Prove or Debunk: WTC7 Collapse Scenario

Here is one theory. I'm looking for evidence to either support this theory, or debunk it outright.

1) Rockefellers decide to build WTCs in 1960's, during height of Cold War. Rockefellers are politically connected to say the least. As part of plan for WTC, it is decided that WTC7 be built as an office complex to house high-security government agencies like the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, SEC, and IRS. Government agrees ahead of time to pay $$$ rent to Rockefellers for WTC7 offices.

2) As part of the construction process, WTC7 is designed to have a "self-destruct" feature in case security is compomised and classified documents need to be destroyed. The self-destruct feature is based on a single, or very few vertical steel columns, if when taken out, cause the entire WTC7 to collapse in on itself (like it did on 9/11).

3) CDI at some point is hired by the CIA to pre-rig WTC7 with cutting charges located on key support columns. These are thermite and/or thermate charges that chain of command can order ignited in case of emergency.

4) 9/11 attacks happen. WTC7's security is compromised. Central command makes early decision to pull WTC7 so that security of classified documents cannot be compromised. As lease holder of WTC7, Silverstein must be made aware of special arrangements with CIA.

5) From 8:46 am until after 5:00 pm, WTC7 is evacuated, and special agents prepare WTC7 for self-destruct. Shortly before 5 pm, word is passed around that WTC7 is going to be coming down to ensure safety of work crews and civilians. This also gives CIA/FBI time to take out most important documents.

6) WTC7 is pulled, as planned, destroying entire contents of building. CDI is called in an immediately begins removing debris, along with highly classified documents, the same way they did at Oklahoma City.

7) FEMA, and NIST can't come up with any logical explanations of collapses that don't include the pre-planned CD. Therefore, they come up with the best explanations they can to describe the collapse without exposing classified information.

What evidence exists to either support this theory, or debunk it?

Imo, this might explain why WTC7 was the first steel frame building in the world to completely collapse from fire and superficial structural damage.

Any thoughts?

I've no evidence to prove or debunk this theory but it seems highly implausible that the building was standing for over 30 years with high explosives placed ready to detonate at the flick of a switch!! Considering the vast quantity of paper files that were left scattered all over Manhatten after WTC1&2 collapsed it would seem that 'pulling' the building in case of compromised security would only give every New Yorker the chance to see for themselves what those government agencies were trying to protect.

[edit on 17-2-2007 by DrunkenPikey]

Originally posted by DrunkenPikey
I've no evidence to prove or debunk this theory but it seems highly implausible that the building was standing for over 30 years with high explosives placed ready to detonate at the flick of a switch!!

I didn't mean to imply that the explosives were there for 30+ years. My thinking was more along the lines that the structure of WTC7 may have been designed so that a few strategic columns held the entire building together. Cutting the "strategic" column(s) could collapse the entire building.

There was plenty of time on 9/11 to place the cutting charges between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm, when WTC7 collapsed. Plus, this goes along with the latest NIST theory.

Considering the vast quantity of paper files that were left scattered all over Manhatten after WTC1&2 collapsed it would seem that 'pulling' the building in case of compromised security would only give every New Yorker the chance to see for themselves what those government agencies were trying to protect.

There was no noticeable paper "confetti" flying out of WTC7. WTC1 and WTC2 had paper flying everwhere before they collapsed. This was due to the initial impact from the planes.