Thread by @drbairdonline

A month ago I made the case that an underground 5+ kT 3rd-generation nuke was responsible for the 2020 Beirut blast. Could an array of several such 3rd-generation nukes have been responsible for the utter destruction of the WTC on 9/11?
Thread
1/

Besides 2020 Beirut, I’ve also made the case recently that 3rd-generation Minimum Residual Radiation SADMs w/yield 10-20 kT TNT equiv were used in 1983 US Marine barracks bombing, four mega-blasts in 1990s England & 2005 Beirut blast that killed former Lebanese PM Rafiq Hariri
2/

This thread picks up from where I left off in another long thread examining where the immense energy needed to destroy the WTC on 9/11 & maintain hot spots in the ground for 99 days could have come from
3/

Physicist Heinz Pommer in Apr 2017 presentation to London 9/11Keeptalking group, based on multiple criteria, certainly thought 3rd-generation nuclear weapons (Directed Energy/Minimum Residual Radiation) were "the prime suspect for being used on 9/11."
4/

Yet, as promising as Pommer had made the case for 3rd-generation nukes seem, only a year later he completely abandoned the idea when he gave a follow-up presentation to the same London 9/11Keeptalking group (1 May 2018) in pursuit of some mysterious 0th-generation nuke!
5/

So what are 3rd-generation nuclear weapons and what is it about them that makes someone as measured in his conclusions as physicist Heinz Pommer totally accept them as "the prime suspect for being used on 9/11" and then absolutely reject them the following year?
6/

The idea of a "3rd-gen nuke" goes back to the late 1950s in arguments in support of developing the "neutron bomb". US scientists then were working on "clean" weapons that produced little or no radioactive fallout by minimizing % energy from fission & maxing % from fusion
7/

Congress & Ike liked LLNL idea of "neutron bomb" as tactical weapon w/fusion energy tailored to produce burst of neutrons like "a kind of death ray, doing almost no physical damage & leaving no contamination, but immediately destroying all life in the target area"
8/

Dec 1959 Thomas E Murray, former AEC member, told reporters the atomic test ban in effect at that time, was hurting US. Tests had helped develop A-bomb & H-bomb, "It the third generation of these weapons is the neutron bomb, it can't be proven until it, too, is tested."
9/

In late 1950s, US had quite an array of “small” 1st-gen tactical nukes for use as atomic demolition munitions (ADMs), artillery shells & warheads. E.g, W-25 warhead (left) weighed only 218 lbs & W-30 warhead (right) had yield as low as 300 tons TNT
10/
nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Weapons/Al…

But, as noted by Andre Gsponer, “the major disadvantage of 1st-generation nuclear weapons is that they produce effects whose combination is never optimal from the military perspective” making them good for “strategic deterrence” but not for “limited nuclear war fighting”
11/

But the “neutron bomb” would be designed to MINIMIZE mechanical, thermal & electromagnetic effects & MAXIMIZE radiological effects, while localizing radioactive fallout. It’s this ability to tailor effects that would define the "neutron bomb" as the first 3rd-generation nuke
12/

The "enhanced radiation weapon" (official DOD name for the "neutron bomb") successfully tested in 1963 but Kennedy & Johnson admins resisted developing any "cleaner" nuke for fear they would be "considered more usable if war broke out" & lead to WWIII
13/
isri.ch/wiki/_media/pu…

But with reduced strategic deterrence due to SALT, reduced conventional forces in Europe & W German refusal to permit "dirty" large tactical nukes on their soil, the Nixon admin began to favor idea of "cleaner" smaller nukes
14/
books.google.com/books?id=ajswh…

Little did any of this "calm" discussion of "neutron bomb" anticipate the furor over the spin that a bomb had been designed to kill people but preserve bldgs when the WaPo reported that funds to start building it had been buried in 1977 ERDA budget.
15/
washingtonpost.com/archive/politi…

With all the furor over an "enhanced radiation weapon," it's interesting there was NO public controversy over a parallel DOD effort to develop the neutron bomb's 3rd-generation counterpart - a "suppressed radiation weapon" - i.e., a nuclear "blast bomb" w/o the radiation
16/

From beginning of Cold War, US had been looking for ways to reduce radioactive fallout. In 1967, AEC even announced work on "pure fusion weapons - that is, hydrogen bombs & missiles that would not require an A-bomb trigger and would therefore be free of radioactive fallout."
17/

While AEC working on 4th-generation fissionless fusion weapons, Lawrence Livermore (LLNL) was quite active trying to find more immediate & practical ways to reduce radioactive fallout as part of Project Plowshare's efforts to promote the idea of "peaceful nuclear explosions"
18/

Nuclear scientists designing a "suppressed radiation weapon" faced same kind of challenges they had overcome w/"neutron bomb". Although by 1970 LLNL had not achieved the goal of no radioactivity, they had made or suggested modifications to minimize it.
19/
inis.iaea.org/collection/NCL…

Early 1970s Nixon administration "without fuss or fanfare" was channeling $10-20 million a year "into research and development on a variety of smaller, 'cleaner' weapons, including suppressed radiation weapons"
20/

1976 US Dept of Energy (DOE) launched three-year program to produce a "Reduced Residual Radioactivity (RRR) Tactical Bomb" "if you like, a very clean bomb" that was going to involve some nuclear testing.
21/

In 1978 DOE budget hearings, Sen McIntyre ask Gen Bratton abt "several technologies designed to tailor nuclear output such as neutron, X-ray, gamma radiation, and blast & shock effects" suggesting DOE working on many more types of 3rd-gen nukes than "neutron bomb" & RRR bomb
22/

Re "tailored effect," Gen Bratton, DOE Director of Military Applications, only wanted to talk abt enhanced radiation weapon & RRR ("achieving a weapon" w/less radiation contamination of area so friendly units could enter more quickly & limited collateral damage to civilians
23/

1978 NYTimes reported US scientists had started work on RRR bomb aka "blast bomb" to be "detonated at ground level", "tactical mission...to dig huge craters, demolish buildings or bury mtn passes under debris” but "minimize residual radiation"
24/
nytimes.com/1978/05/01/arc…

WaPo reported "a blast bomb...is planned to explode ON or UNDER the ground, throwing enormous amounts of debris" & quoted govt nuclear weapons expert "This is the original idea of a 'clean bomb'...designed to create a minimum amt of fallout"
25/
washingtonpost.com/archive/politi…

AP 5/78 Am nuclear scientists "still years away fm producing a “clean” tactical nuclear bomb but...have gone a long way toward mastering the key process wch would result in total combustion of nuclear materials in an explosion", only “prompt radiation” wch disappears quickly
26/

"Highlights of Laboratory achievements during 1979" reported “A three-year LLNL development pgm has culminated in a new kind of tactical nuclear explosive [RRR]" w/fallout & rainout fm surface burst more than order of magnitude less than all-fission explosive of same yld
27/

As significant as that LLNL achievement was in producing the RRR, what is even more amazing is that (apart from this passing mention in NYTimes - in 1985!) #MSM never reported the achievement
28/
nytimes.com/1985/07/16/sci…

Indeed, during the whole debate over Reagan's SDI (or later) when so many reporters were writing abt 3rd-generation nuclear weapons, nobody in MSM mentioned RRR (again w/exception of brief NYTimes ref) or MRR (Minimum Residual Radiation - name adopted by DOE at some point).
29/

As to what actually happened to the RRR tactical nuke, that's still classified. But we get occasional clues like in 2003 Kathleen Bailey & Robert Barker recommended "reduced residual radiation warheads for low collateral damage" for Bush's Advanced Concepts Initiative (ACI)
30/

Physicist Peter Zimmerman, SFRC consultant, replied: "RRR weapons would be similar to the 'neutron' bombs, made in the 1970s, w/very low fission yld. For classified reasons they cannot be readily made today w/o compromise to higher priority programs."
31/
everycrsreport.com/files/20040308…

Although RRRs were forgotten, 1980s MSM was filled with stories of a "new generation" of young nuclear scientists - for whom the "neutron bomb" was only a "crude forerunner" - inventing all kinds of 3rd-generation nuclear devices
32/
nytimes.com/1984/01/31/sci…

This optimism wasn't restricted to young scientists. Physicist Ted Taylor who had been at the center of a lot of the developments at Los Alamos in the early 50s, told journalist John McPhee in 1972 "If you want a bomb that spews out nothing but green paint, you can do that.”
33/

Reagan admin officials in 1982 cited examples of contemplated weapons:
1) bombs to create large EMP to knock out enemy communications systems
2) nuke-powered X-ray lasers to destroy enemy missiles
3) DEWs tailored to destroy target w/few side effects
34/
nytimes.com/1982/10/29/us/…

1985 NYTimes most thorough review of 3rd-gen nukes (the one article that mentioned RRRs!) including DEWs; X-ray & gamma-ray lasers; EMP, antimatter & brain bombs; microwave & particle beam weapons. DOE now testing X-ray lasers & other 3rd-gen weapons.
35/
nytimes.com/1985/07/16/sci…

1986 LLNL physicists say dozens, maybe hundreds, varieties of "nuclear-powered directed-energy weapons, or NDEWS" could be developed in wch some type of energy produced in every nuclear explosion (e.g, X-rays) is stepped up & focused on distant target
36/
washingtonpost.com/archive/politi…

May 1987 Time article revealed details of work on X-ray lasers (codenamed "Excalibur"), "a kind of nuclear shotgun with little pellets" ("Prometheus"), microwave weapons & NDEWs but says debate NOT whether CAN BE developed but whether SHOULD BE
37/
content.time.com/time/magazine/…

Congress started scaling back funding for NDEWs in research in 1989 & rhetoric also cooled, but research and underground nuclear tests on a number of these concepts continuing w/research shielded from Cong oversight b/c within the labs' core program
38/
books.google.com/books?id=rwwAA…

It is unclear what happened to any of these 3rd-gen nuke projects. Andre Gsponer wrote in 2008 most 3rd-gen weapons "never deployed on a large scale for a number of technical & political reasons" esp b/c required fission trigger so yield too high for battlefield, fallout, etc
39/

All Carey Sublette has to say "in passing" at his detailed "The Nuclear Weapon Archive" website is 3rd-gen nukes (e.g., X-ray laser, neutron bomb) "were never procured in large numbers, and have been largely abandoned as of little military interest."
40/
nuclearweaponarchive.org/News/INESAPTR1…

2008 article reports bomb-driven X-ray laser tested 1985 showed beam less bright than thought & efforts to focus the beam failed so SDI turned to other options although underground tests continued until test program stopped in 1992
41/
osa-opn.org/home/articles/…

But to so easily dismiss 3rd-gen nukes is to miss completely the very significant technological achievements of the “neutron bomb” & especially the reduced residual radiation (RRR) weapon whose achievements were either ignored or distorted by both MSM & nuclear scientists
42/

One might understand MSM not picking up on LLNL report but even William Broad’s Star Warriors (1985) that was focused on LLNL's work on 3rd-gen weapons esp X-ray laser makes NO mention of LLNL’s successful RRR weapon project completed only a few years earlier!
43/

Ted Taylor in his 1987 SciAm article writes residual radiation can “be controlled over very wide ranges” but adds “particulary for thermonuclear weapons with yields greater than a few hundred kilotons” ignoring fact 3rd-gen RRR weapon w/MUCH smaller yield already exists!
44/

Altho we don't have exact details abt RRR weapons, based on what was told Congress & media (i.e., "blast bombs" detonated on or under the ground "to dig huge craters, demolish buildings or bury mtn passes") that they were designed as "clean" Atomic Demolition Munitions (ADM).
45/

The US arsenal had two types of ADMs: Special ADMs (SADMs) and Medium ADMs (MADMs). The smaller SADMs used the Mk-54 warhead package w/variable yields (10 T–1 kT) weighed 59 lbs (Mk-54 only) or 150 lbs (complete) and were 16 in diameter by 24 in long.
46/

MADMs used W-45 warhead w/variable yields (1 kT-15kT) weighed 150 lbs (W-45 only) or 350 lbs (complete), 11.5 in diameter & 27 in long. MADMs (top left) thus had a potential blast yield (15 kT) as powerful as the Little Boy bomb that destroyed Hiroshima (all other photos)!
47/

In 1978 when RRR weapon being developed at LNLL, ADMs were in the news b/c W Germany didn't like that US "Zebra Package" had 141 ADMS ready to go in prepared shafts in Fulda Gap & Kinzigtal to stop the enemy at bottlenecks (bridges, highways, tunnels) if Warsaw Pact invaded
48/

Despite criticisms, US Army said both SADMs & MADMs needed. But some officers complained “ADMs are supposed to be exploded in deep holes to dig the biggest possible crater & to minimize radioactive fallout.” They wanted an anti-personnel radiation weapon (aka "neutron bomb")!
49/

Despite criticisms, US Army said both SADMs & MADMs needed. But some officers complained “ADMs are supposed to be exploded in deep holes to dig the biggest possible crater & to minimize radioactive fallout.” They wanted an anti-personnel radiation weapon (aka "neutron bomb")!
49/

In 1984 ADMs were still in the news. Jack Anderson reported “As of early 1983, according to a secret Pentagon report, the US had a total of 608 ADMs – 372 in Europe (mostly in W Germany), 21 in the Pacific (mostly in S Korea) and the rest stored in this country.”
50/

Anderson: "Designed to be buried underground, the ADMs’ three chief effects are cratering, blast & ground shock." Qtes Army manual “Cratering is used to destroy massive targets, such as large bridges & dams, and to create obstacles by excavating a great volume of material"
51/

Jack Anderson reported "Because friendly troops would be operating in the area of ADM demolition, the weapons are designed to as “clean” as possible, giving off minimal but still deadly radiation."
52/

Anderson 1984 reported "the ADM will be phased out over the next few years as Pershing & cruise missiles take over a larger responsibility for NATO’s defense. ADMs will remain in S Korea, however. Some have already been deployed underground near – & possibly under – the DMZ."
53/

Apr 1985 a curious report that, even tho NATO had agreed to remove all ADMs from Europe, DOD was developing a "nuclear backpack" nicknamed ADAM, standing for Advanced Atomic Mine. Since ADAM would do everything SADM already did, it's a good guess that ADAM really an RRR SADM!
54/

There was obviously a LOT of DOD interest in a "clean" SADM in 1970s & 1980s and the RRR weapon fit that bill. Indeed when GIPRI physicist Andre Gsponer first wrote about RRR in 1982, he practically described it as the ideal battlefield weapon.
55/

Yet in 2008 how Gsponer would change his tune saying RRR bomb & other 3rd-gen weapons "require a fission-explosive as trigger, which implies that their yield tends to be too high for battle-field uses, and that they necessarily produce large-scale radioactive pollution, etc."
56/

In 2009 Gsponer added RRR bomb & other 3rd-gen weapons "never found any truly convincing military use. Moreover, none of them has provided any decisive advantage (such as significantly reduced collateral damage, absence of radioactivity, etc.)"
57/

US not the only nuclear state interested in 3rd-gen nuclear technology. USSR 1978 successfully tested the neutron bomb, France 1980 & China 1988.
58/

web.archive.org/web/2015020708…
web.archive.org/web/2011111005…

28 Sep 1986 Sunday Mirror reported as possible disinfo the claim from a "junior nuclear technician" - later identified as Mordechai Vanunu - that Israel has built neutron bombs, a claim Vanunu has reaffirmed in numerous interviews over the years
59/

Theodore Hersh in The Samson Option (1991) reaffirmed Vanunu, based on Vanunu's photos LLNL & LANL concluded "Israel was capable of manufacturing one of the most sophisticated weapons in the nuclear arsenal—a low-yield neutron bomb". By mid-1980s Israel had produced hundreds.
60/

Reed & Stillman's The Nuclear Express (2010) actually concluded that Israel was the THIRD nuclear state (after US & USSR) to successfully test a neutron bomb in the infamous nuclear incident off the coast of South Africa on 22 Sep 1979
61/

R&S reported in wake of 1973 Yom Kippur attack Israeli govt decided they needed a neutron bomb as a tactical nuke, eventually led to 1979 test that went off as planned yielding 1-2 kt. Vanunu's 1986 revelations show
Israel’s neutron bomb in full production by 1984
62/

Mar 2000 Sunday Times reported on secret Israeli military plan called "David's Sling" in wch neutron bombs would by deployed as landmines near Golan Heights to thwart any tank advance, an idea that goes back to the 1980s
63/
wilsonweb.physics.harvard.edu/HUMANRIGHTS/PA…

Military sources say Israeli scientists have perfected a tactical neutron bomb yield 250 tonnes, weighing under 100 kg that can be carried by two soldiers. In addition, Israel has tested neutron artillery shell & laser-guided rockets with neutron warheads are ready for use.
64/

So did any of these nuclear states that had developed a "neutron bomb" copy the US & proceed to develop a "reduced residual radiation" (RRR) weapon - a nuke that with minimal residual radiation APPEARS much like a non-nuclear blast bomb?
65/

First we might consider briefly what would be involved in developing an RRR weapon. Although 3rd-gen details are classified, physicist Heinz Pommer has told me (by email) he believes the RRR/MRR design was essentially a modification of the earlier ENHANCED radiation design.
66/

With a lot more info available on the ENHANCED radiation design, there have been a few attempts to sketch how the neutron bomb worked. The best guess is that it is a miniaturized version of the well-known Teller-Ulam design.
67/
nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-3.…

Pommer has found quite useful this schematic diagram (left) of a neutron bomb on the German (but NOT English) Wikipedia page on "Nuclear weapons technology" (Kernwaffentechnik). It shares a lot in common with Carey Sublette's version (right).
68/
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernwaffe…

Pommer believes RRR weapon was variation of "neutron bomb". Both required tiny fission spark & D/T fusion but RRR required neutron reflector [Be-9] & neutron absorber [B-10] to produce hard X-rays by neutron scattering/capture & minimize neutron radiation/activation fallout.
69/

So we can presume ALL the nuclear states who developed the "neutron bomb" - US, USSR, Israel, France, China -were fully capable of developing a 3rd-generation RRR weapon & furthermore that they all did if just to keep up w/US or see if they could replicate US results.
70/

I should acknowledge that in 2002 Aussie online investigator Joe Vialls reported that in 1981 Israeli scientists at Dimona had successfully developed & tested a lighter & "cleaner" SADM (that he believed Israel had used in "stealth" mode in Bali 2002)
71/
web.archive.org/web/2003021022…

However, Vialls' explanation that the 99.79% Plutonium-239 core of this "new" Dimona micro-nuke ONLY emitted alpha radiation & was thus undetectable by Geiger counter is WRONG. Pu-239 fission has a well-defined isotopic signature & is readily detectable by Geiger counter.
72/

However dubious Vialls' description of 2002 Bali bomb as 1st-gen plutonium fission bomb, his info that Dimona had successfully developed & tested a "stealth" SADM in 1981 - along lines of 3rd-gen RRR SADM that LLNL had developed by 1979 - may actually be close to the truth!
73/

Indeed my earlier analysis concluded that by 1983 Israel did indeed have this kind of 3rd-generation "Reduced Residual Radiation" (RRR) SADM because in that year Israeli PM Menachem Begin authorized its use to blow up the US Marine barracks in Beirut.
74/

From Aug 1970 Sterling Hall bombing thru Aug 2020 Beirut blast, the world has seen dozens of #megablasts TOO BIG to have been caused by chemical explosives yet apparently leaving no detectable radioactive fallout - thus ruling out nukes in the popular understanding of nukes
75/

Yet with an understanding of 3rd-gen nukes, we might suspect that quite a few of these megablasts (like 1983 Beirut) were actually the results of "nuclear state terrorism" employing RRRs in order to give plausible deniability to nuclear accusations.
76/

Yet with regard to 9/11, although RRRs might help explain lack of reports of radioactive fallout, it is questionable whether even multiple RRRs could account for the extent & kind of damage done to the WTC as well maintain hot spots in the ground at Ground Zero for 99 days.
77/

Besides the ER & RRR weapons, one wonder what other 3rd-gen nukes, these 5 nuclear states were able to secretly develop since the 1980s? After all, physicist Ted Taylor said confidently back in 1972 "If you want a bomb that spews out nothing but green paint, you can do that.”
78/

Taylor in his 1987 SciAm article suggested "shaped nuclear charges." He thought even nukes of very low yield w/many forms of energy of much higher intensities had far more opportunities to produce directional effects than "shaped chemical charges."
79/

Indeed in Apr 2017 presentation to London 9/11Keeptalking, physicist Heinz Pommer hypothesized THREE shaped 3rd-gen RRRs - in effect, nuclear directed energy weapons (NDEWs) - one each 25 m beneath lowest level of WTC1, WTC2 & WTC7 in the granite bedrock
80/

Pommer believed each NDEW was UNDER the tower b/c conservation of momentum dictates that only ONE energy source DEEPLY underground connected by a shaft to the surface could form the uniform eruption-like parabolic fountain of ejected material observed for both Twin Towers
81/

Pommer hypothesized it’s possible to choose preferred direction of x-ray/neutron flash by using Be-9 reflectors & Fe-56/Ni-58 X-plug (radiation lens) to pass neutron & X-rays up to the shaft which acts as a “collimator” focusing a powerful energy beam into each bldg’s core
82/

Based on sequence of events (e.g. 9 seconds btwn shockwave & eruption), weakness of shockwave & size of observed “melt cavities,” Pommer estimated 1st stage fission w/1 kt TNT equiv yield & 2nd stage "slow fusion"/nuclear fizzle (for about 5 seconds) w/26 kt yield
83/

Pommer then sketched out how his 3rd-gen RRR NDEW model explained what happened to the South Tower in the 15 seconds after detonation:
0.01 seconds: X-ray / neutron flash in the Tower
1 sec: X-ray softening the Tower's steel core
84/
911history.de/pdfs/911_Analy…

6 sec: Liquid rock chambers at max pressure, steel core softened, fusion terminated, high radioactivity levels in the melt cavity
8 sec: Bursting chambers & nuclear plasma upshot with 8,000 °C inside elevator shafts
9 sec: First visible eruption on top
15 sec: Full eruption
85/

Thus, after 3 years of testing his model, physicist Heinz Pommer had concluded that 3rd-gen Directed Energy/Minimum Residual Radiation nukes (10 kt max) were “the prime suspect for being used on 9/11”. In the rest of this thread I will defend that thesis agst its challengers.
86/

As convincing as Pommer had made case for 3rd-gen nukes, only a year later - after two professors (French & Swedish) contacted him summer 2017 - he had completely abandoned 3rd-gen idea as seen in his follow-up talk to London 9/11Keeptalking (May 2018)
87/

The communication that obviously troubled Pommer most was from the French prof who we can easily identify as François Roby, Physics Prof at Univ of Pau, since he later published the exact same analysis that Pommer discusses in 2018 London presentation
88/
hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02004696v2…