Originally posted by MCory1
This is where I start to have a problem here. In essentially the same breath, you're saying that there's a group of people who are smart enough to

a) Arrange for the hijacking of at least four planes--no biggie, security was much more lax back then.

b) Create an exceptional back story for the hijackers, to the point of ensuring they were enrolled in flight schools at some point in time.

c) Coordinate the kamikazi attacks of the four planes while managing to keep NORAD on a leash, even if it means just creating a reasonable cover story.

d) Somehow plant explosive charges under the noses of a WTC population the size of a small town without anyone noticing.

e) Manipulate the general public for 4+ years into believing the original story.

This group of people was smart enough to cover their bases, but they weren't smart enough to open a first year college level chemistry book to find the properties of jet fuel vs. the properties of steel? I mean, they would even need someone with that kind of knowledge to place the charges--why not ask that person "Hey, is this plausible?" If not, go back to the drawing board. There's plenty of other equally dramatic types of attacks that could've been done with apparently much more realism.

More directly on topic, I can agree with you on the possible reasons WTC 7 was demolished. Although, in keeping with the devil's advocate mentality, it could be argued that the 9/11 comission ignored WTC 7 because it didn't have as much psychological impact. It wasn't as important to figure out what happened there as to the towers, so they focused their time elsewhere.

The Commission’s Final Report provides a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11th, 2001, terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks.