WTC7: Corner damage confusion

I recently started mapping the damage on the south side of WTC7. With the recent discovery of the ABC footage that shows the top portion of Building 7 in detail and the photos of Steve Spak, Aman Zafar and NIST most of the damage/intact facade can now be mapped. The problem is that the Zafar photo contradicts the photos from NIST and the NIST photos seem to contradict each other.

One photo that is rarely presented but is in the NIST report is from Willie Cirone.

Free Image Hosting at

(this is highest quality version i found. It's from the NIST Report PDF, and saved as lossless PNG).

The angle is horrible but i tried to map the columns. First i strechted the image until it was more or less workable, the i drew lines, using the windows of the building as a guide. It seems that this picture too shows a lot of damage. In fact, it seems to show much more (deeper) damage than the NYPD picture of the SW corner that is in the NIST report too.

Free Image Hosting at

The location of the pieces sticking out seem to match with the pieces that are visible in the NYPD photo. They probably appear (much) larger in the straightened image than they really are. The approximate location however is the same.

Free Image Hosting at

But then there's the photo from Aman Zafar that shows the same portion of the corner intact. (go here for the ultra high resolution version)

Free Image Hosting at

Free Image Hosting at

So now we have three photos that all seem to show different damage to the SW corner. The damage and intact facade on the south side in the Aman Zafar photo do match up with the damage and facade in the Steve Spak photo. If both the Spak and Zafar photos are authentic it paints a whole different picture for the south side, where there indeed was a hole, but it near the SW corner and not in the middle where NIST needs it to be.

I trust the Zafar picture more than the NIST "photo"...

Until we see the FULL and unedited pictures that NIST presented, I still believe that they are cherry picking photos where smoke is helping present what they want to.

Then via contrast/color adjustments and possibly "pinching" and other alterations they published them in the NIST document to make WTC7 appear more damaged than it was.

The picture down the alley also has a "whitening" near the top, but looks less tampered with than the copter shot, plus I have not seen any clear pictures of that corner from below floor 12 from a TRUSTED source.

I put infinite more trust in the Zafar image.



Dude, i have a small request for the king of da archive ;-) regarding a desperate need for a 2min mpg (BBC starts at 8:23pm on 9/11), if you have that mpeg could you please check the below link for info...

It's a good-un !!!

Many thanks and best wishes

I'm sorry veritas, i don't

I'm sorry veritas, i don't have that MPEG. I do have the flash video file if you need it (which i can convert to virtually any format).

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

I dont have it either...

RE: V08591-32.mpeg (I think it's really .mpg)

That would be the file:
but that one starts @ 7:41 with the guy at the desk saying "devastating attacks". I only have the first few seconds (4.3M) of this file.

Are you really looking for ?
Which starts off with Jane Stanley infront of a window saying "heavy lifting gear" @ 8:23... ?
I only have 6.9M of V08590-04.mpg.

I am still looking for the rest of the footage in mpeg2...

That's the file I'm looking for...V08590-04.mpg

Originally at...

Well the first 1 minute 12 seconds of it, is all I need...

Where they have been talking to Jane standley for under a minute at the end of the /bbc200109111941-2023/V08591-32.mpg file..

When it continues to the next file I'm looking for, she talks for over a minute, then the anchor "Bill" asks her about WTC7, then the audio cuts out !!!!

If anyone has the MPG from the very start until the connection is lost (1min:12secs) and could stick an MPG on megaupload it would be most appreciated !!!

You can catch the online stream to see the first 1min 12secs at...

Anyone who has it in reasonable quality (pref =mpg original), please upload it to megaupload....

Many thanks

Arie, if you have the flash, what's the quality like, do you think it will merge with the original mpg format ok ??

The flash video (i think) is

The flash video (i think) is the streaming version on, the quality is the same. If you need it, i can upload it somewhere.

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

I'll give it a try... if you could upload the very first 2mins..

to it would be appreciated.

I stopped downloading after the BBC oops, wish I'd got them all, but no use crying over spilt milk...

Thanks arie, it might look stange when it goes from hi-res mpg to flash, but it's the message that counts !!!

Please post the link when done...

Bigtime appreciate it dude...

Many thanks

I'm not sure my software can read flash, could you please XviD

or mpeg it...

Thanks dude

Okay, i will upload it when

Okay, i will upload it when it's finished encoding.

Here a screencapture from this video from Steve Spak:

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

Here it is. The quality is

Here it is. The quality is pretty low though.

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

Thanks arie... here is the finished product...

with credit to you...

BBC's Jane Standley - Audio cuts-out when asked about WTC7

Link :

I tried my best to splice the HQ mpeg with the XviD, I think it looks ok, what do you reckon ?

Please feel free to vote and comment on this...

It's not a smoking gun in itself, but when taken into consideration with the LIVE video feed going down at 5:15pm just before the building would have collapsed behind her, to me gives it more meaning.

Thanks for the help dude, I gave you a mention...

Medium Quality XviD Download (16.3MB) :

Best wishes

Well, that looks pretty

Well, that looks pretty decent even with the splice doesn't it?

veritas, would you like to review the work i did in mapping the south side damage before i post it? If i did it correctly (and the Zafar picture is genuine) there is no room for a 10 story hole from the ground up. There is however, a substantial hole in the southwest corner that connects with the corner damage in the NIST photos. Also there's a 25 floor gash in the upper part of the building.

This would probably mean that the witnesses that described a 5 floor hole are talking about the SW corner hole, and Boyle, talking about a 20 story hole is talking about the gash in the upper part. There are no testimonies of two holes in the bottom part of the building.

My problem is that if the Zafar picture is faked then the south face from that photo can also not be trusted (and not used). However, it does match up with damage in the Steve Spak photo (it partly overlaps).

I really want to believe that NIST cheated with those pictures, but they are very consistent with eacht other, showing the same features and the more or less the same depth of damage. Also i really want to believe that the Zafar picture is genuine, because it give more info on the south side.

Thanks for the article that explains the time of the explosion. It is very thorough and the explosion clearly has nothing to do with the discrepancy in the corner damage.

Has anyone ever noticed that the right part of the NYPD corner photo is stretched out? Compare the size of the windows, with the size of the windows on the left. They are much bigger, which does make the damage appear larger than it really was. Maybe this because of the angle the photo was taken in, or because a wide angle lense was used.

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

WTC7 Damage Analysis...

1) Regarding large straight black "gash" from near roof down...

I first thought it might be soot, similar to the corner, if you zoom into the hi-res Zafar picture, you can see in between the smoke a similar "black mark" where the gash is seen on the ABC footage.

Also remember you cannot see below floor 12 on the Zafar image, so I can't really comment on the ground floor to the 12th.

2) "Compare the size of the windows, with the size of the windows on the left. They are much bigger"

These windows are wider (last two in row to corner), this can be confirmed on many pics of WTC7, including Zafars, the windows are higher on the 22nd and 23rd floors also.

I cannot really add more analysis on the Spak photos and videos except that the exhibit similar lightening of color and washy appearance.

When we've had a chance to view the 13,000 videos and photos held by NIST, I'll give you a better analysis.

That is a scandal in itself...

I still seriously doubt those pictures where the colors do not match the REAL color of WTC7, Zafar's picture is the only on that does !!!

Best wishes and feel free to ask any questions, I know a bit about WTC7, I just refuse to consider what NIST and Co have presented to date.

Best wishes

*** Added - You can find a few links to quite a bit of WTC7 photo research by waterdancer over at pilotsfor911truth, below is a "gateway topic with links to research"...

Link :

I don't necessarily agree with all the conclusions, but he has put a lot of effort looking at the pictures.


I never noticed that the

I never noticed that the windows on the far right are indeed bigger than those on the far left. Thanks for clearing that up.

Personally i trust the Zafar photo more than the NIST photos. But then again, the NIST photos are consistent with each other. I'm just trying to make sense of it all.

Could it possibly be that the (what seems to be) corner structure is in fact not connected to the west side facade and what we are seeing is part of a structure that is further back?

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

It would be very interesting

to know who had the means to cause both these technical disruptions. I'm inclined to believe there must have been some tag team in all the right places -- anyone got any details on the inner workings of broadcasting?

interns < internets

More WTC7 damage shots

These were passed on to me by ignoranceisntbliss.

Are those the original

Are those the original shots? I'm asking since they are mirrored.

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

I dont know.

Ya the mirroring is a mystery.
He got them from a friend who got them from the source... I'll let him post the details.

One of them looked familiar,

One of them looked familiar, then i remembered it's in the fema report.

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

The damage in photos jkheogh

The damage in photos jkheogh posted matches that in the Willie Cirone photo.

Free Image Hosting at

Would there be a possibility where both the NIST/FEMA photos and the Zafar photo are genuine? That the Zafar picture was taken earlier, before a collapse of the corner or an explosion ("seven is exploding", "it's blowin' boy") caused more extensive damage?

I need to get this sorted out before i post the map i made of the damage to the south side.

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

seven is exploding, happened around 10:20am...

according to some thorough analysis by Mintaka33

Can be found at...

Discussion at :


From what Zafar said, the WTC7 pic was taken at "around" 2pm


I still don't trust the pictures in NIST and to be honest, I'm not sure if I trust the other published pictures either....

I'm not saying they're FAKE, but I believe the smoke with mild manipulation portrays the damage as far worst than it was.

That is my opinion.

Best wishes

Be very suspect of any pics with that washed out color

That's just the sort of thing done to the Pentagon frames, presumably to compensate color/shadowing with the original bits and the tampered bits.

Unless someone's about to show an example of this "washed" effect, NOT due to age /damage, in an untampered photo.

Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.

Looks like someone pulled all the yellow out

and the only reason to do something like that is if you've manipulated the image and you want to hide your sins.

Of course, the area that's damaged is covered in enough smoke, so there is very little detail to the image behind it. Another trick to make it easier to manipulate an image.

I agree about the Aman Zafar images. Those are good hi-res images. Any idea what time he took them?

Which 911 movies do you have the English transcripts to?

Hey Arie!

Which 911 movies do you have the English transcripts to? I would like to make some more Danish subtitled versions of these movies.

if you could email them to me, that would be great, just look for my recent blogg entry and send me a list of the text files you got.
There's already a thousand views on my "911 Press for Truth,dansk" movie..



On a slightly related note, my subtitled version of "Money As Debt" has risen from 83 yesterday to 47 right now in's Top100. Booyaka! I sooo want to see it in the Top 10 -- maybe y'all could watch it? In case you've seen it already (or don't care, doh!), you could just mute it and surf away...

The revolution will be podcast.

interns < internets

One more picture to add to the mix

There's some damage on the upper floors on the SW corner.

There are the two burnt out windows on the west side about half way down.

Too bad another building is blocking the bottom floors.

Most of the smoke seems to be come from across the street from the fires in WTC 5 & 6 and the Pit.

Over all the corner doesn't look all that bad.