11 months ago

1.46K

Dimitri Khalezov 9/11 Truth 9/11 Nuclear Demolition 9/11 No Planes

Part 16. The discussion moves further to the exact positioning of the nuclear demolition
charges under the Twin Towers. Khalezov shows in the same map that both nuclear
charges were not exactly under the Twin Towers’ footprints, but rather under some spots
of their perimeters. This conditioned some surviving comers of the lower perimeters of
each of the Twin Towers - exactly opposite the positions of the nuclear charges.
Khalezov shows some photographs of these surviving corners as well and provides
comprehensible explanation supported by animated graphics that shows why these lower
parts of the steel Towers’ perimeters were spared by the crushing waves that pulverized
the rest of the Twin Towers’ bodies. Later a big official NOAA photograph dated
September 23, 2001 is shown. In this photograph are clearly visible hypocenters of the
three destruction zones - and the positions of each of these hypocenters perfectly match
their presumed positions as calculated before. Khalezov says that he was not alone in
arriving at these conclusions in regard to the exact positioning of the nuclear demolition
charges. Because there is one French writer - a certain Mr. William Tahil, B.A. whose
book in pdf format on the WTC nuclear demolition is available for download from
http://www.911media.de/pdfs/GZero_Report0_Tahil.pdf Khalezov shows one of
Tahil’s drawings where a nuclear explosion’s hypocenter is described to be exactly
at the same spot as discussed above - i.e. in between the North Tower and the Marriott hotel,
50 meters below the lowest underground floor of the WTC. The interviewer asks weather William
Tahil actually claims it was a nuclear explosion of a certain “clandestine nuclear reactor”, not
that of a nuclear charge. Khalezov laughs in response and says that it is not serious. A nuclear
reactor could explode neither in a sense of an ordinary explosion, nor in a sense of a
nuclear explosion because it does not contain any explosive material. It can only melt, but
it can not explode. Nuclear reaction in a nuclear reactor and a nuclear reaction in a
nuclear bomb are different and they also need a different quality of nuclear fuel.
Khalezov says that this French author apparently knows that a nuclear reactor can not
explode and even points to a preface of William Tahil’s book where it is stated in a form
of epigraph: “Ground Zero: a point on the ground directly under the explosion of a
nuclear weapon” [added in the form of irony: and not that of a nuclear “reactor”, isn ’t
so, dear Mr. William Tahil, B.A. ?\ Khalezov says that the fact that a nuclear reactor can
not explode is elementary knowledge and it is known even to a school child. He says that
something seems to be wrong in William Tahil’s book, but he does not know what is
wrong. Firstly there was no reason for the US Government to have such “clandestine”
nuclear reactors under the Twin Towers, because the Towers had apparently enough
electricity supplied to them. Secondly, even if they did have such nuclear reactors, there
was no reason to keep them secret, because Tahil claims it was two “clandestine” nuclear
reactors. Thirdly, it is not possible for a nuclear reactor “clandestine” or otherwise to
explode. Nonetheless, despite his seemingly ridiculous claims of “two clandestine nuclear
reactors” that allegedly resulted in “nuclear explosions” that pulverized the Twin Towers,
Tahil strangely positioned one of his alleged “reactors” in exactly the right spot - in
between the North Tower and the Marriott Hotel and he positioned it 50 meters below the
Tower’s foundations - i.e. exactly at the spot where a real 150 kiloton thermo-nuclear
demolition charge was indeed positioned. The discussion moves back to the WTC-7
demolition. Khalezov again shows the big NOAA photograph where three hypocenters of
three destruction zones are clearly seen (one of them under the WTC-7), and he shows
another photograph of “Ground Zero” that clearly shows three distinct spots emitting
vapors. One of these three spots is a spot of the WTC-7 and the other two - spots of the
Twin Towers. He then shows one article on the Internet dated by December 3, 2001, in
which a certain Charles Blaich, a Deputy Chief of the New York Fire Department claims
that there were three spots of “deep underground fires”, one located under the WTC-7.
Besides, some strange chemicals vaguely named by a seditious name “two powerful
ultra-violet absorbers” earmarked “to absorb high-energy emissions” were mixed into the
water that was used by firefighters to extinguish these “deep underground fires” also
under the spot of the WTC-7 according to Blaich. It is clear for those capable of reading
between the lines that in this article the two apparent radioactivity absorbents were
described and the mere fact that such strange “chemicals” were used also at the spot of
the WTC-7 clearly points to the fact that the WTC-7 was demolished by the very same
means as the Twin Towers. The article states that the fires were the “longest-burning
structural fires in history” though the fires were “not typical by any means” and the fires
were represented by “combustible debris mixed with twisted steel in a mass that may be
50 meters deep”.