What was the point of blowing up WTC7

[ravdin]

I think its obvious that it was done to cover-up the massive embarrassment that the BBC would have suffered from reporting that the building had sploded already when it was in fact still standing. Public embarrassment = less people watching the news = shrinking ad $revenues$. Always follow the money.

The BBC already shot Kennedy and faked the moon landings. Don't tell me they did this too!

 

[GregoryUrich]

I have never heard a truther argue this, but it might make sense that if the CIA looses control over a facility, they are required to scuttle the building to protect agents and not risk compromising national security.

 

[johnny karate]

I have never heard a truther argue this, but it might make sense that if the CIA looses control over a facility, they are required to scuttle the building to protect agents and not risk compromising national security.

But what doesn't make even the slightest lick of sense is how the CIA managed to "scuttle" WTC7 while it was on fire and without any of the hundreds of eyewitnesses noticing.

 

[jaydeehess]

But what doesn't make even the slightest lick of sense is how the CIA managed to "scuttle" WTC7 while it was on fire and without any of the hundreds of eyewitnesses noticing.

duh-uh
Since the analogy is with a warship then one must expect that all buildings that house CIA offices must have pre-set 'scuttling' explosives in the same manner in which a warship has its sea cocks.

 

[GStan]

duh-uh
Since the analogy is with a warship then one must expect that all buildings that house CIA offices must have pre-set 'scuttling' explosives in the same manner in which a warship has its sea cocks.

Self-Destruct Voice: Thank you for pushing the self-destruct button.

...

Self-Destruct Voice: Ten... nine... eight... six...
President Skroob: Six? What happened to seven?
Self-Destruct Voice: Just kidding! Seven... six... five... four... three... two... one... have a nice day.
President Skroob, Colonel Sandurz, Dark Helmet: Thank you!

 

[jaydeehess]

Self-Destruct Voice: Thank you for pushing the self-destruct button.

...

Self-Destruct Voice: Ten... nine... eight... six...
President Skroob: Six? What happened to seven?
Self-Destruct Voice: Just kidding! Seven... six... five... four... three... two... one... have a nice day.
President Skroob, Colonel Sandurz, Dark Helmet: Thank you!

hey, its not like it hasn't been vomited up by the CTLF (conspiracy theory loony fringe) before

 

[1337m4n]

Zee whole pless weel self-deestrrukt!

 

[mark4mark]

Well how else could "they" divert everyone's attention away from a structure hardly anyone knew existed before 911?

Obviously.

 

[Galileo]

The BBC already shot Kennedy and faked the moon landings. Don't tell me they did this too!

Fail.

 

[Aitch]

I think its obvious that it was done to cover-up the massive embarrassment that the BBC would have suffered from reporting that the building had sploded already when it was in fact still standing. Public embarrassment = less people watching the news = shrinking ad $revenues$. Always follow the money.

Er, you do know that the BBC is funded from a License Fee and doesn't have any ad revenue?

 

[GStan]

Er, you do know that the BBC is funded from a License Fee and doesn't have any ad revenue?

I do now.

But my suggestion was in the spririt of trutherism, which doesn't ever seem to bother verifying such fundamental information.

 

[Aitch]

I do now.

But my suggestion was in the spririt of trutherism, which doesn't ever seem to bother verifying such fundamental information.

Fairy nuff.

It was, IIRC, Jonathan Miller, soi-disant polymath, who pointed out that for certain humorous writing, we need a font called 'Ironic'.

 

[jaydeehess]

Simliar is the CT cliam that doctors make people sick so that patients will have to pay them more money when in fact in much of the western world doctors are funded by tax money. My GP gets paid the same if I have the flu or if I have cancer. If he refers me to a specialist he gets no 'kick-back' from the specialist and thus my GP has no impetus whatsover to make me any sicker than a mild infection which he can treat. Yet the CT's do claim that all manner of major illness is CAUSED by doctors in a MIHOP scheme that makes 911 look puny.

 

[apathoid]

What was the point of blowing up WTC7

Office Depot was out of paper shredders.
Silverstein had to devise a big money losing insurance scam.
To see if anyone would notice.

 

[Thunder]

the building was an eye sore. it had to go.

 

[KreeL]

If you were a military man planning the WTC destruction for 9/11, and you wanted to conceal the obvious (see Randi about illusions), how would your plan look when you were finished? The entire WTC is your playground, and one of your prerequisites is BIG SHOW. You know, shock and awe.

Now, a production this big would require backup plans in case of certain failures. Most military planners will attest to that.

After you place yourself in that mindset...what was plan A, plan B, plan C?

To catch criminals, you must think like one.

 

[ozeco41]

If you were a military man planning the WTC destruction for 9/11, and you wanted to conceal the obvious (see Randi about illusions), how would your plan look when you were finished? The entire WTC is your playground, and one of your prerequisites is BIG SHOW. You know, shock and awe.

Now, a production this big would require backup plans in case of certain failures. Most military planners will attest to that.

After you place yourself in that mindset...what was plan A, plan B, plan C?

To catch criminals, you must think like one.

I agree with much of that. I saw the WTC Tower collapses on TV in Wales - they showed the plane collision and the collapse in sequence - it was ages before I realised the ~1 hour delay.

My first (civilian) thoughts were horror and "Oh you evil bastards"

(Actually my first thoughts were "Is this some special effects in a movie?" ...but pass on that)

Then my civilian brain gave way to my military one and I revised to "Oh you brilliantly clever devious and evil bastards - well done" (Remember - Military Brain admiring the professional job.)

At that stage thinking it was "Crash immediatly followed by collapse" I saw it simply as "hit some distance from top - top bit falls and crushes the rest."

Lots of people on both sides of the argument are still locked into that view of events. Suits the truthers because it requires massive energy which they can claim isn't there. Then the "no demolition" debunkers - even some of the best - still make the same error. Lucky for them there really was energy to spare so thew get the answer they want but their logic is wrong.

Later I had to work through the real scenario and only two years back felt challenged to work out how it actually happened. An aquaintance is a "committed to any conspiracy" type. UFO's and Vapour Trails under the NWO are his thing with 9/11 a lesser interest. So I tackled the technical question of demolition or not. I then got involved in an on line forum and decided to deal only with technical. Simple really - explosives (or incendiaries) neither know nor care who put them in place or pushed the button. The technical evidence stands apart from the conspiracy and social domain stuff.

So it was 5-6 years after 9/11 before I worked out how it happend and became familiar with most of the funny ideas.

Now back to your "put yourself in the mind of the other side".

True. Around the Kuwait Ware (Gulf War 1) I was responsible for emergency management for a large water authority (Sydney, NSW, Aust) and worked through all the scenarios for terrorist retaliation against Aust as allies with US, UK et al in Gulf 1.

Best approach going - put yourself in their mindset.

Also worked with Aussie army on how to demolish water supplies but drifting too far OT. So I agree - think like they do.

It would be easy to bring down WTC Towers provided no interuption and no need to conceal activities. But covertly achieving it as a top down collapse which looked like Aircraft caused it is a far more difficult trick. Even now with benefit of hindsight.

 

[9/11-investigator]

Has any twoofer ever given any reason that makes even a modicum of sense as to why the NWO blew up WTC7? Any twoofer that still posts here want to take a stab at it? Keep in mind that I am not interested in how you "know" it was a controlled demolition, I want know why they did it.

A few days ago I believe I heard DRG saying that the first explosions in WTC7 took place before the first tower fell.

Speculation: there was a plane destined to remote control crash into WTC7 as well but that something went wrong with the remote control. And there was WTC7, stuffed with explosives for the whole world to see.

Can't have that, therefore push the button anyway and invent 'we decided to pull' and 'thermal expansion' afterwards.

 

[Minadin]

David Ray Griffin is an idiot. I wouldn't pay any attention to a word he says.

 

[dtugg]

A few days ago I believe I heard DRG saying that the first explosions in WTC7 took place before the first tower fell.

Speculation: there was a plane destined to remote control crash into WTC7 as well but that something went wrong with the remote control. And there was WTC7, stuffed with explosives for the whole world to see.

Can't have that, therefore push the button anyway and invent 'we decided to pull' and 'thermal expansion' afterwards.

Sorry, quoting DRG doesn't cut it, Nazi.