I think last night's investgative piece should have settled this matter once and for all. The collapse of building 7 due to fires and structural damage from falling debris was technically explained. The possibility of demolition was dismissed both by demolition experts (one dissented) and by those who were there at the time who said there were no significant explosions inside the building. Some of these narrowly escaped with their lives and are certainly not part of any conspiracy. The BBC also explained the confusion with broadcasting the collapse before it happened and the presenter who said it was interviewed and said it was due to incorrect information being fed to her and she was sick and tired of people attaching meaning to her mistake. On top of this it was postulated that governments are far too incompetant to organize such a conspiracy. Then a main supporter of the conspiracy resorted to foul language and insults when he was confronted with opposing evidence lol. In summary, I feel that what happened to building 7 was unusual but it did not require any conspired assistance to collapse. Dave R.
