VIDEO -- WTC 7: The Smoking Gun of 9/11

digg_url = '';

Explosive new video contains rare footage and a call to action.

Digg it here.

The interviews

are excellent. they provide powerful witness testimony.
Great job. Spread this link around -- and Digg it here:

Please Add to Story Text

The 9/11 Truth B-Team

2 New Yorkers have just

2 New Yorkers have just released their 9/11 Video Footage (New)

Full quality copy?

This is good DVD material...

Jumbo Jets Can Not Demolish Skyscrapers.

I'll get the full-quality

I'll get the full-quality original video file hosted soon and PM you the link. Anyone else can message me for the link also.


New View of 7

Zapruder film

This video is the Zapruder film of the 9/11 Truth movement!!!

Jon Gold, do you think it

Jon Gold, do you think it was controlled demo now? oh please, you don't have to answer that.

What the hell

more do we need for the media to cover this!


... from the Rothschilds ?
"Listen carefully now : DO NOT DESTROY OIL-WELLS" Dubya

This ain't the 60's, the

This ain't the 60's, the media is not going to come to our rescue, they are OWNED by Corporate America, ya know the ones who are profitting and getting more power over every aspect of our lives.

The 9/11 Truth B-Team

Remember: This Is War...

War for the minds, and hearts, of our fellow countrymen, for truth and justice regarding 9/11.

So approach it in a military mindset.

(1) Always attack with your greatest power.

In this case, this is WTC7.

If everyone in the 9/11 Truth Movement did nothing but show the video of the destruction of this 47-story skyscraper to everyone they know, there would be a dramatic change in the number of "Troofers" and "CDiots".

Don't you remember that look of amazement on the face of that person that you showed WTC7's video to?

You don't have to say anything. The building says it all. This is exactly why there has been an almost complete shutdown {until of late} of the viewing of this on MSM TV. The question of CD on WTC1 & 2 literally pales in comparison, even close to a point of distraction (try spending some time at and see some of the other side's army of highly educated, clever people with explanations surrounding WTC1 & 2...but they are weak regarding WTC7, their main thrust being, "We're waiting for the NIST report").

Understand, there are many excellent areas of 9/11 research and investigation, but regardless of what you may hold dear in these arguments (and the noble researchers involved in them), nothing comes close to WTC7.


Therefore, always go with your best weapon, your best shot, your FORCE OF POWER, if you want to win. To do otherwise is to divide your strength, and it tends toward failure (as in "divide and conquer").

(2) Conversely, never show weakness...ever. It is shunned in everything military.
This is exactly why "no-planes...holograms...TV fakery...exotic weaponry...etc." have no place in the 9/11 truth movement (at least not now while the war rages, especially with time apparently running out).

These types of arguments / theories (whether they be right or wrong) will always be DETRIMENTAL due to inherent, readily-seen weaknesses that the common man easily perceives. In this war to win people's minds, the fact that 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB...must be crystal clear.

WTC7 = 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB. This is no theory to me.

How about you?

Everything else of smoking-gun level seems not to even come close.

To win: >>> WTC7... >>> new, real Congressional investigation... >>> JUSTICE.

God help us to this end.

Craig T. Furlong

Don't agree with your choice.

I don't find WTC7 to be the best evidence.

For starters, what is the motive for bringing it down?

We don't know. We can only speculate.

Secondly, the perpetrators KNEW it wouldn't be hit by an airliner, thus exposing this operation to much criticism. This is a negative, an argument not to do it.

Third, while it looks like a CD, average people don't have the technical knowledge to say for certain, and so must rely upon competing experts for their opinion.

Fourth, there was significant damage to one side reported, and fires were present.

Making it a grey area, and not a cut and dry case. Not to mention they haven't exposed the people actually wiring it up and demolishing it.

I can find quite a number of other anomalies that are clearer, better supported by news reports, and covered up by the investigations.

The number one anomaly in my opinion is Shrub and his goat story in the middle of "America is under attack," after being evacuated from his hotel in Genoa for the exact same scenario.

Hopsicker has more info about an attempt on Bush's life at the hotel he was staying at in Sarasota, including a WARNING TO SECRET SERVICE 4 HOURS 38 MINUTES BEFORE THE HIJACKINGS.

And yet, Bush sat there. Secret Service sat there. America is under attack.

Refusal to perform the duties of Commander in Chief during an attack rises to the level of High Treason: it aided the enemy (whomever they were).

The Gordon Ross analysis of the towers collapsing is stronger -- to me -- than building 7. When floors "80 to 95" are "crushed" first, rather than the floors below the presumed structural failure, this is completely at odds with the mechanism put forth by the government.

The War Games are strong evidence of inside assistance to the attacks. Missing Rumsfeld, missing "approval" for fighter interceptors is strong evidence.

The money trail cover up is strong. The dancing israelis is strong. Cover up after cover up shows a deliberate pattern to hide the truth from the American public. That's strong.

I could go on, but everyone here has heard all this before.

"what is the motive for bringing it down?"

Here's one for starters...

below is from the NY Post (12-Sep-2001) regarding the SEC and WTC7 (click to enlarge)

New York Post - 12-Sep-2001


Marked on this image (click to enlarge) is the floor with initial eastfedge fire, floor 12 which happens to belong to the (you've guessed it - SEC)

Free Image Hosting at


FEMA Tenant Details

FEMA Fuel Distribution Data Shows NO Fuel stored on Eastern Edge or 12th Floor

Floor Positions

The impossiblility that the SEC fires on 12th and 13th floors could have been related to the diesel storage and day tanks, i.e.

No large tank was above the 3rd floor.

The small day tanks were (in gallons) : 275 on 5th floor, 275 on 7th floor, 275 on 8th floor and 50-100 on 9th floor.

The fires on the 12th and 13th SEC floors are in my opinion deliberate thermite / thermate based incendiary arson, which were set to destroy SEC evidence.


I'm sure there are other reasons...

Best wishes


Motive is the SEC records amongst others, plus most likely Ghoulianis control room that was most likely used as command central for orchestrating the attacks on the WTC towers, then you have the money silverstein collected. This is "speculation" as you say which is exactly what all your "better" evidence is.
Exposing the operation apparently is of no concern because there was so many loose ends, so much evidence left that since they know they have 100% control of the MSM they feel completely invulnerable.
As far as looking like a CD, well logically there is nothing else it possibly could be just like I don't need to be a meteorologist to know it raining outside. One does not need to be an expert to see that WTC7 was clearly CD.
4th proves it could not have been a simple collapse due to fire or it would have fallen OVER not DOWN and certainly not in 6.5 seconds.

CD of WTC7 and 1&2 are proven by the laws of physics & scientific evidence, video tape & eyewitness testimony that corroborates it all. NOTHING else is, but when you add it all up the speculation the circumstantial etc and ALL of it points to the same conclusion then the case becomes airtight.

Not JUST WTC7 but CD of all the 3 buildings is by far the best evidence we have because it is the ONLY evidence we have that is scientifically proven.

right on

but i doubt the op was ran out of the EOC... that's not covert enough. The EOC was getting commands from a real command center... not the white house imo.

Jumbo Jets Can Not Demolish Skyscrapers.

There a back story on this guy?

I never heard of this Kevin Mcpadden. I'm just not really happy that this guy said it was "pulsed speech" that led him to assume it was a countdown, then in his latest video he says it WAS a countdown.

It just looks bad to debunkers and they are already ripping this guy a new hole. I can't say I disagree with them because what he actually HEARD on the day is the whole basis of his claim.

And where was this guy before? Did he try to give his testimony to the Commission and get omitted with many others? Why six years later is he telling his story? Was he trying to get the word out before?

This means that others must have noticed the same thing. If true, that means that firefighters are part of the coverup. I just get nervous with all the Johnny come lately testimony. And this guy set himself up with his first words being vague, only to turn specific.

good vid

wow..............................just mention that no building has ever collapsed due to fire

Show "'Dancing Movement' ?" by Binkster

U.M.S. and Suter

Dominic Souter A.K.A. Dominick Souter A.K.A Dominic Suter, and Urban Moving Systems, has always been a point of "evidence" for me.

But what does it have to do with this thread? And Hufshmidt/Bradford Smith type of stuff doesn't seem to help really. You can investigate Suter without all the "Jews did it".

Show "Jones/Tarpley fan Maybe ?" by Binkster
Show "?" by Binkster
Show "Down voting" by Binkster

Methinks it's just because

Methinks it's just because you are woefully off-topic.

Time is money

It was six years ago...
(Time to leave the basement everybody. The revolution is now)


Well it's great to see what gets voted down here.
- Don't mention the Five Dancing Israelis, explosives in van on 9-11...etc
- Don't mention Tarpley and Alex Jones have been accused of being 'nonproductive' to the movement on a few sites ( Let alone Bil Maher)

As a newbie - I find this interesting. Tanx for voting !
But it has been six years people....

The you know who....

The Five Dancing Israelis
Do you not think they should be extradited for questioning ?
Gets voted down on a '9-11 Truth' site.
Sort of says a lot...


Suter " has always been a point of "evidence" for me."

So what did you do about it ?
You say you've been involved in the the movement since 2002 ....
What happened next ?

I'm becoming like the Loose Change boys. There's a lot of bitching, opinions and little action here.
So what did you do about it ? Consider a blog ?

Well now that you're getting personal

I will answer you. First of all, let me point out that you have made 6 posts and said absolutely jack squat. As far as "what I've done", that is an ignorant statement as you don't know shit about me, so how can you dare question me as if you're in some place of judgment?

And yes, I gave up a lot of things to help out the "movement" in the past 6 years. To go over it all would be pointless and egocentric. And yes, I did have a Blog, but I became seriously ill about 5 months ago and I had to stop.

That's about all the response you're gonna get from me, as you seem to be just another yahoo idiot ranting off and attacking other people because YOU don't seem to think they're doing enough.

Basically, Who the FUCK are you? And why should I give a rats balls?

Answer: You are a collection of fucking words and phrases with a chat name. Period. Move on.

Nothing Personal

Nothing personal. Was generalizing . ( Consider a blog was actually ...well never mind)
It's a general frustration. So much info is there...Just been involved a just few months and can't see myself just chatting on a web site say - four years from now.
The Democrats are a joke - the front runners proved it again last night. So get angry.
Get angry at me if you want. It's a start.

Show "No Planes" by Binkster

Alex Jones' people need to go to journalism school.

When the interviewee gives vague answers, you prod him to clarify. I still don't know what time, on the clock, that "explosion" allegedly on the 6th floor of WTC7 happened.

He says, repeatedly about "both buildings" still standing. Well, we're talking about 3 buildings at a minimum. Again, the journalist would ask for clarification.

A journalist would ask how much time elapsed from the time he checked "both buildings" (towers?) still standing until the time of the explosion. Also, was there any attempt to check if "both" towers were standing AFTER the explosion? That would be the important bit of info to peg the time as "before" the towers fell.

There are so many questions that should and could have been asked. I would ask them myself, but of course they are hiding his identity.

Perhaps he can't recall the specifics I mentioned above. If not, then so be it. The questions should have been asked though.

When the WTC7 was struck by falling debris, it gouged a massive hole about 18 stories tall, which certainly could have been experienced as an "explosion" to someone being struck by it. So, I remain skeptical, as always.

Only two minutes of the 20

Only two minutes of the 20 minute interview were played on air. We don't know what else was asked.

If they had clearer responses, they would have included them

To those voting down some basic common sense about giving an interview: are you in junior high school?

The lack of common sense and objectivity in this movement is laughable.

Are you skeptical to the point of misinfo?

"When the WTC7 was struck by falling debris, it gouged a massive hole about 18 stories tall, which certainly could have been experienced as an "explosion" to someone being struck by it. So, I remain skeptical, as always."

Funny you say this because Building 7 fell at 5:20 pm that day. The "gouge" was created much earlier. So what is this mysterious "explosion" you think he was confused about?

Other than that. I'm just annoyed that people are saying this is "the smoking gun". This guy already gave two conflicting statements about what he actually HEARD on the radios before the collapse. And this is why the debunkers will tear us apart. Because we keep claiming things are "smoking guns" when their basis isn't even solid.

If I was an investigator and I heard two different takes on story in retrospect, I would think LIAR. That's just the way the world is. Now I'm not claiming he IS a liar, but you can't just say you heard something you PERCEIVED as a countdwon one day, only to say you definitely heard a COUNTDOWN a week later.

He's left himself right out in the open for the debunkers to eat him alive. But there needs to be a better interview with him. He needs to name names. All his superiors, people that he saw involved, firemen, rescue workers, the whole enchilada. If what he is saying is true then he better spill the beans a little more.

Are you not comprehending, or didn't you watch the video?

-->"When the WTC7 was struck by falling debris, it (THE DEBRIS) gouged a massive hole about 18 stories tall, which certainly could have been experienced as an "explosion" to someone being struck by it. So, I remain skeptical, as always."

Funny you say this because Building 7 fell at 5:20 pm that day. The "gouge" was created much earlier. So what is this mysterious "explosion" you think he was confused about?<--

WTC7 was clobbered by debris from one of the towers. This isn't in dispute (is it?).

So, what the hell are you talking about?

I'm not sure what you 2 are even talking about

the guy here in this interview clearly states the EXPLOSION(S) he felt were BEFORE either of the towers fell so there was no damage to WTC7 AT ALL by anything other than explosives placed within the building.

So what the hell are either of you talking about?

No, he doesn't "CLEARLY" say anything of the sort.

The people writing the article claim that. The witness does not.

I'm not interested in amateur videographer's opinions. They need to clear up what he is saying and how he determines the facts.

maybe you need to watch it again

they are repeating what he told them, that they ran from the building (WTC7) as the towers fell, kinda hard for the towers to have done the damage he saw when they had not fallen until he was back outside of WTC7.
and that still has nothing to do with the fact that he heard and felt several explosions while in WTC7.
There comes a point where we need to stop questioning every GD phucking syllable eyewitnesses said and just take it at face value.

Yes more details

Do we have links to the full interviews? Can the "countdown" be corroborated by anybody else? Surely others must have heard the transmission??

Also, the fireman and emergency personel in the video that said to clear out that the building is coming down. Have those individuals been interviewed? Do we know their names? I am sorry if this has already been covered..but it would be so important to follow up with current interviews. Where did they hear that the building was "coming down". We need those details.

In the first testiomony (on

In the first testimony (on stage with Alex Jones) McPadden said he heard the last few seconds of the countdown. I see no conflict here.

Please watch my movie: WTC7 The Smoking Gun of 9/11

How about

three lies.......Like the DOD and NORAD?

Shocking New Revelations On

Shocking New Revelations On 9/11 Ground Zero Cover-Up
First responder heard WTC 7 demolition countdown, was warned to "shut up" when he reported secondary explosions

A 9/11 first responder has shed new light on how he heard a countdown before the demolition of Building 7, how he was told to "shut up" by superiors when he tried to report secondary explosions and why "vicious security" measures were enacted to prevent people from accessing certain areas of ground zero.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

Jennings' testimony contradicted

After initial excitement, I'm getting worried about Barry Jennings' WTC 7 testimony. It is contradicted at least by that of John Peruggia in the Oral Histories. According to Peruggia, the lobby of WTC 7 continued to be used as a center for emergency operations right until the South Tower came down:

"Just moments before the south tower collapsed
and, you know, when it happened we didn't know it was
the south tower. We thought it was the north tower.
There was a reporter of some sort, female with blond
hair and her cameraman, an oriental fellow. They were
setting up outside 7 World Trade Center, just east of
the pedestrian bridge. I told them it would probably
be better off to be set up under the bridge. At least
it was protected. I was just about to enter a dialogue
with her when I heard a sound I never heard before. I
looked up and saw this huge cloud. I told him run. I
grabbed the female, I threw her through the revolving
doors of number 7. We were proceeding inside. She
fell to the ground. I helped her out, I pushed her
towards the direction of where we were all in the south
corner and there was a little doorway behind that desk
which led into the loading bays.
Everybody started to run through that. Never
made it to that door. The next thing that I remember
was that I was covered in some glass and some debris.
Everything came crashing through the front of number
7. It was totally pitch black.

[...] Again, there was a lot of rubble
in the lobby, probably a few feet. The
facade was all broken. Me and Phil grabbed some hand
lights and the people who were still there at ground
level, we directed them to the door where there were
guys who were going to lead them out. Some Port
Authority and some secret service, you know, they were
housed at number 7. Captain Nahmod and Battalion Chief
Maggio, they were going to lead that group of people.
Probably in excess of 30 or 40 people out of the

Unless there is additional support for Jennings' claims, perhaps LC Final Cut should not invest too heavily in him.

The lobby of WTC 7 continued to be used...

as a center for emergency operations right until the South Tower came down...


Maybe that's why there were many bodies, etc witnessed by Barry Jennings when he got down to the lobby.

It still does not explain his testimony (including what he said on 9/11) regarding the explosion near the eighth floor.

Link :


Best wishes

Yet Alex Jones...

... gives the impression that all that, including the bodies, was *before* either tower had come down.

Sometimes you need to ignore any spin...

and hear it from the horses mouth...

He said that the lobby was trashed by the time he got down there, he also stated that the explosion on the stairwell (near 6th floor) was whilst BOTH towers were still standing, he also broke a window with a fire extinguisher.

So maybe by the time he got to the lobby, one or both towers had fallen as he had to get out of WTC7 through a hole, led by firefighters.

Maybe the lobby and bodies is a red herring, looks as though the timeline needs a bit of clarification.

Best wishes

also see:

Transcript and analysis

This seems pretty important. So I typed out the interview quotes concerning the timing.

Alex Jones:

"911 bombshell WTC7 security official details explosions inside building. Says bombs were going off in WTC7 before either tower collapsed. (...) This is building 7 when the second tower hadn't even been hit yet."

(That last claim isn't addressed in any of the interview segments).

The witness, identified as "Barry Jenkins," says:

"I was asked to go and man the office of emergency management at the World Trade Center 7 on the 23rd floor. As I arrived there there were police all in the lobby. They showed me the way to the elevator. We got up to the 23rd floor. We couldn't get in. We had to go back down, then security and police took us to the freight elevators where they took us back up and we did get in. Upon arriving into the OEM EOC we noticed that everybody was gone. I saw coffee that was on the desk. Still, the smomke was still coming off the coffee. I saw half eaten sandwiches.

And after I called several individuals, one individual told me that um to leave and leave right away. Z---(sp) came running back in. He said we're the only ones up here, we gotta get outta here. He found the stairwell.

So we subsequently went to the stairwell and we're going down the stairs. When we reached the 8th-- or the 6th floor, the landing that we were standing on gave way. There was an explosion, and the landing gave way. And we're, I was left there hanging. I had to climb back up and I had to walk back up to the 8th floor. After getting to the 8th floor, everything was dark.



JENKINS: "Well I'm just confused about one thing and one thing only. Why World Trade Center 7 went down in the first place. I'm very confused about that. I know what I heard. I heard exposions. The explanation I got was it was the fuel oil tank. I'm an old boiler guy. If it was a fuel oil tank it would have been one side of the building. When I got to that lobby, the lobby was totally destroyed. It looked like King Kong had came through it and stepped on it. It was so destroyed I didn't know where I was. And it was so destroyed they had to take me out through a hole in the wall, a makeshift hole that I believe the fire department made to get me out."

The interviewer allegedly has more testimony from Jenkins that establishes the time of these events. So, let's see it.

INTERVIEWER: "He (JENKINS) discusses also with us how while he was trapped on those floors he was talking to firemen prior to both collapses of the world trade center towers one and two.


BERMAS: "As each building collapsed, they ran away from it. You know, as everybody did. You know, so those explosions that he got trapped on the eighth floor happened before both towers fell. He heard many other explosions during the whole thing. The entire lobby was blown up. There were dead bodies in building 7."

The confirmation:

JENKINS: "As I told you earlier, both buidlings were still standing. Because I looked two, I looked one way, looked the other way, now there's nothing there. When I got to the sixth floor before all this happened, when I got to the sixth floor, there was an explosion. That's what forced us back to the eighth floor. Both buildings were still standing."


Bermas is witholding some footage, I suppose to include in the Loose Change film. Jenkins doesn't recall running away from anything, here.

The "confirmation" is not worded clearly.

" "As I told you earlier, both buidlings were still standing.
Because I looked two, I looked one way, looked the other way, now there's nothing there. "

What does that mean?

Where was he when he was "looking"? Looking from where, in which direction, at what?

"When I got to the sixth floor before all this happened, when I got to the sixth floor, there was an explosion."

This is the confirmation. Before "all this happened," appears to relate to the passage before it, looking one way and another, where "both buildings" were standing.

"That's what forced us back to the eighth floor. Both buildings were still standing."

Jenkins should be re-interviewed. As should the other witnesses (he was assisted by another man whom he identified in the newscast).

Jones/Bermas takes it that the sixth floor blew up, and Jenkins went up to the eighth floor where he looked to see both towers still standing (from where, what window?), and then, after that, Jenkins and others ran away from the (both) falling towers.

I'd like to hear that stated clearly by Jenkins himself, as well as others who were there, on camera.

So, this may be something. But in order to get past the cacophany of debunkers and disinfo types, you need to streamline it to say WHO, WHEN, WHERE, HOW, WHY. Have several sources corroborate it, and address criticism.

Also-- the WTC7 lobby claims need to be scrutinized. According to Bermas' own statements about the timing, the towers both fell while Jenkins was on the 8th floor. Therefore, when he arrived at the lobby, it was after the debris had fallen into the lobby and destroyed a large portion of it, according to NIST.

The claim of lobby explosions can be countered by the debris crashing there.

Every fact needs to be established beyond reasonable doubt.

I appreciate what you are saying

however we will NEVER get past the "cacophony of debunkers and disinfo types" regardless what is said or whom says it.

The best evidence is always what was said RIGHT THEN IN THE HEAT OF THE MOMENT just minutes after it happened, what Jenkins would say now 6 years later will never be as relevant as what he said minutes after the fact.
The Reich wing nut bags will NEVER EVER agree with any witness that goes against the LIES they are desperately trying to spew.

BTW other eyewitnesses have collaborated that there was explosions in the lobby or basement in all 3 buildings.

The FACT that all 3 buildings were taken down by Controlled demolition has been established well beyond any reasonable doubt to anyone not insane or suffering severe cognitive dissonance, but that doesn't mean shit to at least 30% of this country and 100% of the Reich wing nut bags that obviously don't give a damn about facts because they are actively covering up the crimes.