So let me see if I understand how WTC 7 was imploded on purpose.....

[Logical]

So the government decided building 7 needed to be brought down on 9/11 also. I assume there was a reason for this. Some secret documents or something in WTC 7 that the government could not remove with any other means. The government decided that imploding the building was the easiest way to hide these secrets. Makes sense.

Then a team of explosive experts spent hours rigging the building to collapse. All of this of course was not detected. Timers. Explosives. Etc. Maybe they killed anyone who noticed them planting this stuff I assume. Makes sense also.

I also guess they needed to make sure they had some way to start fires so they could explain the fires caused the building to collapse.

They also had to make sure the water supply to the building was destroyed, maybe another explosion, to stop the sprinklers from working.

Then wait for 9/11 to happen.

After the two towers collapsed they were LUCKY enough that it damages WTC 7 enough that the fire was a believable story.

They they had to make sure that the firefighters would NOT fight the fires and put out the fires. I guess maybe the whole fire department was part of the plan also. That makes sense.

Then they had to make sure the fires did not set off or ruin the charges early because they needed the fires to burn for 7 hours so that the "fire caused the collapse" story looked real.

I wonder why the explosives team did not think maybe they should NOT make the collapse look like a normal intentional collapse? Seems like they would have made it fall to the side of something unusual. Make it look less obvious. I guess it never occurred to them.

Then someone remotely detonated the explosives and the building collapsed. They were sure lucky the remote control worked and was not damaged by the 7 hours of fire or damaged from the twin towers collapse. That would have been embarrassing.

OK, after listing all the steps needed this seems like maybe this is a little harder than I thought. Of course this was the easiest part compared to the work the 4 jet crashing would have taken. I imagine they had the "D" team working on the WTC collapse.

If I missed any steps let me know!

[RZM]

1. I love this kind of thing

Kudos. While I'm 100 percent skeptic on 9/11, I'm often at a disadvantage in the arguments because I know nothing about architecture, how buildings collapse, steel frames, etc. I can't really say how hot fires have to be, in which direction a building is supposed to collapse, or things like that.

But I do have a decent grasp of basic logic. And basic logic dictates to me that all of the steps required to actually bring down WTC 7 and ensure the appropriate amount of secrecy and deniability get harder and harder to believe when you break them down and show exactly what had to happen to pull of that scenario. Each step expands the circle of people in on it further and further, which ends up detracting from the case for a CT since not a single person has ever come forward or been outed as a conspirator.

It's easy enough to point at the video and say: 'See, it was obviously brought down by explosives!' It's much harder to make that case when you stop and think about everything that had to happen and all that people that had to be involved.

[Logical]

2. Thanks! I assume most people who believe it do not put a lot of detailed thought into it.

I am surprised not believers have responded.

[BobbyBoring]

3. Most of the circle of people have been eliminated

in one way or the other with the exception of the Mosad operators that pulled it off. Ask yourself a simple question. Would you kill 3,000 "People" (understand we are NOT people in the minds of these pukes) to make 4.3 billion dollars? That's what Larry Silverstien made from insurance claims http://www.heartcom.org/LuckyLarry.htm.

It would be easy if you could consider them "Collateral damage". Innocent people die in wars every day and israel has been at war for a long time.

I would love to believe the official story, but there are way too many holes in it~

[zappaman]

4. The "Mosad"?

Are you honestly saying Israel brought down the WTC?

[jberryhill]

5. How about asking yourself THIS simple question

Do you think the insurance companies who allegedly paid out that claim are fucking stupid?

You have insurers on the hook for 4.3 billion dollars, but if only they would listen to people on internet forums, they wouldn't have to pay out a dime.

So explain to me why the insurers couldn't figure this out.

[BobbyBoring]

7. Just a guess

The "official story" was being planted in the brain of every American within hours of the event. The insurance company believed it as well?

I hate to say it, but I was leery as soon as the first tower fell that day. Since then, I've spent WAY too much time reading everything available from Both sides, not just Cters. As with everything else in life, if you follow the $$, you'll find the answers.

[jberryhill]

8. I am following the money

Now, the insurers have billions of dollars at stake on the question. You think, for that amount of money, they were just "brainwashed"?

[zeemike]

6. I would like to answer this but you folks make me tired.

And your mantra is always the same...gee it is so hard to do this....which is BS because it is mostly easy to do things right under peoples noes if you know how....
for instance if I wanted to place a shape charge on each pillar of a building I would just schedule maintenance for each place and send in a crew to do it with no fear because no one would be there to see it...
It is easy to manipulate and fool people ...not hard at all....and mostly you can get the cooperation of some that are fearful of being called a CTer to help you by ridiculing anyone that does not accept the official story.