinion alone, a "primadonna". Also a big thanks to Rep for keeping a cool head and covering this discussion. The Jones/Deagle discussion video in my opinion is as revealing as the Jenkins/Wood interview, and it's remarkable that it happened at all, let alone was recorded.

I was very deeply bothered by this, and I hold myself responsible to a large degree. Some good people on this website expressed concerns about having people like Deagle and Webre at the conference, and I allowed a few assurances from others to take the place of serious content vetting. There were a few really watershed moments emotionally for the community at that conference, and I think it went well to set the stage for the next event we held at that hall, William Rodriguez telling his story to Vancouver. Like so many other things, we were a bunch of ill-experienced folks with good intentions and I apologize if the some of wrong people were allowed to mix BS in with the icecream on our platform.

For all its flaws and disappointments, I remain very proud to have been a part of it. I'll never forget some of the incredible people I met there like Ian Woods, Hal Sisson, Matt Dayton (of Brave New Books), Peter Dale Scott, Connie Fogal Hummux, LeftWright, and many others. It was a truly humbling experience, and I hope we helped overall. Thanks to 9/11 blogger and those who continue the very hard fight for those who are still suffering in NY.

Dave Duguay

Don't be so hard on yourself, you guys did great!

Yes, Deagle's "presentation" was very hard to take and that entire day had a very surreal feel to it. But the conference was a great success in a wonderful venue (I hope we can do something there again next year) and one can always learn very useful lessons from negative experiences.

Ken, hummux and I had a great time, you're wonderful hosts and have a first class team in Vancouver.

Thanks again for all your help with the a/v !

You guys rock!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.


The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it


I second the "don't he so hard on yourself" comment. It's obvious you did everything in good faith. We had a similar situation when we invited Hisrshhorn to our Tea Party Conference in Boston. We specifically asked him to focus on the scientific issues, reinforcing Jones, Ryan and Gage and he went and talked about everything else. And then we find out he's part of the crazy proposed legislation in Congress.

We're all doing the best we can and I'm so impressed that we realize when we've been duped and then make the necessary adjustments. The fact that you got him of tape with Jones is huge and we can use that to hone our skills for the next shill that comes our way.

How maddening to get taken

How maddening to get taken for a ride. What a great opportunity, however, to experience what they can throw at you, and to gain effectiveness as a result. Very impressive to set up a forum like that. I haven't accomplished anything like that -- yet.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thank you, Reprehensor and Doug, all

for your work and comments. Will Deagle publish the results of looking for radioactive isotopes of niobium, cobalt and beryllium in the WTC dust? That would be good science, to publish WHATEVER the results turned out to be. Allan is right -- the absence of his publishing these results is strongly indicative of severe weakness in the "mini-nukes" hypothesis.

From a scientific point of view, our arguments regarding the fallacy of the official 9/11 story are very compelling -- and published in established peer-reviewed journals. Has Deagle published in an established refereed journal? The answer is no. If I were to pick a starting point (even for 9/11 beginners) that is accessible to most people and at the same time firmly grounded in science, it would be this article:

Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction
Authors: Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, James R. Gourley
The Open Civil Engineering Journal, pp.35-40, Vol 2

I have made copies of this paper in booklet form and given these away by the hundreds. This peer-reviewed paper is only six pages and yet lays out the scientific evidence concisely -- with many thanks to the co-authors! BTW, the authors retain the copyright on this paper and we encourage you to make copies freely. There is no restriction -- true freedom of speech and of the press here.

We use statements by FEMA and NIST which are grounded in science to show that the official story is in fact full of holes. In the end, as quoted in the article, NIST agrees with us that they cannot explain the total collapse of the Towers.

I always enjoy handing out the "Fourteen Points" paper

and encourage everyone to print it out (preferably two sided to save paper and reduce the bulk) and drop it into your local university, community college and high school science teachers boxes.

The paper provides an excellent gateway into the growing critique of the government's story of 9/11 for the science inclined.

This reminds me to get one to my high school physics teacher, who I just reconnected with last month.

Dr. Jones, I hope that you and yours are all doing well, and I look forward to working with you again in the new year.

Very warm regards,


Thank you for your efforts here, Prof Jones

You dealt with him in a professional and respectful manner. You were able to highlight the fact that tests had been conducted already and that the research was readily available to him and you were certainly able to hold your own with him when it came to the scientific discussions about the evidence that he should be looking for. You are right, now as well when you say that he should certainly make public any test results that he finds; whether or not he finds what he is looking for.

Which brings me to a question.

In the second video, around the 3:30 min mark (ish) Deagle gets around to asking specifically about whether or not you know if tests have been conducted looking other explosive residues in the 9/11 dust you guys found.

The others in the room quickly redirect his question to a statement about the "explosive qualities" of nano-thermites (kind of like flour exploding in a tin-can in 6th grade science class?). Interestingly, at the end, when Deagle asks again about tests for other materials commonly used in controlled demolitions, again we hear a voice off-camera, this time talking about nano-thermite grenades. All of that is VERY interesting, don't get me wrong, but we seem to see a pattern developing here.

Then, still in the 2nd video, after Deagle gets back to asking about other explosive residues in the 9/11 dust samples, you yourself redirect the talk back to the critical question; I suppose that was the question that would rule out mini-nukes.

I understand you don't want to stray off topic with someone like Deagle, but for a moment there, he was simply talking about the fact that thermite alone would NOT be used in a standard demolition process. Some other explosives would typically be used.

In THAT sense his question is a valid one. Knowing what we know about the process of demolition, knowing that a standard method then and now is too use other explosive materials like RDX or PETN, have other tests been conducted at this point to determine if the residue of those materials were found in the debris of 9/11 by members of the 9/11 Truth community?

Now, I think we can all agree that "ray beams from space" and mini-nukes didn't shoot 4 tonne A-36 structural steel beams 400 ft into adjacent buildings.

But neither did thermite. That was used to cut the steel, not move it out of the way or reduce 4" concrete slabs to dust. It doesn't work that way; I don't care how many incendiary grenades you have.

Something did it. And it would make sense to test for the most commonly used materials first, would it not?

I have written to you before about testing for the PETN residue in the dust samples; I even found you a forensic kit that you could use.

So, like you said, "That would be good science, to publish WHATEVER the results turned out to be...". So with that I would like to ask you the same question Deagle tried to ask;

Do you of any 9/11 Truth investigators (we know that FEMA and NIST both made a point to tell us they didn't run any tests) that have tested for the residue of any other explosives commonly used in 2001 in the demolition field, such as PETN or high explosives? And if so, do you know of the results?

Thank you for your time and your continued efforts to expose what really happened on 9/11.

Scott Creighton
American Everyman


There are a lot of steel samples still around. The New York State Museum sent a lot of their collection of 9-11 artifacts for a show. I photographed one sample from the New York State museum that can be found on my site at if you page down a bit. It's a beam bent in half. There may be other large collections of debris. I also wonder if the principle of momentum and energy has been applied to the quantity of material that fell beyond the towers' footprints. It would also be interesting to model an analysis regarding the dismemberment of the building and the energy it would take to do so, compared to the available potential energy. I know that has been done in reference to the dust cloud and to the impact floors, but not the entire building. It might be interesting to see how many steel supports could be severed or bent in half with the available potential energy. It's also interesting that the plume of smoke lingers above the clouds of dust that are dispersing closer to the ground. This might have a bearing on the use of explosive charges and thermate. Thermal evidence to me seems the most convincing -- the high temperatures found in the rubble.

Good point

Are you in New York? Did you hear the part in this where they mention that some of the damaged cars are still there? What are they kept in a garage or something? Could they be tested for the residue? The interiors of them like the carpet? The metal?

I am working on a model of the building, but I dont have cut sections for walls... I do have cad version of the floor plan of the 66th floor though, and a start on the model in autocad 2004.

Me too...

I'd also recommend the civil engineering and science sections of libraries. Put some A4 copies of '14 Points...' in amongst trade journals.

The paper is available in A5 booklet form as a free PDF download from
All you need is normal A4 and some paper glue or a stapler. Mail some off to industry firms and academics, perhaps with a copy of the Hard Evidence letter from

I thank you Professor Jones and your colleagues, for giving us this excellent resource.

Sauce for the goose...

Doesn't S. Jones do nuclear research for the USGov, and believe the angel Gabriel dictated golden tablets to a Freemason named Joseph Smith?

Okay. You get the idea.

I've heard Deagle say repeatedly that, he is not having a contest with S. Jones, but a civil and scientific discussion. I wish you could.

The SCIENCE says there was more happening than just cutter charges. How about the POOLS OF MOLTEN STEEL LASTING FOR WEEKS AND WEEKS AS ADMITTED BY S. JONES HIMSELF:

The cementing orthodoxy at 911blogger bespeaks a closed-minded, techno-peasant attitude. Just because WE aren't familiar with certain classified tech doesn't mean disinfo.

Personally, I am more suspicious of physicists who work/ed on classified fusion research (bombs) and probably want to keep getting paychecks. I point this out not to call S. Jones a liar (I think he's honest) but only to say, there's as much reason to suspect him as Deagle, if you wanna chase disinfo trails.

Looking at those pools of "lava" still flowing weeks after 9/11 convinced me of "more than cutters" - whatever its nature. There are also photos of melted cars blocks and blocks away - cutters did not do that.