If I were a gambling man I’d bet the farm

A New Perspective on World Trade Center 7

Did the 9/11 cabal originally intend to demolish Building 7 earlier in the day,

when it was hidden beneath the North Tower’s dust cloud?

Jeremy Baker

If I were a gambling man I’d bet the farm. The 9/11 conspirator’s original attempt to demolish World Trade Center Building 7 came shortly after the collapse of the North Tower when WTC 7 was completely hidden under a thick cloud of debris—and the attempt was a complete failure. Whether through sabotage or malfunction, the pre-installed demolition system just didn’t operate as planned and what was to be the swift conclusion to an elaborate plot to completely destroy the entire WTC—and, of course, provoke war with the Islamic states—proved instead to be a blunder of epic proportions.

Five years after the fact, few who’ve bothered to scrutinize the strange fate of WTC 7 (and the attacks of 9/11 in general) believe that this building wasn’t brought down in a carefully conceived and professionally executed explosive demolition. The videos of this 47 storey building suddenly shuddering, then dropping like a rock at free-fall speed, straight down, causing no damage to adjacent buildings and piling up neatly within its footprint, are all that most people need to feel confident about this assertion. But other facts support this theory as well, not the least of which is a frank admission from the building’s owner that he and the FDNY ‘pulled’ WTC 7 (ostensibly as a safeguard) and then “watched as the building collapsed.”

So, for those who are convinced that WTC 7 was, in fact, intentionally demolished and did not collapse due to fire damage (the official story), the next question becomes: Why did the plotters wait until the end of the day to do it? What possible reason would they have had to wait seven hours after the attacks to finally put an end to the spectacle and bring the last WTC building crashing to the ground in an obvious demolition before the eyes of the world? Not one of the world class researchers, writers and activists who’ve bravely reopened the books on 9/11 have offered any sensible speculation in regard to this urgent and lingering question—the first clue in what may be an entirely new way of looking at the strange life and times of WTC 7.

The second clue is definitely the fires. It just doesn’t make sense. Every other aspect of the attacks was meticulously “covered” by the conspirators. The dramatic and well planned flights of the jets into the Twin Towers, the ensuing structural damage and fires was, to most observers, convincing “cover” for what is commonly believed to be the real cause of the buildings’ destruction—pre-planted explosives. (To some, this ploy may sound familiar. The very same scheme was played out in Oklahoma City when Timothy McVeigh’s crude fertilizer bomb provided “cover” for the explosive system planted within the Murrah Building, a fact confirmed by myriad reports from official sources that two of the bombs in the building were found intact and subsequently disarmed)

But what happened to WTC 7? Even as late as 3PM, the building’s struggling fires were barely even visible from outside the building. If the 9/11 conspirator’s odd intent was to demolish WTC 7 late in the afternoon, wouldn’t they have concocted a more believable scenario to “cover” its destruction? If fire was to be the preferred “cause” of its collapse wouldn’t they have lit up WTC 7 like a roman candle to give this dramatic (though implausible) scheme a fighting chance? It’s hard to imagine that what was essentially the coup de gras of the 9/11 psycho-drama received so little careful attention.

But set tiny fires on two floors and ‘pull’ WTC 7 before millions of witnesses they did, and what’s been the result? Widespread suspicion and disbelief, so much so that many researchers consider the strange collapse of WTC 7 to be the Achilles’ heel of the 9/11 deception, and for good reason.

Besides this plan’s general lunacy, a compelling array of evidence points instead to its likely alternative: the demolition of WTC 7 as it was being upstaged by the far more dramatic collapses of the Twin Towers—and as it was completely hidden from view. We could nick-name this phenomenon the “Marriot Vista Hotel” effect after the 33 story building that once stood between the Twin Towers. One of the seven WTC complex buildings, it was completely destroyed when the towers collapsed—and then, for all intents and purposes, vanished into obscurity.

It’s worth mentioning that some 9/11 researchers believe that dwelling on the more esoteric details of this complex conspiracy can distract us from more salient points, and to a certain extent I agree. But resolving the details of arguably the most dramatic and audacious mass-murder in human history, how could this possibly be ill-advised? So, in the spirit of responsible research (which may, at times, include a little well founded, if not entirely provable, speculation) this is what I think really happened to World Trade Center Building 7 on September 11^th.

The 9/11 conspirators, possibly operating out of the mayor’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM)—a reinforced, self-contained emergency command retreat built on the 23^rd floor of WTC 7 in 1999—first, orchestrated the collision of the planes into their targets, causing structural damage and fires that spread throughout the upper floors of both towers. They then armed and detonated the explosive system in the safely distant South Tower.

Shortly thereafter, the plotters exited WTC 7 and moved to a secure secondary location where they prepared for the near simultaneous demolition of the North Tower and WTC 7. This scenario is supported by comments made by Rudy Giuliani to ABC News and Peter Jennings; “We were operating out of there [the OEM] when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse, and it did collapse before we could get out of the building.” In a world that has never seen the collapse of a steel-framed high-rise due to fire damage (except on 9/11 when it happened three times) this clairvoyant statement is extremely suspicious in its own right. But it also confirms that the South Tower collapsed before the mayor and his people were able to (or chose to) exit WTC 7.

The secondary control center mentioned above may also have been alluded to in another report that the mayor was operating out of “a makeshift command post at 75 Barkley Street,” just north of and adjacent to WTC 7. Perhaps it was at this location that the conspirators then remotely detonated the explosives in the North Tower, the building shredding itself in a way oddly identical to the South Tower’s collapse.

As the North Tower fell a massive cloud of debris shot into the sky, quickly rising to almost twice the height of WTC 7. Then, when it was completely hidden from view, the conspirators triggered Building 7’s explosive system as well, the thick cloud of debris to obscure any signs that WTC 7 was being intentionally demolished.

After the smoke had cleared and the events of the day were relegated to history, the stories about Tower One’s plummeting debris impacting the electrical substation and 40,000 gallon diesel tank located on Building 7’s ground floors—causing massive internal explosions that kicked its feet out from under it—would’ve made good sense to most observers, providing satisfactory “cover” for the real cause of the building’s destruction: pre-planted explosives. Few would’ve given another thought to the demise of this, the last of all seven WTC buildings to be completely destroyed by “Islamic extremists” on September 11^th.

But, as posited above, Murphy was working overtime that day. Incredibly, the demolition system in WTC 7 simply didn’t respond as intended and the building defiantly remained intact, at least for another few hours.

After this stunning set-back, the plotters must have debated fiercely about what to do next. But, in the end, it was clear; Building 7 had to go. Besides hosting a possible control center for the attacks, who knows what ghosts haunted WTC 7 and the WTC complex in general — buildings that had been the Manhattan HQ of the Secret Service, ATF, FBI, IRS, DoD, SEC, CIA, Customs House and a long list of the world’s foremost banks and corporations for the past thirty years. Building 7 was also the only WTC building left standing (and the only one rebuilt since 9/11), making the plan to level (and then upgrade?) the entire complex incomplete. Remember, it can’t be said enough; despite their close proximity to many other buildings, the only structures entirely destroyed on 9/11 were all seven of the WTC buildings

So, in their shock and desperation, the conspirators regrouped. First, they scrambled to bring the demolition system in WTC 7 back online. Second, a new scenario had to be concocted, again, to “cover” what would otherwise be the forthcoming but completely inexplicable collapse of WTC 7. The fire-caused-the-collapse scenario was likely their first choice; it was the same scheme they used for the towers earlier that day.

It may have been well into the afternoon that the perpetrators finally made the decision to reenter WTC 7, climb to the 7th floor (the location of the OEM’s emergency generators) and begin setting fires. Next, they ascended to floor 12, one of three floors occupied by the SEC, and sparked blazes in this location as well. This was possibly done to eliminate incriminating evidence of sprawling white collar crime in case the demo-system failed again. Building 7 was reportedly the storage facility for millions of files on open investigations into money laundering, terrorism and organized crime, all of which have demonstrable links to US intelligence.

Eventually the explosive system was brought back online and they waited for the fires to build to convincing proportions. But they never did. Despite their best efforts and training, the conspirators were completely unprepared for this contingency, and it showed. Even by late afternoon, the fires in WTC 7 were still marginal and struggling. Unlike the towers, these fires were oxygen starved by windows that hadn’t been shattered and couldn’t be opened.

What a mistake to think of the 9/11 conspirators as criminal masterminds. Imagine their state of mind as they watched their plan to destroy one of the world’s most famous landmarks (and, of course, violently murder thousands of innocent people) unfold before their eyes. Even the most jaded covert operative wouldn’t likely remain un-rattled after having perpetrated such an outrage. And don’t forget, they had very similar performance problems in OK City. Certainly we can find Deepthroat’s words to Bob Woodward (in relation to yet another botched “op”) encouraging; “Truth is, these aren’t very bright guys and things got out of hand.”

But, for the conspirators, the clock was ticking. A burgeoning army of firefighters and rescue workers were descending on Ground Zero. To the 9/11 cabal, it was then or never, so down came Building 7 at 5:25 PM, its suspicious collapse to be sanitized by our megalo-media, a propaganda machine that could be relied upon to play ball after the smoke had cleared. And play ball it did.

Needless to say, any paradigm shift of this magnitude relating to an event as grave as 9/11 will likely undergo intense scrutiny, as it should. But I do believe that the available facts indicate this alternative. The only point to support the theory that the plotters kept WTC 7 up all day long for some unfathomable reason is that it did stay up all day long. But just because something happened, it’s no guarantee that it was meant to happen.

There are one or two additional points to consider as well—for one, the strange case of Master Secret Service Special Officer Craig Miller. The US House of Representatives website posts a tribute to Special Officer Miller who had apparently perished in WTC 7 during the “rescue effort” that day. But what really happened to Officer Miller—Secret Service Special Officer Miller? Not a firefighter. Not a rescue worker or cop—a high-ranking Secret Service special agent.

Who on earth were you rescuing, Officer Miller? WTC 7 had been evacuated. Rescue effort? How could this man possibly have died except by malfeasance? WTC 7 was emptied prior to getting hit by falling debris and being “overcome” by fire. Could this man have been an amateur arsonist who got too close to his fire? Could he have sabotaged the explosive system in WTC 7? Under the circumstances, isn’t the absurd claim that this man died during the “rescue effort” clearly a cover story for something that’s being carefully kept under wraps? Does his suspicious death support the idea that a brilliant plan had just gone off without a hitch or that a major “cock-up” had just occurred?

In addition; 1) isn’t it odd that the FDNY seemingly just gave up on such an exceedingly important and valuable building as WTC 7, one that had only marginal fires burning on two floors? 2) Among the thousands of photos of ground zero taken throughout the day, not one has been released that shows the debris damage to WTC 7’s south face that is alleged to have caused the “catastrophic” fires in the building. 3) Shouldn’t the building’s sprinkler system have made short work of any such blazes? 4) Wouldn’t the conspirators have preferred wrapping things up in one fell swoop that morning rather than prolonging the spectacle any longer than necessary? 5) Why would Rudy Giuliani locate his armored emergency command facility in the midst of the number one terrorist target in the western hemisphere (especially after the 1993 attack), a place likely to be destroyed (as it was) in the event of an actual attack?

And the bewildering notion, hinted at by one or two 9/11 theorists, that the conspirators originally planned to spend the day in the OEM “orchestrating the aftermath” of the attacks in the upper floors of a burning building is really stretching reason to the breaking point.

And, as for Larry Silverstein’s cryptic comments about ‘pulling’ Building 7 (originally aired on a PBS documentary in 2002), well, if I was the center of mounting suspicions about the inexplicable collapse of my building, I’d definitely be looking for a bone to throw at a doubtful but naive public. Using Karl Rove-like sleight of hand, Silverstein’s well-oiled comments offer us a vague accounting of the anomaly delivered to us on an almost subconscious level. However subtle this attempt may’ve been, his simple and concise phrasing—that “...they made that decision to ‘pull’ and we watched the building collapse”—has impressed many of the finest 9/11 researchers as being clear and unambiguous, and for good reason.

The only explanation that’s ever been offered by anyone in Silverstein’s defense is that he used the word ‘pull’ to indicate instead the cautious evacuation of WTC 7’s perimeter in the event of another unprecedented collapse. But I believe that this usage of ‘pull’ is just as damning, and this is why: For these guys to ‘pull,’ (clear the area around) Building 7 and then have it fall, right on cue, when physics doesn’t support the phenomenon, there’s absolutely no precedent for such a collapse and the building was, at best, only marginally involved is simply too much of an implausibility to take seriously.

Also, officials involved in the FEMA and NIST investigations into the odd collapse of WTC 7 specifically stated that “there was no fire fighting in WTC 7” to begin with. Under the circumstances, the ruse that Silverstein used the word ‘pull’ to mean evacuation, not demolition, just ends up looking like spin, pasted into place after his crude “hang-out” attempt on prime-time TV backfired and ended up creating more suspicion than it dispelled. This usage of the word ‘pull’ is just as incriminating as if he did intend the word to mean demolition—although, from the outset, the latter interpretation has always seemed to make the most sense. This and several other compelling points wholly tie Silverstein into the suspicious events of the day at the highest levels and have ensconced him firmly within the elite fraternity of prime suspects behind the attacks of September 11^th.

The story we’ve been told about WTC 7’s peculiar plunge to Earth is so blatantly absurd that it’s done nothing but fuel speculation about and attract attention to the attacks. But if WTC 7 was brought down as it was hidden under the debris cloud rising from the rubble of Tower One, few would have asked another question about it and what many theorists consider to be a 9/11 smoking gun would have been lost to history forever. Certainly this theory is supported by the evidence and deserves consideration by the broad community of 9/11 truth-seekers.

[In 2003 Jeremy Baker broke the story about Larry Silverstein ‘pulling’ WTC 7. He’s also been a 9/11 events organizer and frequent contributor to GO magazine. He lives in Seattle.]

Thanks to David Ray Griffin for his invaluable assistance

For a video of Silverstein’s comments about ‘pulling’ WTC 7, go to; www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/FDNY.htm

To see three excellent videos of WTC 7 imploding, go to; www.wtc7.net/videos.html