Let's ask again: What was the MOTIVE for WTC7?

1337m4n

Alphanumeric Anonymous Stick Man
1337m4n
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
3,510
Since WTC7 has recently become something of a hot topic on this forum, I thought I'd once again revive the age old question that debunkers keep asking but that Truthers keep dodging:

What was the MOTIVE for destroying Building 7?

Because think about what you're saying here: You're saying that The Bad Dudes were planning on:

--Demolishing a 47-story skyscraper
--In broad daylight
--In full view of hundreds of eyewitnesses
--AFTER the dust from the Twin Towers had settled
--AFTER the building was emptied of people
--While DEPENDING on the debris from the Towers to, by sheer dumb luck, do enough damage to it to establish a plausible cover story

That is a LOT of unnecessary risk. That is a LOT of potential for the lie to be exposed. Surely, The Bad Dudes must have had a VERY GOOD REASON for going through so much trouble and risk to bring this thing down.
 
Frankly, the whole idea of a controlled demolition of WTC7 is "probably" the most stupid conspiracy theory ever. None of the scenarios make any sense.

1. Larry Silverstein insurance scheme. Any evidence that he made a profit off the destruction of WTC7? And how does insurance fit into what happened to WTC 1 & 2?

2. More "shock & awe" to get Americans hyped for war with Afghanistan and Iraq. Then why wait to destroy the building until everyone was safely evacuated? Even the "troofers" admit that most Americans don't know WTC7 collapsed that day, so how did it's destruction help the push for war?

3. Destroy supper-dupper top secret documents located in WTC7. Excuse me, it's called a paper shreader! Why would the CIA, who would have been a major player in an "inside job" want to destroy it's own offices?
 
The motives offered thus far -

1. WTC 7 was where the 9/11 attacks were planned and carried out. Destroying the building destroyed that evidence.

2. WTC 7 was destroyed to eliminate SEC evidence of companies like Enron, WorldCom, etc. (That can be a blanket non-9/11 evidence destruction motive.)

3. WTC 7 was the actual target of United 93. When the passengers forced the hijackers' hand, the explosives would have been discovered and it had to be brought down anyway.

That's all I've ever heard.
 
Alt+F4 said:
Excuse me, it's called a paper shreader!
Click to expand...

I'm curious about this particularly persistent canard. Do you honestly think that even a majority of the sensitive information stored in the WTC 7 was in paper form?
 
Their whole motive for 9/11 is flawed. Bush was legally allowed to go to war in Iraq without it per the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. Why would he kill 3,000 of his own citizens and risk the death penalty, revolution, and global unrest for something he could've done anyway?

Most troothers have seen way too many action movies.
 
RedIbis said:
I'm curious about this particularly persistent canard. Do you honestly think that even a majority of the sensitive information stored in the WTC 7 was in paper form?
Click to expand...

Ok, how about we add a few degaussers and a sledge hammer?
 
What sensitive documents were destroyed in WTC 7? I don't recall 9/11 impacting any important court cases.
 
That's why we need a new investigation to find out!
/truther
 
RedIbis said:
I'm curious about this particularly persistent canard. Do you honestly think that even a majority of the sensitive information stored in the WTC 7 was in paper form?
Click to expand...

Isn't it possible to wipe hard drives or just burn them or something? Seems like any alternative would be better than just destroying the building completely.
 
RedIbis said:
I'm curious about this particularly persistent canard. Do you honestly think that even a majority of the sensitive information stored in the WTC 7 was in paper form?
Click to expand...

Well Red, a fire on every floor would have done the job, no need to go crazy and destroy the building too.
Unless the building itself was evidence that it was..well a building with to many intel offices and the NWO wanted a different location.
 
RedIbis said:
I'm curious about this particularly persistent canard. Do you honestly think that even a majority of the sensitive information stored in the WTC 7 was in paper form?
Click to expand...

Are you serious? So there was sensitive information in the building that couldn't be 'erased' by a shredder (or by degaussing or whatever) that needed to have the building it was housed in destroyed?

You must have been pressed for time. Obviously I assumed you had a better answer for the OP's question.
 
RedIbis said:
I'm curious about this particularly persistent canard. Do you honestly think that even a majority of the sensitive information stored in the WTC 7 was in paper form?
Click to expand...


I am also curious about this particularly persistent canard. Do you honestly think that the "highly sensitive information" that was stored in WTC 7 was stored only inside WTC 7 and not backed up anywhere else? Do you honestly think that the only way to destroy this stand alone "highly sensitive information" would be achieved by the demolition of WTC 7 ?

I'm curious.

Hey it's fun this " do you honestly think " game isn't it ?
 
Garb said:
Isn't it possible to wipe hard drives or just burn them or something?
Click to expand...

Yes. You can use a powerful magnet or, failing that, a sledgehammer or, failing that, your foot.



RedIbis loses yet again. How sad.
 
I have to second the theory that WTC7 being a controlled demolition is, without a doubt, the stupidest conspiracy theory of all time. That's right. Bush Snr's right Lizard eye doesn't have a claim on this.

You somehow have to be sitting around, in the White House or sodomising some bohemian boys, and go absolutely barking insane.

You have to count on half of the North Tower crashing down, perfectly into WTC7, causing enough damage that every firefighter on the scene would say it is coming down. You'd have to count on Peter Hayden seeing a visible bulge and declaring the building is coming down. You'd have to count on Nigro clearing the area, the building leaning. Or, you could risk the North Tower falling away from 7, not having a huge hole and billowing smoke and fires, and scratch your head with surprise when suddenly it popped itself into the ground.

So as these men were thinking up this idea, you would have to believe they didn't go 'ha ha' insane, but actually stark raving mad. Beyond The Shining ****.

How Dylan Avery has got his movie playing in many cinemas, on this premise alone, is mind-blowing. It is absurd, and is one of the most idiotic waste of time I have yet to see inflicted on the human race.

Added to this, the truthers would have you believe that the government can shut up the many thousands of people who would have to be involved, yet they cannot stop some secret files falling into the hands of people who shouldn't, and wouldn't have access to them anyway.

If this theory was toothpaste, I'd be brushing my teeth with raw sewage to keep them clean.
 
collapsing the building would in no way guarantee the complete destruction of the super secret data. A much more effective and less error prone way would be use a magnet and paper shredder as mentioned or simply physically move the data elsewhere.
 
WTC 7 was pulled because it might collapse into the search and rescue area. There was no motive for a conspiracy or inside job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom