07-02-2016, 10:15 AM
Stunning Video of WTC 7's Damaged South Face
Discovered on a 9/11 Truth Debunking Website
A short ABC News video from 9/11 reveals shocking new details about the
damage World Trade Center Building 7 allegedly sustained from the
collapse of the North Tower.
Jeremy Baker
(May 8, 2008) A short video clip from ABC News recently discovered on a
9/11 Truth debunking website provides the best view yet of the damage
WTC 7 allegedly sustained from the collapse of the North Tower on 9/11.
Incredibly, this video clearly shows an
enormous gash that extends down the
center of WTC 7's facade from its
roofline all the way to the ground.
Authorities have always attributed the
damage on Building 7's south face to
heavy debris impact from the collapse
of the North Tower at 10:28 AM on 9/11.
But facts recorded since the attacks
strongly challenge this assertion.
Even more startling is the fact that
absolutely no fire can be seen
anywhere in the building. Also absent
are the thick black columns of smoke
typically seen p ouring out of burning
buildings. The authorities claim that debris from the collapse of the North
Tower ignited expansive fires that spread throughout the entire building.
The debris damage and fires are the official explanation for WTC 7's
inexplicable collapse.
Some theorists postulate that most of the smoke we do see in the video is
from fires that gutted the low-rise building WTC 6 (fig. 2) standing at the
base of Building 7. Wind from the northwest made the smoke from this fire
rise in front of WTC 7 and cling to its face. To some, this may have created
the impression that the smoke was actually coming from Building 7.
The ABC News video was clearly shot after the enormous debris cloud that
smothered lower Manhattan (fig. 3) had finally dissipated. This means that
(Fig. 1) A composite photo captured from the
ABC News video shows no fire whatsoever in
WTC 7. It also shows an enormous gash
(arrows) that extends from the building's
roof line all the way to the ground.
what we see in the short clip took place long
after WTC 7 was allegedly struck by debris. If,
as the authorities claim, debris did spark fires
that built to a crescendo throughout the day,
surely they would have been visible by the
time this video was shot.
The only photos that do show fire in the
building were taken later that afternoon.
Some show small, barely visible pockets of fire
burning on 2 or 3 floors of the 47 storey
building (fig. 4). But these are photos of the
north side of the building; oddly, no photos or
video of the south face have been seen by
the public until now. The origin of these fires is
still unclear.
The fact that photos and video of WTC 7's south
face have been unavailable to the public is intriguing when you consider
how central this evidence is to the official story. If fire did bring WTC 7
down, it had to have been one of the most intense high-rise fires in history.
It was also the last act in the most dramatic and shocking television
spectacle of all time. Certainly this enormous building being gutted by fire
would have attracted TV cameras and photographers by the score.
In addition, 9/11 truth researchers have all
but proven that, given its distance from the
North Tower (one full city block), WTC 7
could not have been heavily impacted by
wreckage. This point is supported by the
fact that two buildings flanking WTC 7 (fig.
5) suffered little or no damage at all by the
same wave of destruction that authorities
claim had caused catastrophic structural
damage and fires to WTC 7damage that
ultimately caused it to collapse seven
hours later.
Several stray girders hurled laterally from the collapses of the Twin Towers
struck other buildings that morning, but the damage they caused was
minimal. It was also rough and irregular (fig. 6). The gouge in WTC 7 was
long, straight and cleana narrow, even channel that runs all the way up
the building. The force required to gouge this enormous gash in Building
7's side represents a source of destructive power far greater than anything
(Fig. 2) Smoke poured out of the
low-rise building WTC 6 and rose up
in front of the much taller WTC 7
all day long.
(Fig. 3) The enormous debris cloud that
slowly rose over Manhattan had entirely
dissipated by the time the ABC News
video was recorded.
that was present that day and simply could not have been caused by
falling debris.
An exhaustive study by NIST (the National Institute of Standards and
Technology), which has yet to release its final report on WTC 7, briefly
mentioned the gash in their "current
working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7.
NIST describes the gashin highly
technical jargon and unaccompanied by
photosas an "initial local failure" that
occurred "below floor thirteen" that
"[progressed] up to the east penthouse,"
or roof; confirmation that it does indeed
run up the entire building's face.
The World Trade Center Task Force
debriefed hundreds of firefighters and
rescue workers after the attacks and
posted these interviews on the web. Some
of these eyewitnesses described WTC 7 as
being "completely involved in fire, all forty
seven stories," having "heavy fire and
smoke" on "nearly all floors" and that
"everybody was expecting [WTC 7] to come down." These comments
seem incredible when you compare them to photos like the one in figure
4, not to mention the ABC News video. But could it be that what these
witnesses actually saw was smoke, lots of smoke, clinging to the entire
expanse of WTC 7's leeward south face?
It's easy to understand how even
trained professionals might make this
mistake when you examine photos like
the one in figure 7. WTC 6's fires grew
more intense throughout the day and
produced most of the thick black
smoke we see in the photo. WTC 7 had
begun to contribute some smoke of its
own from the miniscule fires that
appeared in the building later that
afternoon but remember, it was
practically a mantra from defenders of
the official account that intense,
catastrophic fires were raging in the
upper floors of the Twin Towers, but all
Tower
(Fig. 5) The Verizon Building and the U.S. Post
Office Building (off camera to the upper right)
should have been decimated by the same
wave of debris that allegedly struck WTC 7.
Instead, both buildings stand in near
pristine condition.
(Fig. 4) A photo of WTC 7's north face
taken at 3 PM shows fires so small
they are barely visible from outside
of the enormous building.
WTC 7
The Verizon
Building
WTC 6
The North Tower
we ever really saw was smoke; some minor pockets of fire, yes, but mostly
lots and lots of thick, black smoke.
It's also understandable that talk of WTC 7 being in danger of "imminent
collapse" was common in these accounts. Rumors of this highly unlikely
"inevitability" were circulating down from FDNY brass to rescue personnel
all day long. Firefighters and rescue workers repeating what they'd been
told by their superiors isn't surprising.
The revelations revealed in the ABC News
video1) the lack of fire in the building, 2)
the absence of catastrophic debris damage
and 3) the mystery of the dramatic gouge
running up the building's south faceare
certainly the priority issues in this story. Points
1 and 2 seem significant enough as
dramatic refutations of the official account,
but speculation as to what may have
caused the hollowed out shaft on WTC 7's
face is another matter altogether. Here is
one possible explanation for this extremely
bizarre phenomenon:
Few points have reached greater
consensus among 9/11 truth researchers
than the belief that WTC 7 was brought
down in a carefully prepared explosive
demolition. Some think that the 9/11 conspirators first pushed the button
on the building just after the collapse of the North Tower when WTC 7 was
well hidden under a thick cloud of debris. When the explosive sequence
failed, WTC 7 remained standing. Finally, late in the day, the problem was
resolved and Building 7 was brought down in an obvious controlled
demolition.
Could the straight, clean gouge in WTC 7's south face be an indication
that a line of explosives running up the center of the building detonated
but then stalled? Buildings typically have their centers blown out first when
they are being demolished and this kind of failure is certainly not without
precedent. Though this theory is surely speculative, is it unreasonable to
ask the question: What else could have caused such a bizarre wound in
the south face of WTC 7?
In figure 8, we see a photo of the remains of the Murrah Building in
Oklahoma City. Many newscasts reported and authorities confirmed that,
(Fig. 6) An example of girder damage to
The Bankers Trust Building. It stood much
closer to the South Tower than WTC 7 did
to the North Tower, but it wasn't
"scooped out" by debris.
after the attack, two unexploded bombs had been found strapped to
key core columns in the building, Timothy McVeigh's crude fertilizer bomb
having been just the cover story for the real cause of the building's
destruction, pre-planted explosives.
In the photo mentioned above, the arrow indicates a hollowed out shaft
eerily similar in appearance to the one we see on the face of WTC 7 in the
ABC News video. Although the Murrah Building
was not nearly as tall as WTC 7 and therefore
cannot provide a perfect comparison, the
gouge left in its carcass does seem to loan
credence to speculation that the incomplete
detonation of an explosive sequence in a
steel-framed building might very well leave a
vertical shaft of destruction much like the one
we see on the face of WTC 7.
Listen to this live, first hand account by a CNN
reporter on the scene at Ground Zero: "…at a
quarter to 11:00 [just minutes after the collapse
of the North Tower] there was another collapse
or explosion…a firefighter who rushed by us
estimated that fifty stories [WTC 7 was 47
stories] went down. The street filled with smoke.
It was like a forest fire roaring down a canyon."
Could this uncanny description from a firefighter be a hasty reference to
the botched attempt to demolish Building 7? The time frame is perfect.
The few explosives that did detonate would certainly have sounded like a
"collapse or explosion" or a "forest fire roaring down a canyon." A vertical
column of explosives blasting out the full
height of the building could very well have
given someone the impression that "fifty
stories" were going down and would
certainly have filled the street with smoke.
What else was going on at the time that fits
this very detailed description?
NIST's official collapse hypothesisthat
debris falling from the North Tower kicked
out central vertical supports that caused a
cascade reaction that hollowed out a
narrow shaft that ran straight up the entire
face of the building that ultimately
compromised the structure to the point of
(Fig. 8) An aerial photo of the Murrah
Building bombing shows a hollowed out
vertical shaft (arrow) that runs up the
entire height of the building, much like
the gouge in WTC 7's south face.
(Fig. 7) WTC 7 did produce some smoke
towards the end of the day, but most of
it came from WTC 6. Smoke hugging
the face of WTC 7 creates the illusion
that the building was fully involved.
collapse seven hours laterseems, at best, implausible. NIST also fully
acknowledges that this hypothesis is pure speculation. But when
contrasted with many other facts in evidence that appear to support a
very different collapse scenario for Building 7, these assertions from NIST
quickly lose what little credibility they may have had to begin with.
As if all this weren't enough, in a speech in the spring of 2008, Larry
Silversteinthe Manhattan developer who owned Building 7 since the
80's and who took control of the entire WTC complex just six weeks
before 9/11stated as fact that the antenna that stood atop the North
Tower caused the gash in WTC 7! According to Silverstein, as the North
Tower fell, the antenna sliced through Building 7 and severed fuel lines
that caused diesel fuel to leak, catch fire and consume the building.
Of course, this ridiculous claim stands in direct contradiction to NIST's
collapse hypothesis and is easily refuted by video evidence. Despite his
own astounding assertions to the contrary, Silverstein considers NIST's
voluminous studies to be conclusive and disparages those who do not.
Amazingly, this kind of disagreement among various defenders of the
official account on key issues regarding the attacks is not uncommon.
Photographic evidence that WTC 7 was
not heavily impacted by debris or
ravaged by fire but was instead
destroyed with explosives would
contradict everything the government
has told us about its unlikely collapse and
open up a Pandora's Box of other
disturbing questions. It's understandable
that photos and video disproving the
authority's claims might be strictly
suppressed. Is it an exaggeration to say
that the lack of video evidence in regard
to the strange collapse of WTC 7 is almost
as disturbing a 9/11 anomaly as the lack
of video surveillance footage from the
Pentagon strikea visual resource one
would think must exist in abundance considering the high security status of
one the most monitored military buildings in the world?
Whatever the case may be, the video from ABC Newsdiscovered,
ironically, on a 9/11 truth debunking websiteraises many troubling
questions about the veracity of the official account. Those who have
pursued the issue of insider complicity in the attacks will undoubtedly
(Fig. 9) An NYPD photo indicates the
point where the enormous gouge on
WTC 7's south face meets its roof line.
scrutinize this bizarre new development and try to decipher its connection
to broader theories about what may or may not have happened at the
World Trade Center on the morning of September 11,th 2001.
[In the spring of 2003, Jeremy Baker wrote the original story about WTC 7 controller Larry
Silverstein and his comments about pulling' WTC 7 broadcasted on a PBS documentary.
He has also organized 9/11 events in Denver, Boulder and Seattle and his articles have
appeared in Global Outlook magazine and on many popular 9/11 websites. He lives in
Seattle.]
For much more on this topic, read "Last Building Standing, New perspectives on the
strange last hours of WTC 7's dark life." Find it at:
microsoft-word-last-building-standing-comp
Find the ABC News video at:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...3&hl=en-CA
Find still photos and the composite photo captured from the ABC News video on the
9/11 debunking website where they were originally discovered:
http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm
The NIST report's "current working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7" can be found at:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/relea...62907.html
A video of WeAreChange's confrontation of Larry Silverstein is at:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EtPC0W4HII8
Thanks to David Ray Griffin
For the photos in the article see pdf attachment.
Discovered on a 9/11 Truth Debunking Website
A short ABC News video from 9/11 reveals shocking new details about the
damage World Trade Center Building 7 allegedly sustained from the
collapse of the North Tower.
Jeremy Baker
(May 8, 2008) A short video clip from ABC News recently discovered on a
9/11 Truth debunking website provides the best view yet of the damage
WTC 7 allegedly sustained from the collapse of the North Tower on 9/11.
Incredibly, this video clearly shows an
enormous gash that extends down the
center of WTC 7's facade from its
roofline all the way to the ground.
Authorities have always attributed the
damage on Building 7's south face to
heavy debris impact from the collapse
of the North Tower at 10:28 AM on 9/11.
But facts recorded since the attacks
strongly challenge this assertion.
Even more startling is the fact that
absolutely no fire can be seen
anywhere in the building. Also absent
are the thick black columns of smoke
typically seen p ouring out of burning
buildings. The authorities claim that debris from the collapse of the North
Tower ignited expansive fires that spread throughout the entire building.
The debris damage and fires are the official explanation for WTC 7's
inexplicable collapse.
Some theorists postulate that most of the smoke we do see in the video is
from fires that gutted the low-rise building WTC 6 (fig. 2) standing at the
base of Building 7. Wind from the northwest made the smoke from this fire
rise in front of WTC 7 and cling to its face. To some, this may have created
the impression that the smoke was actually coming from Building 7.
The ABC News video was clearly shot after the enormous debris cloud that
smothered lower Manhattan (fig. 3) had finally dissipated. This means that
(Fig. 1) A composite photo captured from the
ABC News video shows no fire whatsoever in
WTC 7. It also shows an enormous gash
(arrows) that extends from the building's
roof line all the way to the ground.
what we see in the short clip took place long
after WTC 7 was allegedly struck by debris. If,
as the authorities claim, debris did spark fires
that built to a crescendo throughout the day,
surely they would have been visible by the
time this video was shot.
The only photos that do show fire in the
building were taken later that afternoon.
Some show small, barely visible pockets of fire
burning on 2 or 3 floors of the 47 storey
building (fig. 4). But these are photos of the
north side of the building; oddly, no photos or
video of the south face have been seen by
the public until now. The origin of these fires is
still unclear.
The fact that photos and video of WTC 7's south
face have been unavailable to the public is intriguing when you consider
how central this evidence is to the official story. If fire did bring WTC 7
down, it had to have been one of the most intense high-rise fires in history.
It was also the last act in the most dramatic and shocking television
spectacle of all time. Certainly this enormous building being gutted by fire
would have attracted TV cameras and photographers by the score.
In addition, 9/11 truth researchers have all
but proven that, given its distance from the
North Tower (one full city block), WTC 7
could not have been heavily impacted by
wreckage. This point is supported by the
fact that two buildings flanking WTC 7 (fig.
5) suffered little or no damage at all by the
same wave of destruction that authorities
claim had caused catastrophic structural
damage and fires to WTC 7damage that
ultimately caused it to collapse seven
hours later.
Several stray girders hurled laterally from the collapses of the Twin Towers
struck other buildings that morning, but the damage they caused was
minimal. It was also rough and irregular (fig. 6). The gouge in WTC 7 was
long, straight and cleana narrow, even channel that runs all the way up
the building. The force required to gouge this enormous gash in Building
7's side represents a source of destructive power far greater than anything
(Fig. 2) Smoke poured out of the
low-rise building WTC 6 and rose up
in front of the much taller WTC 7
all day long.
(Fig. 3) The enormous debris cloud that
slowly rose over Manhattan had entirely
dissipated by the time the ABC News
video was recorded.
that was present that day and simply could not have been caused by
falling debris.
An exhaustive study by NIST (the National Institute of Standards and
Technology), which has yet to release its final report on WTC 7, briefly
mentioned the gash in their "current
working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7.
NIST describes the gashin highly
technical jargon and unaccompanied by
photosas an "initial local failure" that
occurred "below floor thirteen" that
"[progressed] up to the east penthouse,"
or roof; confirmation that it does indeed
run up the entire building's face.
The World Trade Center Task Force
debriefed hundreds of firefighters and
rescue workers after the attacks and
posted these interviews on the web. Some
of these eyewitnesses described WTC 7 as
being "completely involved in fire, all forty
seven stories," having "heavy fire and
smoke" on "nearly all floors" and that
"everybody was expecting [WTC 7] to come down." These comments
seem incredible when you compare them to photos like the one in figure
4, not to mention the ABC News video. But could it be that what these
witnesses actually saw was smoke, lots of smoke, clinging to the entire
expanse of WTC 7's leeward south face?
It's easy to understand how even
trained professionals might make this
mistake when you examine photos like
the one in figure 7. WTC 6's fires grew
more intense throughout the day and
produced most of the thick black
smoke we see in the photo. WTC 7 had
begun to contribute some smoke of its
own from the miniscule fires that
appeared in the building later that
afternoon but remember, it was
practically a mantra from defenders of
the official account that intense,
catastrophic fires were raging in the
upper floors of the Twin Towers, but all
Tower
(Fig. 5) The Verizon Building and the U.S. Post
Office Building (off camera to the upper right)
should have been decimated by the same
wave of debris that allegedly struck WTC 7.
Instead, both buildings stand in near
pristine condition.
(Fig. 4) A photo of WTC 7's north face
taken at 3 PM shows fires so small
they are barely visible from outside
of the enormous building.
WTC 7
The Verizon
Building
WTC 6
The North Tower
we ever really saw was smoke; some minor pockets of fire, yes, but mostly
lots and lots of thick, black smoke.
It's also understandable that talk of WTC 7 being in danger of "imminent
collapse" was common in these accounts. Rumors of this highly unlikely
"inevitability" were circulating down from FDNY brass to rescue personnel
all day long. Firefighters and rescue workers repeating what they'd been
told by their superiors isn't surprising.
The revelations revealed in the ABC News
video1) the lack of fire in the building, 2)
the absence of catastrophic debris damage
and 3) the mystery of the dramatic gouge
running up the building's south faceare
certainly the priority issues in this story. Points
1 and 2 seem significant enough as
dramatic refutations of the official account,
but speculation as to what may have
caused the hollowed out shaft on WTC 7's
face is another matter altogether. Here is
one possible explanation for this extremely
bizarre phenomenon:
Few points have reached greater
consensus among 9/11 truth researchers
than the belief that WTC 7 was brought
down in a carefully prepared explosive
demolition. Some think that the 9/11 conspirators first pushed the button
on the building just after the collapse of the North Tower when WTC 7 was
well hidden under a thick cloud of debris. When the explosive sequence
failed, WTC 7 remained standing. Finally, late in the day, the problem was
resolved and Building 7 was brought down in an obvious controlled
demolition.
Could the straight, clean gouge in WTC 7's south face be an indication
that a line of explosives running up the center of the building detonated
but then stalled? Buildings typically have their centers blown out first when
they are being demolished and this kind of failure is certainly not without
precedent. Though this theory is surely speculative, is it unreasonable to
ask the question: What else could have caused such a bizarre wound in
the south face of WTC 7?
In figure 8, we see a photo of the remains of the Murrah Building in
Oklahoma City. Many newscasts reported and authorities confirmed that,
(Fig. 6) An example of girder damage to
The Bankers Trust Building. It stood much
closer to the South Tower than WTC 7 did
to the North Tower, but it wasn't
"scooped out" by debris.
after the attack, two unexploded bombs had been found strapped to
key core columns in the building, Timothy McVeigh's crude fertilizer bomb
having been just the cover story for the real cause of the building's
destruction, pre-planted explosives.
In the photo mentioned above, the arrow indicates a hollowed out shaft
eerily similar in appearance to the one we see on the face of WTC 7 in the
ABC News video. Although the Murrah Building
was not nearly as tall as WTC 7 and therefore
cannot provide a perfect comparison, the
gouge left in its carcass does seem to loan
credence to speculation that the incomplete
detonation of an explosive sequence in a
steel-framed building might very well leave a
vertical shaft of destruction much like the one
we see on the face of WTC 7.
Listen to this live, first hand account by a CNN
reporter on the scene at Ground Zero: "…at a
quarter to 11:00 [just minutes after the collapse
of the North Tower] there was another collapse
or explosion…a firefighter who rushed by us
estimated that fifty stories [WTC 7 was 47
stories] went down. The street filled with smoke.
It was like a forest fire roaring down a canyon."
Could this uncanny description from a firefighter be a hasty reference to
the botched attempt to demolish Building 7? The time frame is perfect.
The few explosives that did detonate would certainly have sounded like a
"collapse or explosion" or a "forest fire roaring down a canyon." A vertical
column of explosives blasting out the full
height of the building could very well have
given someone the impression that "fifty
stories" were going down and would
certainly have filled the street with smoke.
What else was going on at the time that fits
this very detailed description?
NIST's official collapse hypothesisthat
debris falling from the North Tower kicked
out central vertical supports that caused a
cascade reaction that hollowed out a
narrow shaft that ran straight up the entire
face of the building that ultimately
compromised the structure to the point of
(Fig. 8) An aerial photo of the Murrah
Building bombing shows a hollowed out
vertical shaft (arrow) that runs up the
entire height of the building, much like
the gouge in WTC 7's south face.
(Fig. 7) WTC 7 did produce some smoke
towards the end of the day, but most of
it came from WTC 6. Smoke hugging
the face of WTC 7 creates the illusion
that the building was fully involved.
collapse seven hours laterseems, at best, implausible. NIST also fully
acknowledges that this hypothesis is pure speculation. But when
contrasted with many other facts in evidence that appear to support a
very different collapse scenario for Building 7, these assertions from NIST
quickly lose what little credibility they may have had to begin with.
As if all this weren't enough, in a speech in the spring of 2008, Larry
Silversteinthe Manhattan developer who owned Building 7 since the
80's and who took control of the entire WTC complex just six weeks
before 9/11stated as fact that the antenna that stood atop the North
Tower caused the gash in WTC 7! According to Silverstein, as the North
Tower fell, the antenna sliced through Building 7 and severed fuel lines
that caused diesel fuel to leak, catch fire and consume the building.
Of course, this ridiculous claim stands in direct contradiction to NIST's
collapse hypothesis and is easily refuted by video evidence. Despite his
own astounding assertions to the contrary, Silverstein considers NIST's
voluminous studies to be conclusive and disparages those who do not.
Amazingly, this kind of disagreement among various defenders of the
official account on key issues regarding the attacks is not uncommon.
Photographic evidence that WTC 7 was
not heavily impacted by debris or
ravaged by fire but was instead
destroyed with explosives would
contradict everything the government
has told us about its unlikely collapse and
open up a Pandora's Box of other
disturbing questions. It's understandable
that photos and video disproving the
authority's claims might be strictly
suppressed. Is it an exaggeration to say
that the lack of video evidence in regard
to the strange collapse of WTC 7 is almost
as disturbing a 9/11 anomaly as the lack
of video surveillance footage from the
Pentagon strikea visual resource one
would think must exist in abundance considering the high security status of
one the most monitored military buildings in the world?
Whatever the case may be, the video from ABC Newsdiscovered,
ironically, on a 9/11 truth debunking websiteraises many troubling
questions about the veracity of the official account. Those who have
pursued the issue of insider complicity in the attacks will undoubtedly
(Fig. 9) An NYPD photo indicates the
point where the enormous gouge on
WTC 7's south face meets its roof line.
scrutinize this bizarre new development and try to decipher its connection
to broader theories about what may or may not have happened at the
World Trade Center on the morning of September 11,th 2001.
[In the spring of 2003, Jeremy Baker wrote the original story about WTC 7 controller Larry
Silverstein and his comments about pulling' WTC 7 broadcasted on a PBS documentary.
He has also organized 9/11 events in Denver, Boulder and Seattle and his articles have
appeared in Global Outlook magazine and on many popular 9/11 websites. He lives in
Seattle.]
For much more on this topic, read "Last Building Standing, New perspectives on the
strange last hours of WTC 7's dark life." Find it at:
microsoft-word-last-building-standing-comp
Find the ABC News video at:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...3&hl=en-CA
Find still photos and the composite photo captured from the ABC News video on the
9/11 debunking website where they were originally discovered:
http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm
The NIST report's "current working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7" can be found at:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/relea...62907.html
A video of WeAreChange's confrontation of Larry Silverstein is at:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EtPC0W4HII8
Thanks to David Ray Griffin
For the photos in the article see pdf attachment.