The use of micro-nukes to take-down the WTC complex — 9/11 through different eyes

The thirteenth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States fall later this year, surprisingly we still have many unanswered questions

NEW YORK CITY (INTELLIHUB) — Why does the U.S. government continue to cover-up the actual events that took place on Sept. 11, 2001? Okay, I admit it, maybe that’s a stupid question.

While some are calling for an independent investigation of the events that took place that day, many independent investigations have actually been conducted, including one by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The group, composed of over a thousand credentialed architects and engineers, is determined to find out just what caused the buildings in the World Trade Center complex to collapse at near free-fall speeds back in 2001.

While the group’s spokesman Richard Gage, who I have interviewed several times, maintains that nano-thermite was used to bring down the towers. Which very well may be true, however there may have been other weapons used in conduction with the nano-thermite to knockout the main cores of the buildings in order to achieve the intended effect, minimizing collateral damage in the neighborhood.

Although one thing is for sure and is really not open for debate, the actual impact from the alleged passenger planes did not cause the collapse of the WTC’s towers 1 and 2 that stood proud above the New York skyline, nor did the jet fuel or fires throughout the buildings. In fact, we can clearly see that this was not the case, because the tops of the buildings actually started to collapse first, dustifying themselves in mid-air as reported by Dr. Judy Wood who conducted an independent investigation.

However, interestingly enough, it’s also a fact that micro-nukes exist, and have since the 1950′s, opening an entirely new can of worms for some researchers.

Wikipedia explains:


The Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM) was a family of man-portable nuclear weapons fielded by the US military in the 1960s, but never used in actual combat. The US Army planned to use the weapons in Europe in the event of a Soviet invasion. US Army Engineers would use the weapon to irradiate, destroy, and deny key routes of communication through limited terrain such as the Fulda Gap. Troops were trained to parachute into Soviet occupied western Europe with the SADM and destroy power plants, bridges, and dams.

The project, which involved a small nuclear weapon, was designed to allow one person to parachute from any type of aircraft carrying the weapon package and place it in a harbor or other strategic location that could be accessed from the sea. Another parachutist without a weapon package would follow the first to provide support as needed.

The two-person team would place the weapon package in the target location, set the timer, and swim out into the ocean where they would be retrieved by a submarine or a high-speed surface water craft.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the United States developed several different types of lightweight nuclear devices. The main one was the W54, a cylinder 40 by 60 cm (about 16 by 24 inches) that weighed 68 kg (150 lbs). It was fired by a mechanical timer and had a variable yield equivalent to between 10 tons and 1 kiloton of TNT. The W54 nuclear device was used in the Davy Crockett Weapon System.

Now do I have your undivided attention?

On 9/11 there is no doubt that multiple bombs were detonated in the WTC complex. This fact can not be disputed and is clearly documented by hundreds of videos and backed up by many eye-witness testimonies, including highly credible first responders and firefighters. In fact, seismic readings from that day even indicate that at least 3 large man-made explosions, possibly nuclear by signature, took place underground the WTC complex. Could these be the actual blast that took out the cores of buildings 1, 2 and 7 in the WTC complex? Is this what the U.S. government has been hiding all along?

Interestingly, previous tests have been conducted by factions of the U.S. government in which they used micro-nukes to demolish rather large buildings.  The results were astonishing to say the least, almost a perfect mirror of the collapse of buildings 1, 2, and 7 that took place in Sept. of 2001.

To no surprise during the construction boom of the 19th century as large skyscrapers started to become a norm in America , detailed plans to demo large buildings became mandatory in some large city municipalities, required by the city itself in actual city building ordinances. But what if that building is too big to demolish with conventional explosives? How could such a large building be demolished so that the surrounding buildings would remain unaffected? And to think, all of this is likely a dilemma that large cities may still face to this day.

Interestingly, some have even gone as far as to say that micro-nuclear devises were always installed in the WTC towers 1, and 2, to meet demolition ordinance requirements required by NYC building code. If this is true, the nuclear devises would have had to have been regularly maintained and inspected by military elements and possibly the U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE) or the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Is it possible this was an option?

The use of micro-nukes in the WTC complex on 9/11–the smoking gun

It’s safe to say that high energy releases have a distinct look.

Dr. Ed Ward has documented what he believes is the use of micro-nukes on the World Trade Center complex attack that took place in September of 2001.

One of the smoking guns in this case is that over 5.3 billion pounds of steel was instantly turned into 2 billion pounds of dust, but that’s not all.

Massive steel beams were bent like pretzels as the towers collapsed.

One video shows the penthouse on building 7 being demolished on the roof just before the building comes down. This proves that a top-down demolition process was being utilized, otherwise the buildings might have just twisted, naturally falling over themselves. But perhaps the most startling revelation is the fact that vehicles looked incinerated up to one mile away from the towers. Cars were even flipped over as if they came out of a war zone.

The fact that many of the first responders are now dead if not very sick does not sound like the byproduct of a falling building but more like they got a massive dose of deadly radiation. Most of the responders have died of blood cancer, yet another sign of radiation exposure.

Cars not hit by falling debris yet totally destroyed far away from the towers

Molten metal was seen in and around the debris of the WTC for months.

There is also the fact that the debris field was substantially low for the magnitude of buildings that were destroyed, thus signifying that most of the debris was incinerated upon the demo blast.

Massive craters under the WTC complex were formed, likely from the detonation of micro-nukes, as the rock was even melted smooth. Later after the site was fairly cleaned up and the craters were excavated, the city of New York continued to wash down the cavities with hoses daily for years as traces of Tritium were found, signifying the use of nuclear weaponry. Evidence shows that levels of Tritium were 55 times higher than normal in the WTC debris. Tritium is a by-product of a nuclear blast.

The fact that the WTC buildings were pulverized into a fine dust, 20 microns in size or less, cannot be ignored. This is a tell-tale sign of a high energy release typical of a nuclear explosion. Eyewitness accounts and personal testimony indicate that people were thrown an entire city block from what was described as a warm wind just as the towers begin to collapse.

There were also multiple reports of “hanging skin” or “melted skin” on victims around ground zero. This was a common occurrence in the Hiroshima blast.

Major hot spots were reported in and around the debris for up to six months after 9/11.

This is commonly referred to as “China Syndrome”, where nuclear material will continue to undergo fission for a period of time, generating massive heat plumes.

To no surprise, videos  obtained via Freedom of Information ACT (FOIA) requests show that sections of the video and audio have been removed, especially during the beginning of the collapse of the towers. Why would the government need to remove these sections of the video and