Making the Evidence Fit

The above image consists of two shots of WTC7 taken on 9/11. The Left photo is attributed to the NYPD, and is used by NIST as corroboration for eyewitness testimony that suggests that debris from the collapse of the towers caused a specific amount of damage to WTC7. The photo on the Right is by Aman Zafar. The discrepancy is obvious, Zafar's photo does not confirm the visual data in the NYPD photo.

Researchers should petition NIST for provenance on this photo. If the photo was taken with a digital camera as other helicopter shots from 9/11 were, then Exif data should be embedded in the file that will reveal a time-stamp. The original file should also reflect what we see in the NIST drafts, and not bear evidence of tampering in Photoshop or other image editing software. A separate inquiry to the NYPD probably wouldn't hurt. (If you have a connection there, use it.)

Vesa blogged this item yesterday and invites observations and input. also blogged it and there is good information in the comments section below the blog entry. DanR over at the Randi Rhodes Message Board posted about this back in December of 2006, after seeing a post here, and that's where I cribbed the source files for the graphic above.

But if it wasn't for "Winston Smith", and his article, Photographic Analysis of Damage to WTC7 and Critical Errors in NIST's Estimations, posted last October, maybe nobody would have noticed this one.

To all those celebrities who

To all those celebrities who comes to this site. This is the time for all of you to come out and support Rosie. Lets take advantage of it while the story is still out there. I would really love to see a group of celebrities come out at the same time. I think it would be a tremendous impact for the time being. Please act NOW!!!

Is Rosie aware of this yet?

This needs to be widely published now!

The conflicting pictures appear (based on sunlight) to have been captured at around the same time, yet are clearly different.

The NIST photo has all the signs of tampering. My colleague at work only looked at if for a second or two before saying it is clearly (and poorly) Photoshopped.

Even if either of these

Even if either of these photos is accurate, I don't see what difference it makes. The damage is obviously incredibly minor, especially in comparison to 3, 4, 5, and 6. Certainly not enough to make the building come down. Plus, remember that Silverstein himself said that the building was incredibly strong and redundant so that whole internal sections could be removed for remodeling.

Fighting for G.O.D. (Gold, Oil, and Drugs) is available now for pre-order on Amazon.

Whilst I agree the damage would not make WTC7 collapse...

I cannot agree that it does not make a difference.

NIST have obviously used that image to portray substantial damage to the south-west corner. This is clearly contradicted by the picture taken at approximately 2pm by Aman Zafar.

This has been cited by many "debunkers" over the past 18 months and on the face of it looks serious (especially with the angled perspective and not being able to see the bottom, leads the mind to think it grows out of view into the bottomless pit).

To me there are two scenarios, both are bad for NIST, the first is that NIST selected a photo that had smoke covering the corner from the 18th floor down and chose to portray with coloring, contrasting and text that the corner is missing, this is bad for NIST.

The second scenario is far more damning and that is if the original had the corner intact and through editing the damage was artificially created, this would be VERY bad for NIST.

I agree with Rep... a FOIA or similar method needs to be issued for the release of the original and unedited photos.

Best wishes

Bizarre, isn't it?

Isn't it also quite odd that the argument for extensive damage requires huge quantities of burning metal to crach through WTC 7? What on earth would have propelled it there?

It seems remarkably strange that their own argument, about WTC 7, requires explosions ripping either WTC 1 or 2 or both apart, so as to hurl MANY TONS of red-hot metal around. If not explosions, then what else? It is not easy to move such large chunks of metal around, to a distance more than one football field away.

Or did I miss how they accounted for that?

And... red hot metal? How on earth...

From Manuel Garcia's "Dark Fire":

The upper block of WTC 1 drops into the burning impact zone and ejects a cascade of incandescent metal and heated stone laterally, from near the 97th story (368 m), at between 12 m/s (27 mph) to 15 m/s (34 mph) during the 1.5 seconds it takes to fall down to the original height of the 71st story (269 m). (3)

This hot volley, within the overall pyroclastic cannonade discharged by WTC 1 during its collapse, hurtles at 86 m/s (193 mph) at a steep angle down into the face of WTC 7 from Floors 18 to zero. A solid missile -- a hot section of I-beam? -- punches into Floors 11 and 12, bursting through the concrete floors and touching off fires. The elevator shafts at Floors 8 and 9, about 10 to 15 m (33 to 49 ft) into the building, are ruptured and the elevator cars fall out onto the floors. The air pressure wave presses on eardrums, stairwells fill with dust and smoke, and lights go out, the building shakes for nearly 10 seconds; magnitude 2.3. (2)

Clearly, the perps and their panderers are advancing the story that hot steel from WTC 1 damaged WTC 7 and started the fires that eventually weakened the building enough to cause its complete failure and total collapse. Not bad fiction, when you think about it.


Unfortunately for them, our Kevin Ryan has already completely debunked this highly speculative theory (which is based on pathological science) and I'm willing to wager that Dr. Griffin's new book will do the same.

I'm left with the distinct impression that the NIST photo was created to help support the Garcia theory on WTC 7. I will be very interested to see how this plays out.

Keep up the good work, brothers and sisters, and remember that our real work is still with the people out in the streets.

Have you shared 9/11 Truth with someone new today?

I love you all very much.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Whoa, LW, that reads like

Whoa, LW, that reads like pulp fiction!

As was pointed out on another thread, we can promote the comparisons between the Murrah Building in OKC and WTC7. Murrah had a REAL scoop (what, 1/3 of the entire building?), random fires from the explosives, etc. And yet....not only did it not behave in any way like the collapse of 7, but it didn't even collapse asymmetrically. Most importantly, it eventually had to be brought down through controlled demolition!

I would love to see some handy person put together side-by-side photos and descriptions in a short video of the two -- it helps ground people's thinking.  Most of us know the problems with the official story of OKC, but it's not necessary to highlight it for this purpose. 

I have compared them...

... they have responded by saying that the OKC building was not as tall as WTC 7 and asking if it was a steel-reinforced concrete building instead of a steel-framed building like WTC 7.

The similarities

are not in the buildings themselves, as one is a steel-reinforced concrete building and the other is a steel-framed building, but in the MO of each "attack."

In the case of OKC McVeigh was the patsy and the truck bomb the cover story; whereas with the WTC we know the Arab/Muslims were the patsies and the plane impacts (and fires) provide the cover story.

I think that OKC was a warm-up test for the perps to see if they could control law enforcement investigations and manage the media effectively in preparation for 9/11. Unfortunately for us, they succeeded in OKC and were emboldened to go ahead with 9/11.

In this sense OKC is quite useful in educating the general public about 9/11 and also, hopefully, finally getting the OKC perps, as well. When I was in Memphis in January I spoke with a guy who is part of OKC Truth and he talked about how they've been battling since 1995 to get new investigations.

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

They were similar enough to have the same...

ASCE representatives... i.e Gene Corley !!

More Info :

Best wishes

Keep 'em coming!

This is another very significant find. This movement has MOMENTUM boyeee! Democracy ISN'T just a facade for cynical scum to hide behind while they manipulate us. Democracy is actually WORKING here. There is a whole new epistemology taking shape right here in these forums. A democratic epistemology fostered by the ever increasing interconnection of the real people who refuse to debase themselves before power. "Experts" - or as we like to call them, "junk scientists" - have always been the lapdogs of the powerful. We're no longer in their thrall. We're clever enough to be our own experts. And DAMN does it feel good!

And, hell, since I'm getting all sentimental I might as well say: I love you all, too ; )

Hey LeftWright. Was wondering where to find Kevin Ryan's debunking of this ludicrous story. Does he just debunk the idea that such a hole could have caused complete collapse, or does he actually question the reality of the hole itself? Because I'm interested to see how he can get enough of a handle on the purported mechanism by which this "scoop" was formed to do anything like debunking. The idea that this damage could be caused by material ejected horizontally from the height of the 97th floor is just too silly to require anything like debunking. But what other story could they tell? It seems like only a bomb at ground level, either inside or outside, could cause such damage. Perhaps a building falling over and against the base of seven could have ripped out a chunk like that from the bottom. But there was no such building. Perhaps the idea will be that one of the upper blocks of the towers exploded on its impact with the ground. But then, we saw the upper blocks disintegrate in midair.

Whatever way you look at it its another huge problem for the perps and their pathetic little pets the junk scientists.

Manuel Garcia Sees Physics That Don’t Exist

Manuel Garcia Sees Physics That Don’t Exist by Kevin Ryan

I believe this is what you asked for, brother Joe90.

I live just north of San Francisco. Where are you located?

Are you part of a 9/11 Truth group?

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Thanks! I don't know how I

Thanks! I don't know how I missed that. Kevin Ryan is the fucken bomb, man. Ha ha. A little satirical humour is crucial when, as 911isalie says just below, the half-hearted official attempts to answer our questions have decended to the level of utter farce. Unless we find a way to laugh at the picture of these so-called "experts" arrogantly pontificating transparent idiocy from their official podiums, well, the prospect is so sickening that the only alternative is to cry. Its more empowering to laugh!

I'm in New Zealand, LW. A long way from the action. But thanks to 911blogger, I can be involved, however indirectly, in the good fight.

North island or south island?

My oldest brother lived in Christchurch for 3 years.

What is the general opinion of 9/11 in NZ?

How fed up are you all with us yanks?


The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.


I have distributed 9/11 Mysteries DVDs to my co-workers. 100% agreement that 9/11 was an inside job. The whole political spectrum is different here, the conservative National party politicians are equivalent to the most liberal democrats in the US. The old conservative leader was a public atheist. The new conservative leader campaigned at the "Big Gay Out" annual gay picnic. It moves left from there.

Very old people have fond memories of Americans from WWII. However, NZ exited ANZUS and has not been a US ally for over 20 years. Young people have a better opinion of the governments of Russia and China than the US government.

More fuel to the fire....


I have to agree completely!
Isn't it bizarre that the official story apologists like to deny that any force, other than gravity, could horizontally propel multi ton steel beams hundreds of feet, YET are eager to say that is exactly what happened to building 7?


How did CNN and BBC have foreknowledge of the WTC7 collapse, yet five years later, the government cannot explain it?

What is significant

Is that NIST, and by extension Popular Mechanics who were given access to all of NIST's data, had access to 1000's of photos, yet they selected this one to forward their "scoop" hypothesis. There's no way they would offer that without attempting verification from other photos, would they?

I think they picked it up off the net and just ran with it, without verifying it's authenticity.

Something's fishy about it that's for sure.
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

having it both ways

Having your cake and eating it too, are we not?

Can no one see the obvious flaw in all of this? NIST and PM's arguments are trying to have it both ways.

The building fell because of all this damage to one side "20%" of the volume of the building was "scooped" out - yada yada. And the building fell symmetrically.

Okay - problem is you can't have it both ways. If the building was damaged on one side, it will fall to that side and portions of the building will remain standing.

If it fell symmetrically, then it couldn't have fallen that way as a result of a collapse, for the afore mentioned reason of the damage to particular side of the building.

It's a simple as removing a leg from a table or chair - does the table or chair fall straight down or topples over in direction of damage? It falls over - that simple.

I'm know I'm not an engineer, or a physicist or any of that stuff - I'm just an average guy (like most 911 Truthers) exercising the brain and common sense that the Lord God gave me - and none of the official "story" makes any sense, to me. And I doubt seriously it would make any sense to a jury in a court of law; should this thing ever be put to a rigorous empirical examination.

To be honest, the whole thing has become a farce - the story, the mythology, and those that push, defend, the official "story" the media, the congress, the courts, the police, the military - they are all a joke. To have all of this evidence sitting there, to have all of the glaring inconsistencies - and it seems to make no difference to some - Like one blonde member of The View.

I find it funny how many times I've heard "inside job" over the last few weeks about different events - oh, the MSM know it's an "inside job" because of this or that, when they look at other events...but 911...was 911 an inside job? Oh, no - they will tell you. You're a kook - they will tell you.

We are at a point now where the lies are so obvious now, that the only thing that is keeping the official "story" in business is the non-coverage in the MSM.

The official "story" is much like a car that has a bad wheel alignment - sitting in the driveway; it's not a problem...even if you drive it around the block at a low speed - no problem. But, if you take it out on the road and start getting the speed up, all of a sudden you begin to realize there is a problem; that something isn't just right or in alignment. And the faster you go, the more pronounced and obvious it becomes.

Well, that's where we are today. The people of not only the United States, but the whole world are waking up to 911 Truth, and they are beginning to notice that the story, if tested, begins to rattle a lot, and the harder you push it - the more it wobbles and rattles.

The Truth Movement grows stronger every day and we lose no one. Soon, all this will be commentary as we watch the trials unfold. And the only thing that could prevent that – would be if they do it again.

Only this time, millions will already be onto them. However, those millions are going to have to grow a set – or The Truth and whether or not you know it, will be a mute point.

Long live The Truth Movement.

Maybe the damage occurred

Maybe the damage occurred after Zafar's image was taken by a secondary explosion.  Is there anyway to get timestamps for each of these images?



Exif data would account for the NIST photo. But Zafar's photo was derived from negatives that have been destroyed.

[EDIT] Admittedly a slim chance but,...

Zaafar's prints may have a date/time stamp on the back.

[And, of course, this wouldn't serve any purpose. Sorry]

The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001

With regards to the Zafar Image and timings...

Following discussions on this blog :


and coming the the conclusion that there was a major discrepancy between the NIST and Zafar photos.

I contacted Aman Zafar on the weekend of the 10/11 March, after a bit of discussion he recalled that the below picture was taken around 2pm

Free Image Hosting at


Maybe shadow analysis is possible... The NYPD roof picture is earlier than Aman's picture, no sun on west edge.

Free Image Hosting at


it's hard to determine exactly when this picture was taken, I would guess around 2pm but not certain.

Free Image Hosting at

Best wishes


Has anyone noticed that the supposedly damaged corner that caused a near free-fall symmetrical collapse is exactly diagonal to the penthouse structure that drops first?

Does that have any significance to anyone? It seems odd to me.
head up, eyes open, fist clenched

Personally, I would not use the term "exactly diagonal"...

The eastern mechanical penthouse occupied almost a third of the roof space.

I think "opposite ends" would describe it more accurately.

I believe the eastern penthouse came down first to allow the edge walls to fall on top of the pile (pulled inwards) and not fall outwards damaging adjacent buildings. Typical implosion really, where the gravitational pull, with the central columns removed bring them inwards.

Just my opinion.

Best wishes


The eastern mechanical penthouse was the blockier one, not the longish one, right?
Maybe 'exactly diagonal' isnt the best phrasing, but the point remains: if the damage was so significant on one end of the building, then why did the eastern mechanical penthouse (on the opposite end) collapse first?

How could this be explained away?

head up, eyes open, fist clenched

How could this be explained away? -- They are unrelated...

The south west corner (if the NIST picture is a true representation, which I personally doubt) would have either been caused by debris damage from the north tower or cosmetic explosives placed in that corner around the 10th floor (could be higher or a bit lower).

The eastern mechanical penthouse collapsing prior to the main structure was a deliberate phase of the demolition sequence, to ensure the building imploded neatly.

Therefore, I don't believe they are related events.

Just my opinion.

Best wishes


um i think we agree...
what im saying is that if the official theory now says that the damage is what caused the implosion, then the east mech penthouse would not be where structural failure would be initially noticeable.

to me, this proves even more the case for controlled demolition.
so you are correct, the penthouse and the damage are not related.

however, the penthouse IS directly related to explosives...

head up, eyes open, fist clenched

I still think that "Fire" is the official theory...

We'll have to wait to see what ARA concoct for NIST.

At least FEMA were honest enough to state the low probability of fire, and the sulfur / evaporated steel.

That's why I believe Fetzer and his group are trying to throw a spanner in the works with this legal action against NIST. Not being a legal eagle, I'm not sure how, but that's the vibe I'm getting !!!

Best wishes zombie bill hicks...

I erected structural steel

I erected structural steel buildings for ten years now I work in a granite quarry using explosives all day. I have my license from the ATFE

When you erect a building there is very little structural integrity on exterior columns there are manly for strength for the exterior walls and load Bering strength on floors half the space to your first interior columns

the damage sustained from building 7 by WTC 1 2 was not nearly enough make a building fall. Building 7 had a complete failure of every single columns interior and exterior simultaneously at the same time it is impossible for that to occur without the use of explosives.


check out the zoomed image that showes proof of editing:



Whoa, weird indeed!

good catch.

interns < internets

Strange...when i zoom in on

Strange...when i zoom in on the image i don't see it. Which image did you use as a source?

Free Image Hosting at

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

Arie try the one above...

Link :

PS... Did you see me FAO arie (regarding WTC7 south face video) at :

Best wishes

** ADDED **

You can download the original NIST PDF at :

That picture is on page 17...

Free Image Hosting at

The edit also appears on NIST's photo

If this is indeed an edit, they are caught red-handed spreading fraudulent information about Building 7. Any photoshop experts in the house?

"We are going to keep up this fight till the end, till the very end... They took it from the top to the bottom. We're gonna take it from the bottom to the top!"
-Dan Wallace

Arie, Send Your Film to INSIDE EDITION

Arie, Send Your WTC7Film to INSIDE EDITION. They are asking for video comments.

I've posted a link a couple of places among the recent stories.

Cheers Arie

Hey Arie. Just watched the piece you put together on WTC7. Some nice evidence gathering and splicing. Very handy to show people who don't have the patience to sit through one of the longer movies.

I think there are a few things you could do to improve it. First a little gripe about a grammatical mistake: when you get to the BBC's premature reporting the text says: "In fact they reported it 20 minutes before actually happened".

I think an absolutely crucial piece of evidence in the case of building 7 is the closeup video of squibs moving up the upper southwest corner of the building (see I hope you'll consider adding that in somewhere.

In my opinion you show the building's collapse one or two times too many. There's the danger of starting to focus on the collapse aesthetically instead of remaining focussed on the evidence. You could replace some of that footage with a bit more detail about the official story, perhaps saying something about the purported gouge, and the difficulty of explaining it. You could show the two contradictory photographs from this thread (though I'm sure you're already considering that).

You could also quickly mention the molten metal found beneath the rubble, which cannot be explained by fires, but can very tidily be explained by exothermic chemical reactions.

Great job. Thanks for putting so much effort in.

smoky pictures

at one point i thought that could be smoke in the foreground, obscuring the building, rather than structural damage.

Nice diagram + a suggestion

Nice diagram.

One suggestion if I may - floor numbers might be better than A, B, C.

For example, would be interested to learn if the damage shown was related to Giuliani's bunker.

Also it would make if more clear that the "scooped out below floor 18" story is a lie.

Here is what I have (with help from 911veritas)

Thanks for your good work.

Show "More foolishness." by Mark Roberts

Thrown the towel in...

... already, Mark?

NIST photo

The NIST photo may not be a fake, as it merely looks like smoke & dust are obscuring the building, making it look like there is more damage than there actually was. I must say, however, the smoke does look somewhat photoshoped but that is pure speculation. The fact is, when you put both photos together, they match up really well, except that our photo is clear, NIST's is not. Another victory for the truth.

Can smoke be the answer?

Upon further review of the NIST photo, there appears to be a very faint "line" that follows the edge of the building into the "missing" area. It is possible that the photo is real, but that what looks like a physical gouge is nothing more than an illusion produced by smoke that is coming from that area. If this is the case, however, NIST certainly should have been able to figure this out, but opted to use this photo to promote their view.


Here we have another photo lense issue. The photo on the left was taken with a wide angle lense. As you can see, the windows near the top of the photo are distorted (stretched), thus, making the building appear wider at the top. This makes the "cut out" appear more dramatic than it would be otherwise. Debunkers would also see this to be the case. The issue of phtographic lenses was also an issue in the "Flying Elephant" article in the Journal of 911 Studies.

A separate issue is whether the photo on the left was altered. I doubt that it was as another suitable photo (or more than one photo) would certainly have been altered beyond question in order to bolster the "cut out" story." It is more likely that a combination of the photographic distortion and smoke, leads one to interpret the vast difference between the two photos.

it doesnt matter what angle

it doesnt matter what angle its taken at. the Vesa photo clearly shows most of the same area, how do you account for this fact? are you just going to outright deny it?

Contacting NIST

"Researchers should petition NIST for provenance on this photo."

I was wondering if anyone has done, or intends to do, that.

I won't be able to in the near future, but I hope someone can.

I wish everyone a Happy Easter!