Twin Towers: The Magic Dust

... um, Karan, in case you don't already know (and, of course, you may well), the Pulitzer-prize winning, 'The Looming Tower' and 'Perfect Soldiers' are, indeed, works of fiction.

You know how the World Trade Centre was covered in dust and looked like a warzone after the towers came tumbling down? Guess what? It wasn't dust from the disintegration of the towers, it was dust that had been planted in the towers, whose planting may have been facilitated by floors being removed from the towers.

As we can see that WTC-7 came down by implosion I think that is sufficient to cover the actual collapses of all WTC buildings even though the twin tower collapses were obviously of a different kind of controlled demolition. While it is generally agreed that WTC-7's was a classic implosion, there is a great deal of speculation about what brought the twin towers down although, in the scheme of things, it is not of great importance exactly how they came down - controlled demolition of whatever kind is sufficient. My theory is that it is not a particularly exotic type of demolition and that rather than simply weakening the base and the central columns first to cause the building to fall in on itself as with WTC-7, in the case of the twin towers, the floors blew out progressively downwards from the top in a special configuration, to ensure the floors above collapsed straight down ... but the magic dust, of course, hides well what exactly is going on. See collapse of the North tower.

The dust had a multiplicity of functions:

• to make the collapses more spectacular
• to make controlled demolition less obvious
• to make WTC look like a warzone, enhancing the sense of enormity and terror of the event
• to provide distraction in the form of Judy Woods', "Where did the towers go?", nonsense
• to allow crisis actors to be "interviewed" on a day other than 9/11 all covered in dust so that they more convincingly match up with the WTC-covered-in-dust scene.
• to provide distraction and to entrench the sense of evilness of the perpetrators making real death and injury more plausible in the alleged deaths of first responders and others due to illness caused by the toxic dust.

A major reason to doubt toxicity of dust apart from the above:

• Those involved in implementing the event would have been exposed to the dust themselves. There had to be people at Ground Zero in on the operation so it seems more than unlikely that the significant number of people in the know who would have been at Ground Zero and the surrounding areas would agree to be part of an operation where they themselves would be exposed to toxic dust. Doesn't make sense, does it? When we bear in mind that 9/11 was really a massive Full-Scale Exercise pushed out as a real event, we know hundreds of people would have been in on this operation, many at Ground Zero.

Disclaimer - Copyright - Contact

Online: buildfreedom.org | terrorcrat.com / terroristbureaucrat.com