Interactive 9/11 Memorial Timeline Uses WTC# 5 Photograph as WTC# 7 and Claims Raging Fire

In preparation for the 10th year anniversary of the 9/11 murders, the 9/11 Memorial has put up an online interactive 9/11 timeline. It hasn't been up more than 24 hours as of writing this.

I have not had much time to review it, but sure enough I noticed a major fault right away!

The timeline mentions the WTC# 7 "collapse" at 5:20pm and if you click on the images available for that time, you will see 3 pictures - one of them being the one shown below.

The 9/11 Memorial Interactive Timeline says this is a raging fire in   WTC 7, however it looks a lot like WTC #5

 Lets look at undisputed pictures of WTC# 5:

Above is WTC# 5 on fire, after the two towers had been destroyed. Below is WTC# 5 many days after 9/11.

Here is a great video of WTC# 5 on fire:


Notice the side-by-side vertical beams, arched windows and architecture in the pictures and video of WTC# 5? 

Those types of beams and arches are NOT present in the WTC# 7 structure by any means:

These 2 videos show the floor levels of WTC# 7 not long before it's destruction:

The 9/11 Memorial Timeline obviously is a joke for anyone interested in fact. There were no massive fires at WTC#7 and the fires that were alive were not large enough to bring any building down in the manner that WTC#7 came down; it was a controlled demolition!

Worse than a joke, this memorial is peddling lies as history.

For a complete timeline that spans more than just the day of 9/11, please visit the Complete 9/11 Timeline.

Let us hope

that if anyone is searching online trying to find the memorial timeline, they get hits that link to the History Commons timeline instead.

that is horrible,

and so obvious.
I wonder if they will correct the error.
I sort of hope they don' is a good point for us to use.

This info might make for a mainstream news article...

Nor Cal, Thanks for this data.
I can only assume that "this Building 7 mistake" was deliberate, unless they have morons running the show.

This information might be a good leadin to a mainstream news piece about Building 7.

Witness possibly describing sound of explosives

Check out the audio of independent photojournalist Catherine Leuthold, in this interactive 9/11 timeline, describing the collapse of the South Tower. She said: "As I was taking pictures, I could hear these sounds. This sort of cracking, loud cracking. And it collapsed." Sounds like a description of explosives going off to me.


red-handed, in historical revisionism.

Contact info

the photo's URL:

contact info:

National September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center
One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor New York, NY 10006
Telephone: 212.312.8800
Fax: 212.227.7931

For general inquiries, email:

For press inquiries, email:

When I called the phone number, they connected me with the voicemail of Reynaldo Vega (No idea if that's the correct spelling).

Thanks for the info

It's great that bloggers here search out and provide us with contact info. This is a HUGE service.

I'm suggesting when we contact them, we "cc" the media (i.e. New York Times, Newsweek, CBS, ABC, NBC, etc). We need to let everyone know that we are not only on top of everything, but that we are determined to let the media know about things like this. When writing, I would avoid accusing them of fraud, since we really don't know why this happened. But IMO it as good to point out the need for accuracy, particularly when talking about #7.

Maybe we should "cc" Cass Sunstein, too.

Tom T is right, this is a good "hook" to get the media to pay attention.

And thanks, NorCal. Yes, the arches are a dead give-away that it's actually Building 5.

Archetype blog comment

I clicked on "About" and then "Archetype" and commented on their blog entry. I informed them that the photo is 5 WTC.

Archetype reply

Someone called Mike has replyed to my post on their blog. He says...

"Hi Jim, Thanks for the note. We will forward this to the 9/11 Memorial & Museum team."

Cheney's evacuation and subsequent arrival at the PEOC

at the supposed time of 9:36 hrs is also flawed, and a very important one also.

OCT defenders still giving different accounts

Yes, but that's still earlier than the version given in the Commission report, which had him hanging out in the corridor watching reports about the Pentagon hit before he actually entered the PEOC, closer to 10 AM (they say).

I wonder how well their timeline will make sense of all the conflicting versions put forward by NORAD.


On the memorial site you will find a link to Ethics point. This is their commitment pledge:

"The National September 11 Memorial & Museum places utmost value on ethical conduct and integrity. To successfully carry out our mission, we must safeguard our critical assets, including our people and information, as well as continuously improve our processes and controls.

We value your input. That is why we have selected EthicsPoint to provide us with an anonymous and confidential method to hear your suggestions, concerns, or reports of misconduct.

The information you provide will be sent to us by EthicsPoint on a totally confidential and anonymous basis. You have our guarantee that your comments will be heard."


Yes, how ironic, smacks of typical corporate doubletalk. How exactly they got WTC 7 confused with WTC 5, exactly such that a common government lie is reinforced.... this is like the Dealey Plaza "Museum", isn't it.

I called

and left a comment (politely) with a very pleasant lady ..It turns out she was located in Oregon. I kept it simple...nothing about 911 truth...The photo in the time line appears to be Bldg 5 not 7 which was never "engulfed” in flames. They will respond via phone or email..

I wish Richard Gage, Erik Lawyer ...a professional... would call/and write. I said I was just a "concerned citizen" when she asked if I was affiliated with any organization.


Someone should tell Billy Crystel and Robert De Niro about 'actors and artists for 9/11truth' (which happens to be the first link in google if you just type in 'actors and artists', which is quite impressive).

I find it very hard to

I find it very hard to acknowledge that the weasels and scum responsible for this "9/11 memorial" site are promoting such untruthful, inaccurate, bogus material, in innocence; the same goes for everyone in a position of knowledge about the events of 9/11 who are actively promoting the official story. Not only do they *know* that what they are saying is untrue, but worse, they are effectively obstructing justice to the point of aiding and abetting terrorists.

The corporate media in general are just as guilty, in that they have rendered the entire subject of "disproven aspects of the official story" to be taboo; their deliberate silence is complicity re. preventing justice from being served, and could also be construed as "aiding and abetting terrorists".

I notice that Rudy Giuliani is a "contributor" to this shameful, treasonous website of lies and propaganda; Giuliani was the man who knew in advance that the twin towers were going to fail - with no historical precedent (he admitted such in an interview on ABC, 9/12), yet he failed to warn NYPD and FDNY (etc) first responders to get out of the buildings. His inaction resulted in hundreds of people, ie the heroes who rush *towards danger to save others*, being killed.

This 9/11 "memorial" site is a sickening, twisted, perverted piece of excrement that sticks a finger up at the tens of thousands who lost loved ones that day. It deserves to be permanently taken off the web.. ..Calling any patriotic hackers....

>>I find it very hard to

>>I find it very hard to acknowledge that the weasels and scum responsible for this "9/11 memorial" site are promoting such untruthful, inaccurate, bogus material, in innocence;

I'm not sure its a great idea to label a few dozen people as "weasels and scum" whom we don't actually know much about -- likely some of them are not aware of Building 7, or many of the other points.

Perhaps a campaign to educate them would be helpful, without using "treason" or "shame" or other descriptors which will automatically turn people against us, and which may have no basis if they really did not know.

I think of how many building professionals were completely unaware of B7 at the AIA Convention that Richard Gage's group participated in. Many people out there don't know and they haven't done the research -- our job is to make sure it gets into their hands, untainted by MSM bias or threats that they are a traitor if they don't act the way we expect them to, and what they decide to do with it is up to them.

>>Calling any patriotic hackers....

You might want to re-think that, on a public blog where you regularly post.

>>> I'm not sure its a great

>>> I'm not sure its a great idea to label a few dozen people as "weasels and scum" whom we don't actually know much about -- likely some of them are not aware of Building 7, or many of the other points.

Perhaps a campaign to educate them would be helpful, without using "treason" or "shame" or other descriptors which will automatically turn people against us, and which may have no basis if they really did not know.<<<<

If you *read* my original post, my commentary was directed against those who *ALREADY KNOW* that the official story is a pack of lies, but promote it nonetheless. People who do such are undoubtedly helping those who planned and executed the attacks, in other words accessory before and after the fact to terrorism and mass murder. Those people are still out there, at large and will probably do something like this again.

There are undoubtedly, amongst those who have put this memorial website online, people who know that what this website is promoting is riddled with lies and omissions. I don't *know* if the photo of WTC5 was deliberately mislabeled as WTC7, but it is common knowledge that there is a huge controversy raging over WTC7. To place a photo that makes it appear that the entire building was being consumed in an inferno appears to be an attempt to sway readers (who are both aware or unaware of the WTC7 controversy) that the official explanation of "fire" is credible.

I would reckon that my "weasels and scum" labeling of those who knowingly mislead the public, or knowingly put time and effort into promoting a lie, is very mild. My actual thoughts on these persons, and what they deserve, are unprintable on a public bulletin board.

I am impressed by many here.

The independent action taken by many 9/11 Truthers is impressive!!

Wow! Read the comments on this thread! Well done!


The expanse of destruction so far exceeded just the towers hit, those saying no explosions were there need to see this. I'm posting the video links onto FB, and I hope others do too. Even if no mention of 911 Truth comes up, it need not be mentioned. Just seeing these videos raises eyebrows regarding the reality and the OCT. Blown buildings and blown minds. Wow.

Sadly,, I discovered that the nano-thermite piece from the Bentham journal too, has been taken off the internet. The censorship is underway.

"Rudy Giuliani is a contributor"

Bloggulator, Giuliani was a "contributor" to murder long before that terrible morning of 9/11. Giuliani knew that the antiquated analog radio equipment used by the firemen would not work in high-rise buildings, and indeed that it had failed at the time of the February 26, 1993 terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center. What most people are unaware of is how it came to be that the FDNY was using the same radios that failed 8 years earlier at the same place, the World Trade Center. Here's some information for those interested.
Road to NYC radio litigation

February 1993 — Bombing at World Trade Center reveals a number of problems in the communications system used by FDNY. A report cites the need to address the inability to communicate with firefighters in the upper floors of the World Trade Center using Motorola's Saber I analog “handi-talkies” and in-car repeater systems.

April 1997 — City of New York agrees to purchase 750 Saber I radios from Motorola for $2.88 million over three years in a sole-source replacement contract.

May 1998 — Motorola informs New York City that the Saber I radios will be discontinued. The vendor offers to substitute the Saber radios with XTS 3000 models. During the same year, Motorola introduces the Saber III product.

February 1999 — Motorola says it no longer manufactures Saber III radios and offers to substitute them with XTS 3500 radios, which are new digital models.

December 1999 — Over a three-month period, FDNY places $13.9 million in orders with Motorola for 3,818 XTS 3500 radios as a substitute for the $2.88 million contract for 750 Saber I radios in 1997, meaning no competitive bids are sought. First 2,700 radios delivered are returned because they were not waterproof.

March 2001 — FDNY puts XTS 3500 radios into service. After numerous complaints and a life-threatening incident involving a firefighter in Queens, the radios are pulled from service a week later.

April 2001 — New York City Comptroller Alan Hevesi releases a review that states the XTS radios were not field tested before being put into service in March 2001 and orders payments to Motorola be stopped. Hevesi also claims FDNY broke contracting rules by purchasing a new radio system without competitive bids as a substitute for a contract for replacement radios. A week later, a Motorola official testifies there is nothing technically wrong with the radios.

May 2001 — Hevesi asks Motorola to recall the 3,818 XTS 3500 radios sold to the FDNY. Hevesi claims the XTS 3500 radios were an undeveloped prototype when sold to the city in 1999 and that Motorola refuses to identify other buyers of the radios.

September 2001 — Using essentially the same Saber radio technology that was used during the 1993 bombings, firefighters allegedly are unable to hear evacuation orders before the north tower of the World Trade Center collapses.

Sources: New York City Comptroller's Office, Lawsuit against City of New York and Motorola

Giuliani is guilty way beyond that of a "contributor", in my book he's a murderer! Has anyone ever wondered how our Office of Emergency Command Center ended up in 7 WTC, when the World Trade Center was already attacked in 1993? Guess who, Giuliani! How can a nation be so asleep!

Thanks for this info on

Thanks for this info on Giuliani. It will prove useful should he run for any political office in future, as well as fodder to silence those who still are under some media-induced hallucination that he was the "hero" of 9/11.

9/11 Interactive Timeline has been changed...

The photo of 5 WTC is still there but has been moved from the first to the third image under "7 WTC Collapse". The caption has also been changed. It now says...

"Fires rage in the World Trade Center complex throughout the afternoon of September 11.
5 WTC, pictured, sustained extreme fire damage and was later demolished during cleanup efforts at ground zero."

It has been changed, but the

It has been changed, but the photo of WTC 5 does not belong in the WTC 7 area!

Now someone sees the picture of a fire raging in WTC 5, but without clicking or dragging their mouse on it they wont read the caption that says it is WTC 5.

I don't like it, and I may have to make a another call or post.

The active thermitic paper

Let's send them links to the peer-reviewed article "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" by an international group of scientists (three from the Brigham Young University).

Links are gone

Benthams Chemical Physics Journal is offline. I fear it won't come back.


After 10 days offline