Time to prove the official report right

This is an interesting photo.



Why would they have cleaned the debris from WTC 7 before they "pulled" WTC 6 and demolished WTC 5? 5 & 6 could have contributed to the debris of 7. That means they would have had to clean that area twice instead of just once if they demolished 5 & 6 before cleaning 7. Also, why would they have cleaned up WTC 7's debris before WTC 1 and 2? 1 & 2 could have had survivors but they decide to clean WTC 7 first? BTW, no one was in 7 when it collapsed, so therefore the rescue mission couldn't be the answer. I'm stumped on that one.

Edit: I know people are going to say "well you can see that they are clearing WTC 1". My point is, why didn't they make sure that they cleared 1 & 2 (just in case of survivors) before even starting clearing 7? Is it because of the street? I wouldn't think so because the whole area wasn't accessible to begin with, so why the need for the road if no cars could drive on it anyway?

Edit 2: This photo is very telling to me that they wanted to get rid of the debris (evidence) from 7 even before fully trying to rescue people. How sad.

[edit on 2/1/2007 by Griff]

[edit on 2/1/2007 by Griff]

[edit on 2/1/2007 by Griff]

The best evidence against the official story is the lack of evidence supporting it.