Federal reports did indicate that tritium and “massive amounts of strontium and barium were found in the dust” of the WTC complex. And above the dust, a blizzard of paper covered the Towers’ immediate area. Paper becomes inert if energy is generated by electromagnetic pulses and thus raises questions why fires alleged to be hot enough to weaken structural steel, were not hot enough to burn paper.
Another nuclear aspect Deagle has cited involves significant cracks found in the substructure of WTC basement’s retaining walls keeping the Hudson River from flooding downtown Manhattan. Because the cracks were underwater, fire involvement has been ruled out.
Similarly, the force ascribed to impact by aircraft on the Towers’ upper stories is highly unlikely, according to Deagle, to have generated direct and adequate energy to cause any damage to those retaining walls.
Add to this evidence, the molten metal that reportedly burned for months at the WTC site despite efforts of firefighters to extinguish it. The ineffectiveness of water and constant replacement of soil to cool those hotspots——especially at the No. 7 site——would seem to underpin Deagle’s view that a “mini-nuke” device had been detonated onsite.
Another Deagle theory involves the possible use of the Pentagon’s new weapons of “ultra-powerful magnetic pulses.” Lasers can generate nuclear explosions without requiring a nuclear fission/fusion as their trigger.
(12) That only a cursory investigation of No. 7’s collapse was done by federal agencies and the insurer. That enabled owner Larry Silverstein to collect $861,000,000 in claims. (The 9/11 Commission did not deal with No. 7.)
That has been the theory of many who have read official reports (FEMA/NIST) about the building’s collapse. Among them was a shareholder, John-Paul Leonard, from the building’s principal insurer, Allianz Group of Munich. He sued the company in April 2005 on grounds of fraudulent explanations about the collapse and claimed it was caused by a controlled demolition.
FEMA’s report (2002), which apparently satisfied Allianz officials, claimed the collapse was the direct result of several fires ignited by North Tower debris and not shock waves from the Tower collapses.
Yet if flaming debris fell on the roof, the obvious unanswered questions ever since September 11 have been: 1) Why fires were seen inside No. 7 on two or three floors though the windows had not been blown out, customary in conflagrations; 2) Why firefighters were ordered from the building at 11:30 a.m. “for safety reasons” instead of extinguishing the fires; and 3) How Silverstein could claim that his directive to the Fire Chief to “pull it” alluded to pulling firefighters from the building if none were inside. (“Pull” is the demolition term for setting off explosive charges for an implosion.) FEMA’s report stated that “no manual firefighting operations were taken.”
The explanation for the firefighter evacuation seems to have been the basement and lobby explosions set off in No. 7 beforethe Towers collapsed. Two witnesses to the explosions were both high-ranking city officials: Michael Hess, New York City’s corporate counsel, and Barry Jennings, deputy director of emergency services in the city’s Housing Authority. They had rushed to the 23rd floor’s Emergency Center for the complex.
Ordered to “leave right away” by an unidentified person prior to the Tower collapses, the two rushed down the stairs. When they reached the 6th floor, an explosion collapsed the stairs beneath them. They clambered to the 8th floor and took another route to the lobby and found it destroyed and littered with bodies.
They were ordered not to look at what Jennings described to the media as a “King Kong” rampage in the lobby. His street-side account would seem to support the multiple-explosion theory in the basement areas. It also contradicts suggestions that No. 7’s collapse was attributable to fire.
Evidence about explosive devices includes statements that were made by television reporters for the British Broadcasting company and Cable News Network. One in particular was that the building had collapsed a half-hour prior to that event——despite its presence directly behind the BBC reporter. This raised questions about a pre-arranged demolition by owner Larry Silverstein should the Towers suffer a ruinously expensive repeat of the 1993 bombings ($330 million).
Prior to 9/11, the Towers were in such dangerous condition that floor-by-floor demolition——as has now been done with the Deutsche bank building——that at least two applications had been filed to the city by the WTC complex owners, the Port Authority of New York/New Jersey. The Towers were insulated with asbestos, and the alumninum exterior cladding was so corroded that it endangered pedestrians below. Both conditions were singled out as causes for significant declines in tenancy.
But the city denied the applications because the WTC was built on municipal bonds and because it was a major attraction to tourists and bound up in civic pride. The Port then turned to leasing the complex and thrusting the renovation expenses onto the whoever won the bid.
Repair estimates exceeding $200,000,000 were provided by the Port Authority to Silverstein and the other three parties who submitted bids in late 2000. Silverstein’s bid of $3,200,000,000 made him the leaseholder.