Humint Events Online: Nukes AND Beam Weapons?

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Nukes AND Beam Weapons?

It has been brought to my attention that a viable explanation for what happened to the WTC towers that fits what Wood and Reynolds describe is micro-fission nukes or nano-fusion nukes.

In fact, very small nuclear devices would be a better alternative explanation for the dustification/vaporization of the WTC steel than a directed energy beam weapon, particularly in terms of energy requirements. Nuclear fusion produces the most extreme temperatures imaginable, literally as hot as the sun, which is easily hot enough to vaporize steel that is in the vicinity of the reaction.

Thus, nuclear fusion can explain many of the oddities observed with the destruction of the twin towers-- the vaporization of steel and internal office components, the twisted steel debris seen in the rubble, the extreme heat of the Ground Zero debris pile, and the high rate of cancers seen with Ground Zero rescue workers. Small nuclear devices could explain the explosions heard in "911 Eyewitness" before the towers fell, which the beam weapon hypothesis can't. The fusion micro- or nano-nukes could also explain the abnormal levels of tritium that were found around Ground Zero after 9/11, since tritium is a by-product of the fusion reaction.

These small nuclear devices would have been planted above ground-- again, with the idea to minimize the damage to the foundations of the WTC and the "bathtub" from tons of steel falling 1000 feet by vaporizing much of the steel from the upper portions of the towers.


I have also always thought the term "Ground Zero" was some sort of ironic hint at the use of nuclear weapons. Indeed, early mainstream reports said that the energy released from the fall of the towers was similar to a small nuclear device, another possible hint.

Interestingly, as an expert on fusion technology, Steven Jones has probably has more to cover-up about fusion micro-nukes/nano-nukes than he would for Wood and Reynolds' beam weapon explanation.

Nonetheless, there still is evidence for directed energy weapon usage (electro-magnetic energy pulses?) at the WTC that doesn't fit with small fusion nukes.

The evidence that most favors the use of some sort of directed energy "beam" weapon and can't be easily explained by small fusion nukes is:

1) the grounding of military flights during the time the towers were destroyed

2) the explosion of an aircraft in the sky at the time the south tower was being brought down (according to EMT Patricia Ondrovic)

3) the vast numbers of strangely roasted and toasted cars in lower Manhattan that can't be explained simply by falling debris or a chain reaction series of explosions.

4) the directed movement of a large section of WTC1 outer wall such that it twisted in mid-air as it fell to avoid the WFC.

Thus, it seems quite possible to me that both small fusion nukes AND beam weapons were used.

The nukes may have done the primary destruction, whereas an electromagnetic beam weapon may have been used to move large pieces of debris in a way to minimize damage to the buildings surrounding the WTC.

One fact that may argue against nukes is that the aluminum cladding of the WTC for the most part was left unscathed by whatever brought down the towers. However, the aluminum cladding was also relatively light and lightly anchored to the structure, such that the pieces of cladding were blown off the building and ahead of the main destructive force.

20 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

the thousands of sheets of paper that didn't burn.

1:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wow look at all the smoke coming from that real plane crash!
as opposed to this stupid little puff of smoke that the govt/media assured us ua93 made.

12:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sure, nukes. Where's the radition, then?

1:47 AM  
Blogger Sword of Truth said...

You people are stuck on stupid.
- Lt. General Russel Honore, United States Army

5:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Pinch, can you see the airplane here? Yes, a real airplane crash."

THIS is a perfect example why your little crew of Mini Me's, Spooky, will never will never, ever have any credibility in anything.

Because they are stoopid!

a REAL plane crash! Of an aircraft in the LANDING configuration, crashing and burning AS IT LANDED and comparing that to a airborne impact of a building of an aircraft at 500 mph with an accident scene that included the remains of 2 110 towers.

Really Spook. You need to get these douche bags back in their cage or find smarter minions.

6:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"viable explanation"

How pathetic that you're willing to glom onto any theory that will justify your initially hilarious premise

8:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wow all 3 of the sword of conspiracy pinch geniuses in a row!

after both towers poofed into dust in only 10 seconds each, some of the few pieces of massive steel that were actually still in existence at ground zero were observed to have become brittle and to have odd swiss-cheese like holes left in them. 1400 cars were also burned and some were melted.
a result of the incredible power of gravity?
right.

that little phony puff of smoke was allegedly from ua93 that allegedly lawndarted itself completely underground and there is no 757 debris in any photos.
as if.

after the explosion at the pentagon, the wall of the section that was exploded didn't even fall over until a good 1/2 hour later.
so unless the 757 squeezed thru a window it wasn't really there. then automobiles are photographed, the fire is put out and the autos are replaced with different autos and also photographed.
nice job pentagon.

the blurry, barely visible blob that we were told was aa11 was too small to be a 767 and the resulting hole where it allegedly entered wtc1 was too small for a 767 and didn't even line up properly with blob11. then edna cintron is filmed holding on for dear life to the same pieces of steel that NIST claimed were hot enough to melt.
sure NIST, your report is fully believable.

the images of what is alleged to have been ua175 filmed from the east show a foolish looking shadowy black cardboard-like silhouette of a plane missing it's right wing and the images supposedly filmed from the south show a cartoon of a plane with left wing fading in and out and then gliding entirely into the wtc2 without even slowing down.
aluminum planes can't do that and again the resulting hole is too small for a 767.

larry silverstein admits on camera that wtc7 was "pulled".
that's using your head larry!

9/11 was an inside job.

10:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regarding the previous comment, please see my post from above and re-read the parts that specifically mention "stoopid" and "douche bags". Anyone who can recite the Left Wing Wacko Mantra with such precision surely needs both those descriptive monikers appended to their name.

10:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"larry silverstein admits on camera that wtc7 was "pulled"."

Debunked so many times that I laugh out loud when you clowns try to resurrect it again...

10:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Debunked so many times that I laugh out loud when you clowns try to resurrect it again...

You people saying he meant something else does not qualify as "debunked."

12:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"stooopid" "douche bags" "debunked"

i don't think that i've ever seen such a persuasive argument in support of the official govt/media 9/11 fairytale.

it's almost as if you guys don't believe it and don't expect anyone else to believe it either.

help us out - is the energy supplied by a douche bag greater or less than the force of gravity?

12:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

flying douche bag?

12:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ahh yes.. the old 'lets bring up WTC7 and argue about what Silverstein meant with pullit while not focusing on how WTC7 exhibits classic signs of CD' meme. yawn.

WTC7s walls folded in and neatly stacked on its core structure, exactly like a classic controlled demolition. WTC7 fell at near free fall speed, and as it fell, WTC7 exhibited the classic kink as seen in the penthouse which collapses first, exactly like a classic controlled demolition.

You people saying he meant something else does not qualify as "debunked."

thats right-- WTC7 stills falls at freefall speed, WTC7 stills has a kink in the penthouse as it collapses, and the outer walls of WTC7 are still folded in on top of the core after the collapse, regardless what silverstein meant. if you're hear to argue the pullit comment, i suggest you head to the flogger-- plenty of truthlings over there to muddy the waters with you ;-)

for the record, i think WTC7 is a hangout. even if you went to court with the WTC7/CD argument, i see it being spun around with the perps saying, 'yea, it was CD'd but that's because it was an emergency FEMA bunker and months ago had been set up with blast resistant glass, diesel fuel generators, its own air supply... and oh yea, we rigged it months ago with demolition charges as a emergency last resort.' no dice. WTC7/CD gets you no where. just my opinion.

a REAL plane crash! Of an aircraft in the LANDING configuration, crashing and burning AS IT LANDED and comparing that to a airborne impact of a building of an aircraft at 500 mph with an accident scene that included the remains of 2 110 towers.

pinch makes about as much sense as usual with this statement, but if i can pull out a few tidbits, i might be able to reconstruct his argument. to paraphrase...

a plane which crashes on final approach, landing gear down, and approaching the runaway at a significantly slower speed than routine flight is NOT comparable to a plane which crashes at full speed into the ground, nose first and upside-down.

sure, i'll give you that pinch. but as usual you still ignore the original point (i believe) democrat was making: normal plane crashes have recognizable debris, but on 9/11, very little debris at any crash site. we get a fake fuselage on top of WTC5, a few rusted pieces of nondescript 'plane' parts, a red bandanna, and a passport.

furthermore, why were all these crash sights not given the usual treatment by the NTSB and why were no plane parts identified by serial/registration number. these are normal procedures which were not followed on 9/11. and pinch will ignore this.

pinch will also ignore direct questions posed to him, for instance: pinch, do you believe the official government story concerning the events of 9/11 as told by the 9/11 commission report? pinch will ignore this as well, despite my bold tags. to the best of my knowledge and for all his ridicule, pinch has not once taken a position on any point raised by Spooked or commentators.. his modus operandi is ridicule-us maximus and intelligence minimus.

1:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

shanksville weenie roast!

4:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

PWN1N6 pinch is too easy.
So, what about the tiny nukes idea? When did they go off? Twice? Many times? Did their million degree flashes start fires in lower floors? Were their events spherical? Conical? Hyperbolic? How might one control the direction of the energy released by a nuclear event? How are fission devices more practical than a butt load of bombs?
I can describe the function and effects of any sort of science fiction invention, so long as I don't have to submit a diagram to the patent office.
There are no micro nukes. There are no clean nukes. There are no controlled direction nukes. There is no reason to develop a nuke with a blast radius no larger than a conventional weapon.
It seems that most everyone in the vicinity of GZ heard bombs exploding and still the perps can ignore them. That is the crude power of great wealth, propaganda and the threat of brute force, not fantastic supervillain power that could do anything imaginable.

7:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yo Spook!

The post that LGF put up on those wonderful "diagrams" of the Shanksvilel crash:

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21471

has generated over 550 comments! And I bet even YOU can guess what direction they are leaning!

Here's a hint:

"Don't forget- he's a "biomedical researcher". Probably delves deeply into the effects of recreational pharmaceuticals, with himself as primary subject."

or

"Like OH MY GAWD..we are totally, and I mean LIKE TOTALLY having an airplane moment. And, I don't even mean Airplane-the movie.

It's just SOOO KEWL when scientific minds think alike. It's like a Charlie Sheen/AlGore moment."

or

"You know what? You can't even begin to attempt to rationaly discuss why this is technically wrong.

Even attempting to do so would make you look just as asinine as this poster. It's like trying to explain to a 3 year Santa doen't exist. You just can't bear to do it."

Nuff said.

7:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wen i cant tihnk wat 2 say i go 2 lidel grene foootbals 2 giv me werds of smartnes cuz thy no mor stuf thta is good adn tey hate bad terrist folks and ivel doors

3:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"""You know what? You can't even begin to attempt to rationaly discuss why this is technically wrong.""

another non-defense of the offical govt/media fairytale?

again, it is as if you don't believe it and don't expect anyone else to believe it either.

10:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

while he's certainly not one to address 9/11 issues, Greenwald does make some great points this morning regarding signing statements, the patriot act, and national security letters:

[T]he Bush administration presented a choice: (a) succumb to the Leader's will by vesting in him the unchecked powers that he demands, or (b) help The Terrorists attack and kill innocent Americans. That binary, exploitive formula was promoted by the media and it single-handedly prevented rational examination of any of these vital issues over the last six years.

12:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

this was 1992 if authentic:
http://www.drboylan.com/grantour2.html
"Since I could not enter even the main lobby area of DOE or SNL headquarters, I travelled a quarter-mile farther to the National Atomic Museum (NAM). The nuclear physicists and military at Los Alamos and Sandia Labs are so proud of their history of nuclear "achievements" that they proudly display information I had presumed was classified (and may still be, elsewhere). For example, The U.S. now has hydrogen bombs downsized as small as a RV propane tank, and which could easily fit in an Army duffel bag. Or, as Abu Nidal knows, in a bus terminal storage locker. Even more amazing, in view of Lawrence Livermore Laboratories' continuing disinformation campaign that "we're still working on containing nuclear fusion", was NAM's revelation that the U.S. since 1987 been producing controlled nuclear fusion, and that it is self-sustaining(!) and contained by a hyperstrong magnetic field. They use lasers to implode fissile material and produce fusion. This is an inexhaustible and rather compact energy source, and may be the powerplant for the gravity-defying craft I saw at Area 51. Another NAM revelation with Star Wars weapons implications (and applications) is that SNL has achieved advanced particle acceleration energy capabilities that can deliver a 100,000,000,000,000 (100 trillion) volt burst of ions using a lithium diode one inch thick."

8:22 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger