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.