Collapse of WTC7

Hey, I'm no expert on this subject,but when I first saw the Twin Towers come down I thought that it looked as if they were brought down by explosives. Then I watched "Loose Change" for the first time in '06 & it was confirmed. I didn't know about WTC7 untill I saw that film.After I learned of that buildings contents, it hit me that WTC7 was brought down to eliminate any records of proof from the Securities & Exchange Commissions court documents on pending cases on Enron, Worldcom,etc. I believe with all my heart that it was destroyed due to the fact that alot of people would have gotten what they deserved. Especially the pack of liars in the Bush Administration. I am new to this whole Internet stuff & really don't know how to investigate what really was in WTC7. If anyone has the know-how, could find out & post it here at "*9/11 Blogger"? Thanks for letting me share my opinion!

Jim Hoffman's website is a pretty good place to start.

this theory has never really

this theory has never really stood up for me because imploding a building inst a great way to eliminate records or documents. Do you remember shots of the ny streets after tower 1 and 2 had collapsed? There were whirlwinds of paper all over the street. I'm pretty sure shredding or burning documents in an isolated situation would have been more efficient than having to blow up an entire building while running the risk the papers could be blown outside.

Response to TTHNR

Hmmmm...that's something I never took into consideration. Thanks. However, there were fires in WTC7 before it was brought (pulled) down. What do you think? Enough time to get rid of documents?

why do you think there where

why do you think there where fires in that building and that
somebody apparently was ordered to stay inside ?
"Listen carefully now : DO NOT DESTROY OIL-WELLS" Dubya

I doubt

I would doubt if any of those papers were gathered, collected, saved, etc. They were probably all thrown away as trash. What good is finding one page of a document from an office on the 44th floor of WTC 1 with another page of a document from an office on the 63rd floor of WTC 2 and another page from the SEC from WTC 7, etc..... It was all one huge paper (document) shredder. (I haven't heard or seen anything about "document reclamation", or anything of the sort, has anyone else? (probably because it wouldn't be feasible or possible))

Interestingly, I also haven't heard anything about "super security" regarding the clean up of WTC 7, which you would think would be required at least because of the FBI and CIA offices located there.

Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent, Forensic 9/11ologist

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. — Robert Heinlein

Totally agree 1FZFAN - The SEC was a MAJOR TARGET...

There are quite a few blogs on here which go into quite good detail regarding the position of fires and what occupiers they equated to.

Below are a few bits on the SEC, i.e. below is from the NY Post (12-Sep-2001) regarding the SEC and WTC7 (click to enlarge)

New York Post - 12-Sep-2001


Marked on this image (click to enlarge) is the floor with initial eastfedge fire, floor 12 which happens to belong to the (you've guessed it - SEC)

Free Image Hosting at


FEMA Tenant Details

FEMA Fuel Distribution Data Shows NO Fuel stored on Eastern Edge or 12th Floor

Floor Positions

They also cover the impossiblility that the SEC fires on 12th and 13th floors could have been related to the diesel storage and day tanks, i.e.

No large tank was above the 3rd floor.

The small day tanks were (in gallons) : 275 on 5th floor, 275 on 7th floor, 275 on 8th floor and 50-100 on 9th floor.

The fires on the 12th and 13th SEC floors are in my opinion deliberate thermite / thermate based incendiary arson, which were set to destroy SEC evidence.


You are definately on the right track...

Good luck with your research and best wishes

I find that hard to believe

That they would allow fuel tanks (or generators) above the basement level. That sounds like a MAJOR fire hazard and against pretty much any fire regulation I've ever heard of. (it also goes against simple common sense if you think about it for more than a few seconds) I wouldn't think they would allow that. And generators would be in the basement, with electrical wires going up to the needed floors, not fuel lines taking fuel up to high level floors with the generators stored there, much less fuel tanks there, whether they were small or not. OSHA and the NY Fire Marshall would crap themselves over something like that. (they would have massive battery backup rather than localized fuel-burning generators)

Something's not right there.

Senior 9/11 Bureau Chief, Analyst, Correspondent, Forensic 9/11ologist

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny. — Robert Heinlein


Yo, 911veritas, thank you so much for your response. Great posting of information. Also, thanks to all who have responded! Let's keep digging, y'all!!

Read the official FEMA

Read the official FEMA report on WTC7.They go through the whole process of how they think collapse initiated.At the end of the report they actually state that the whole theory has little chance of being correct.Well why bother then?.One thing i do agree with them on is that either one or two of the main trusses failed{the kink in the roof was directly above those trusses}.These trusses were massive and spanned two floors.The question is could those massive structures fail because of a bog standard carbon fire.On any other day in history the answer is definately no but 9/11 was no ordinary day.The laws of physics did not apply that day.Bin Laden is a genius for sure.


Your argument is thought provoking, however, I'm not sure if you realize that you are making the assumption that WTC7 was brought down by explosives as well. After seeing "Loose Change," I too became concerned about the information Building 7 contained. However, as much as it looked as if explosives were placed inside the Twin Towers, there is evidence that counteracts with this argument. The contents inside WTC7 were significant, but one may not be quick to assume the Bush Administration was behind it all.

In Response To "Response"

You're correct. It could have been Larry Silverstien.