Creative Speculation

Aren't widely-available explosives marked with taggants? Hypothetical first-class demolitionists would hypothetically use hypothetical custom-made explosives.

Hypothetical first-class demolitionists would have hypothetically planned that WTC7 hypothetically come down when it was hypothetically hidden in the hypothetical dust clouds from the hypothetical collapse of WTC1. They would have hypothetically planned that it come straight down so as to minimize damage to adjacent buildings. WTC7 would go unnoticed--nobody died there, and the assumption would be that debris from WTC1 knocked it down. In this hypothetical case there is no hypothetical reason for hypothetical first-class demolitionists to try to hypothetically simulate a hypothetical fire-induced collapse.

Your attempt to dispose of the preheat/bulge/buckle hypothesis by conflating it with the straight-down collapse is irrational. They are independent issues. The reason to use the preheat/bulge/buckle technique would be to contain the sounds of explosives. It could be used to bring the building straight down, or used to create a more believable collapse.

Chief Hayden's story of the 13th floor bulge has not been corroborated by anybody that I know of. Rather than improve the story by "correcting" it, perhaps you should do some actual investigation of an issue with which you seem to be unfamiliar. Did the NIST report cite Chief Hayden's story, or did they ignore it?