(Fig. 1) The enormous, 47 storey World Trade Center Building 7. The Verizon Building stands at left, the U.S Post Office Building at right. Last Building Standing Did the 9/11 cabal originally intend to demolish Building 7 earlier in the day when it was hidden beneath the North Tower’s dust cloud? Jeremy Baker If I were a gambling man I’d bet the farm. The 9/11 conspirator’s original attempt to demolish World Trade Center Building 7 came shortly after the collapse of the North Tower, when WTC 7 was completely hidden under a thick cloud of debris—and the a ttempt was a complete failure. Whether through sabotage or malfunction, the pre-installed demolition system in Building 7 just didn’t operate as planned and what was to be the swift conclusion of an elaborate plot to completely destroy the entire WTC—and, of course, provoke war with the Islamic states— proved instead to be a blunder of epic proportions. Six years after the fact, few who’ve bothered to scrutinize the strange fate of WTC 7 (and the attacks of 9/11 in general) believe that this building wasn’t brought down in a carefully conceived and professionally executed explosive demolition. The videos of the 47 story WTC 7 suddenly shuddering, then dropping like a rock at free-fall speed, straight down, causing no damage to adjacent buildings and piling up neatly within its footprint (figs. 2 and 3), are all that most people need to feel confident about this assertion. But other facts support this theory as well, not the least of which is a frank admission from the building’s owner that he and the FDNY ‘pulled’ WTC 7 late in the day on 9/11 and then watched as the building collapsed. So, for those who are convinced that WTC 7 was, in fact, intentionally demolished and did not collapse due to fire damage (the official story), the next question becomes: Why did the plotters wait until the end of the day to do it? What possible reason would they have had to wait seven hours after every other WTC building lay in ruins to finally put an end to the spectacle and bring the last WTC building crashing to the ground under the most obvious of circumstances? Not one of the world class researchers, writers and activists who’ve bravely reopened the books on 9/11 have offered any sensible speculation in regard to this urgent and lingering question, the first clue in what may be an entirely new way of looking at the strange last few hours of WTC 7’s dark life. The second clue is definitely the fires. It just doesn’t make sense. Every other aspect of the attacks was meticulously “covered” by the conspirators.

(Fig. 3) Another view of WTC 7’s wreckage looking south. The Verizon Building stands at right. (Fig. 2) The wreckage of WTC 7. 2 The dramatic and well planned flights of the jets into the Twin Towers, the ensuing structural damage and fires was, to most observers, convincing “cover” for what is commonly believed to be the real cause of these buildings’ destruction—pre-pla nted explosives (To some, this ploy may sound familiar. The very same scheme was played out in Oklahoma City when Timothy McVeigh’s crude fertilizer bomb provided “cover” for the explosive system planted within the Alfred P. Murrah Building, a fact confirmed by myriad reports that two of the bombs in the building were found intact and subsequently disarmed). But what happened to WTC 7? Even as late as 3PM, the building’s struggling fires were barely visible from outside the building. If the 9/11 conspirator’s odd intent was to demolish WTC 7 late in the afternoon, wouldn’t they have concocted a more believable scenario to “cover” its destruction? If fire was to be the preferred “cause” of its collapse wouldn’ t they have lit up WTC 7 like a roman candle to give this scheme at least a fighting chance? It’s hard to belie ve that what was essentially the coup de gras of the 9/11 psycho-drama received so little careful attention. But set tiny fires on two floors and ‘pull’ WTC 7 before millions of witnesses they did, and what’s been the result? Wide-spread suspicion and disbelief; so much so that many researchers consider the strange collapse of WTC 7 to be the Achilles’ heel of the 9/11 deception, and for good reason. Besides this plan’s general lunacy, a compelling array of evidence points instead to its likely alternative—that the 9/11 conspirators originally intended to demolish WTC 7 earlier in the day; probably when it was being upstaged by the dramatic collapses of the Twin Towers and was completely hidden from view under a thick cloud of debris. We could nick-name this phenomenon the “Marriot Vista Hotel” effect after the 33 story building that once stood between the Twin Towers. One of seven WTC complex buildings, it was completely destroyed when the towers collapsed, and then, for all intents and purposes, vanished into obscurity. It’s worth mentioning that some 9/11 researchers believe that dwelling on the more esoteric details of this complex conspiracy can distract us from more salient points, and to a certain extent I agree. But working to resolve the details of arguably the most dramatic and audacious mass-murder in human history cannot be condemned as long as care and discretion is used when presenting these points to the public. So, for what its worth, this is what I think really happened to the World Trade Center—and Building 7 in particular—on 9/11.

(Fig. 6) The North Tower’s debris cloud rises to almost twice the height of WTC 7. (Fig. 5) (Fig. 4) WTC 7 (arrow.) 3 First, the 9/11 conspirators—possibly operating out of Mayor Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM); a reinforced, self-contained emergency command retreat built on the 23rd floor of WTC 7 in 1999—orchestrated the collision of two Bo eing passenger jets into the World Trade Center Towers. The dramatic impacts caused fires that spread throughout the upper floors of both towers and allegedly resulted in significant structural damage to the buildings’ core columns (both would later be used to explain the buildings’ unprecedented collapses). The conspirators then turned their attention to the explosive demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7. The first step in this phase of the plan would be the arming and programming of the explosive system previously installed within the tower furthest from Building 7 and the OEM bunker; the safely distant South Tower or WTC 2. When this had been done, the conspirators then awaited the optimum moment for detonation, a time when the South Tower’s “collapse” would be reasonably believable to most people. When that moment finally arrived, the plotters brought the South Tower down in a dramatic progressive demolition that began on its upper floors and proceeded down, all the way to the ground. Some researchers have speculated that the conspirators demolished the South Tower first because the smoldering fires burning in its upper floors had begun to go out and any further delay in its destruction would make the fire-caused- the-collapse scenario appear less and less plausible. But this theory has always been just that, speculation, and certainly leaves room for other possibilities. And if the OEM bunker was indeed manned at this time, doesn’t it makes sense that the plotters would want to begin the demolition sequence by first destroying the tower that stood at a reasonably safe distance from the OEM shelter, not the one that loomed directly overhead? Isn’t it logical to assume that the kind of reinforcements so conveniently made to the OEM bunker just a year before 9/11 were designed to withstand the pulverized, ashen debris that rained down around WTC 7 from the first collapse but were never meant to bear up under the huge shards of steel and concrete that would be blown horizontally from the tower that stood only a block away? After the South Tower had been obliterated, the conspirators then put their newfound expertise in

4 the demolition of mega-high-rises to work on the North Tower. But instead of proceeding with their plans from the OEM bunker in WTC 7, they chose this moment to exit Building 7 altogether and prepare for the near simultaneous demolition of the North Tower and WTC 7 from a secondary location. This back-up operations center could have been anywhere. All that they needed was a triggering mechanism to initiate the demolition sequence; something perhaps as simple as a cell-phone or laptop. “…they chose this moment to exit Building 7 altoget her and prepare for the near simultaneous demolition of the North Tower and WTC 7 from a secondary location.” (Fig.7) WTC 7’s tiny fires photographed at approximately 3 PM. Once the conspirators had safely repositioned themselves, they again awaited the optimum moment to proceed. When they were ready, the plotters initiated the second demolition sequence by pushing the button on what had just become the safely distant North Tower, its catastrophic collapse a carbon copy of the South Tower’s complete and symmetrical plunge to earth. As the North Tower fell, a massive cloud of debris shot into the sky, quickly rising to almost twice the height of WTC 7 (figs. 4-6) and smothering lower Manhattan. Then, a minute or two later, when Building 7 was completely hidden from view and the world’s attention was distracted by t he unthinkable destruction of the Twin Towers, the conspirators triggered WTC 7’s explosive system as well. As it fell, the thick cloud of debris enshrouding it would completely conceal any signs that Building 7 was being intentionally demolished. After the smoke had cleared and the events of the day had been relegated to history, official claims that Tower One’s plummeting debris impacted the electrical substation and diesel tanks located throughout Building 7—causing massive internal explosions that kicked its feet out from under it—would have made good sense to most observers (in the absence of visual evidence to the contrary) and done much to provide satisfactory “cover” for the real cause of the building’s destruction: pre- planted explosives. In the end, Building 7’s suspicious collapse would become just an afterthought in the minds of a stunned public. Few would have given another thought to the demise of this, the last of seven WTC buildings to be completely destroyed by “Islamic extremists” on September 11.th (Fig. 8) Detail of fig.7. Small fires smolder on floors 7 and 12.

(Fig. 9) WTC 7’s east face. 5 But, as posited above, Murphy was working overtime that day. Incredibly, the demolition system in WTC 7 simply did not respond as intended and the building defiantly remained intact, at least for another few hours. After this stunning set-back, the plotters must have debated fiercely about what to do next. But, in the end, it was clear—Building 7 had to go. Besides possibly hosting a clandestine control center for the attacks, who knows what ghosts haunted WTC 7 and the WTC complex in general—buildings that had been the Manhattan HQ of the Secret Service, ATF, FBI, IRS, DoD, SEC, CIA, Customs House and a long list of the World’s foremost banks and corporations for the past thirty years. Building 7 was also the only WTC building left standing (and the only one rebuilt since 9/11) making the plan to level (and then upgrade?) the entire complex incomplete. Remember, it can’t be said enough: despite their close pro ximity to many other buildings, the only structures entirely destroyed on 9/11 were all seven of the WTC buildings. Clearly the complete destruction of the WTC complex was a subplot within the overall 9/11 scheme; an outdated, inefficient dinosaur that had, according to many sources, become a blight on lower Manhattan, was in need of the ultimate makeover (and if a few billion bucks could be made on the side in a massive insurance fraud scheme, so much the better). “Clearly the complete destruction of the WTC comple x was a subplot within the overall 9/11 scheme…” So, after the smoke had settled and it became clear that WTC 7 was alive and well, the conspirators regrouped. Naturally, their first priority would be to quarantine the area and rid it of any uninvited guests. FDNY fire chief Frank Fellini said that firefighters were evacuated from the area around WTC 7 “five or six hours” before WTC 7 finally did collapse after having been specifically warned of this inevitability. In a world that has never seen the collapse of a steel-framed building from fire (except for that morning), the prophetic nature of this order is intriguing enough, but where did the order come from? You’d think that it would have come from the FDNY, but no. Captain Michael Currid, president of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association, said that “someone from the city’s Offi ce of Emergency Management” gave the order to clear the area around WTC 7 of personnel shortly after the towers had collapsed. After Building 7’s perimeter had been put in lockdown, the conspirators then scrambled to bring the demolition system in WTC 7 back online. Next, a new scenario had to be concocted; again, to “cover” what would otherwise be the forthcom ing but completely inexplicable collapse of WTC 7. The fire-caused-the-collapse ruse was likely their first choice; it was the same scheme that they used for the towers earlier that day. The question is, what was the source of the marginal fires we saw burning in Building 7? Two possibilities logically present themselves; the fires were intentionally set by the plotters who reentered WTC 7 well after the towers had collapsed or they were the by-product of debris damage to Building 7’s ground floors. We’ll examine the latter possibility in a moment.

(Fig. 10) The damage sustained by WTC 7’s southeast corner. The Verizon Building’s roof can be seen in the lower right-hand corner. 6 If we are to consider the theory that the perpetrators did spark additional fires in WTC 7 to “cover” its forthcoming collapse, the following scenario may make sense. Circumstances being what they were, it may have been well into the afternoon before they finally made the decision to reenter WTC 7, climb to the 7th floor and begin setting fires. Floor 7 was the location of the OEM’s emergency generators and was presumably secured and accessible only by OEM personnel. Next, they ascended to floor 12, one of three floors occupied by the SEC, and sparked blazes in this location as well. This was possibly done to eliminate incriminating evidence of sprawling white collar crime in case the demo-system failed again. WTC 7 (like the Murrah Building) was reportedly the storage facility for millions of files on open investigations into money laundering, terrorism and organized crime, all of which have demonstrable links to US intelligence. A New York Post article dated September 12th, 2001, specifically stated that the destruction of SEC offices in WTC 7 would put “massive” IPO probes in jeopardy and said, of the destruction of evidence, “It’s devastating. They’ll ha ve to scrap many cases and start from scratch on others.” When the explosive system in WTC 7 was finally brought back online, all the plotters had to do then was wait for the fires to build—but, as we all saw, they never did (figs. 7, 8 and 9). Despite their best efforts and training, the conspirators were completely unprepared for this contingency, and it showed. Even by late afternoon, the fires in WTC 7 were still marginal and struggling. Unlike the Twin Towers, these fires were oxygen starved by windows that hadn’t been shattered and couldn’t be opened. What a mistake to think of the 9/11 conspirators as criminal masterminds. Imagine their state of mind as they watched their plan to destroy one of the world’s most famous landmarks (and, of course, violently murder thousands of innocent people) unfold before their eyes. Even the most jaded covert operative wouldn’t likely remain un-rattled after having perpetrated such an outrage. And don’t forget, they had very similar performance problems in OK City. Certainly we can find Deepthroat’s words to Bob Woodward (in relation to yet another botched “op”) encouraging; “Truth is, these aren’t very bright guys and things got out of hand.” But—despite the fact that the fires ne ver caught on as hoped—for the conspirators, the clock was ticking; a burgeoning army of firefighters and rescue workers were descending on Ground Zero. To the 9/11 cabal, it was then or never, so down came Building 7 at 5:25 PM, its suspicious collapse to be sanitized by our megalo-media, a propaganda machine that could be relied upon to play ball after the smoke had cleared. And play ball it did. Needless to say, any paradigm shift of this magnitude relating to an event as grave as 9/11 will likely undergo intense scrutiny, as it should. But I do believe that the available facts indicate this alternative. The only point to support the theory that the plotters kept WTC 7 up all day

(Fig. 11) Diagram showing the radius of debris damage from the collapse of the Twin Towers. WTC 7 and the Verizon Building stand side by side at top. 7 long for some unfathomable reason is that it did stay up all day long. But just because something happened, it’s certainly no guarantee that it was meant to happen. 9/11 researchers have often cited the OEM bunker in WTC 7 as a possible front for the conspirator’s operations center. Although this theory hasn’t been proven conclusively, the facts supporting it are very intriguing. The timing of the construction of a reinforced facility (shortly before the most dramatic “terror” hit in history) with a bird’s eye view of what was obviously a conspiratorial operation seems oddly convenient in retrospect. But the fact that the location chosen for the brand new facility had been acknowledged by experts as the single most likely terrorist target in the western hemisphere is particularly suspicious, especially when the WTC had already been struck once in 1993. This point was revisited, though half-heartedly, by the 9/11 Commission who understandably questioned the logic of locating an emergency command retreat where it would likely be destroyed (as it was) in the event of an actual attack. But another odd fact about the OEM bunker was addressed in an article in the NY Daily News that described the command post in WTC 7 as “the first-e ver aerie-style bunker,” the vast majority (or, according to The Daily News, all) of similar facilities naturally having been built underground and well removed from potential hot spots. Richard Sheirer, the Police Commissioner’s Chief of Staff, testified to 9/11 commissioners that he had warned OEM officials that such a location could render the facility inaccessible (and the elevators inoperable) should the building sustain damage in an attack or natural disaster. These and other suspicious facts about the OEM bunker have given 9/11 researchers much to consider. Although these points may not prove conclusively that this OEM facility was really a nest of conspirators, they would appear to explain the poor choice of locations for a command retreat that oddly rewrote the rules set in place for similar facilities in the past. As mentioned above, it is possible that the conspirators never did reenter WTC 7 to set fires but opted instead to just allow the “debris impact” fires to spread. But this theory gets very complex very quickly. A NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report on the collapses of the WTC buildings includes photos that appear to show significant damage to the lowest floors of the southwest corner of WTC 7 (Fig. 10). This damage may extend across the full length of WTC 7’s south face but the few available photos of this area, all taken from disadvantageous angles and obscured by smoke, cannot confirm this possibility. Incredibly, no unobstructed photos of the south face of WTC 7 have ever been released to the public (much like the video surveillance tapes of the Pentagon hit), a wholly suspicious development in and of itself considering how vital this evidence is to those who support the official story. NIST also claimed that the North Tower’s plummeting wreckage “sco oped out” about 25% of the bottom third of WTC 7. How NIST scientists determined that this catastrophic damage was done to

The Verizon Building WTC 7 WTC 6 The North Tower (Fig. 12) The south face of the Verizon Building stands in near pristine condition at upper left. The lack of damage to its façade seems inconsistent with the heavy damage officials claim had impacted Building 7 (right). 8 Building 7 is anyone’s guess since, as mentioned, no photographic evidence is available to confirm it. The debris-caused-catastrophic-damage-and-fires-to-WTC 7 theory would appear to make sense were it not for the strange lack of damage to a building right next door that logically should have sustained similar damage. Photos of the Verizon Building (standing just across a side street to the west of WTC 7) clearly show that it sustained, at best, only light damage. Despite suffering one or two minor puncture wounds, presumably from stray girders, the building remained virtually unscathed by the debris that had apparently “scooped out” a quarter of WTC 7’s total depth. Site plans (fig.11) of the area confirm that debris from the collapsing North Tower should have impacted both buildings equally. But look at these aerial photos of the Verizon Building’s south face (figs. 12 and 13), especially its sharp southeast corner (directly opposite WTC 7’s heavily damaged southwest corner); it stands in near pristine condition—not a nick or a scratch on it. What force c ould so heavily impact WTC 7 and yet leave the adjacent Verizon Building virtually untouched? Some might argue that the buildings were constructed of different materials, but one would think that any wreckage that allegedly caused such profound damage to WTC 7 would surely have left its mark on its cozy neighbor, no matter what the buildings were made of. Does it really make sense that falling wreckage from the collapsing North Tower magically veered off towards WTC 7 and away from the Verizon Building or does the damage to Building 7’s lower floors and the ensuing fires within tell a very different story about what was at work in Building 7? More to the point, does the damage to WTC 7 provide us with a clue that there was perhaps a third possible cause of the fires in WTC 7; that, just like the Murrah Building in OK City, a partially detonated explosive system may have failed to complete its sequence? Explosive demolitions typically begin on ground floors and proceed upward. And which makes more sense, that the smoke billowing out of the wound in WTC 7’s south face (fig. 14) was the result of impact damage from stray debris or a hot explosion from within? Is this why no clear photos of Building 7’s south face have ever been released to the public; because they’d show that significant amounts of debris never reached WTC 7 in the first place and that the front of Building 7 was actually blown out by an explosion, not in by debris? This idea, that wreckage falling onto structures automatically sets them on fire, is absurd. The South Tower fell right onto the North Tower, and yet no fires in the North Tower’s lower floors were ever photographed or reported. Photos of WTC Buildings 5 and 6 completely engulfed in flames seem suspicious in this light and seem to point instead to arson. And those who argue that a tsunami of debris hit WTC 7, struck the diesel fuel tanks and/or electrical substation in its belly The North Tower

(Fig. 13) Another aerial view of the Verizon Building and the remains of WTC 6 and WTC 7. 9 seem out of luck when the debris impact theory appears to have so little plausibility to begin with. Lacking insider confirmation, we may never know the complete story about what happened to World Trade Center Building 7 on the afternoon of 9/11. But its paltry fires just don’t seem consistent with the kind of well-crafted plans executed earlier in the day. What we saw instead was a virtual replay of what happened in Oklahoma City; the incomplete detonation of a pre- planted demolition system in a highly secure government building housing military, financial and intelligence agencies. In addition, isn’t it odd that the FDNY seemingly just gave up on such an exceedingly important and valuable building as WTC 7, one that had only marginal fires burning within? Wouldn’t the conspirators have preferred wrapping things up in one fell swoop that morning rather than prolonging the spectacle any longer than necessary? And the bewildering notion— hinted at by one or two 9/11 theorists—that the conspirato rs spent the day in the OEM bunker “orchestrating the aftermath” of the attacks in the uppe r floors of a burning building is really stretching reason to the breaking point. “What we saw instead was a virtual replay of what h appened in Oklahoma City; the incomplete detonation of a pre-planted demolition system in a highly secure government building…” As for Larry Silverstein’s cryptic remarks about ‘pulling’ Building 7 (originally aired on a PBS documentary in 2002), well, look at it this way: a building that Silverstein owned inexplicably “collapses” in what was obviously an intent ional demolition at the end of the most infamous day in American history. As the months passed, he had to have become the focus of mounting suspicions about the strange death of his building and likely became desperate to offer something in the way of an explanation to a doubtful public. All he needed was the right pulpit. For a wealthy and well-connected man like Silverstein, finagling an interview on a PBS documentary may not be as hard as it seems. Using Karl Rove- like sleight of hand, Silverstein’s well-oiled comments offer us a vague accounting of the anomaly delivered to us on an almost subconscious level. However subtle this attempt may have been, his simple and concise phrasing—that “...they made that decision to ‘pull’ and we watched the building collapse” —has impressed many of the finest 9/11 researchers as being clear and unambiguous, and for good reason.