Care to dig into the pile of Building 7 debris with me? I started looking for corroboration of controlled demolition in the structural remains, and found none. You are invited to follow along, and see what I did find.

The purpose of this site is to gather as much of the debris evidence of Building 7 into one place as I can, and organize it in such a way so others can see the story it tells. It tells a story much different than the one told by Architects and Engineers For 911 Truth, the source of the controlled demolition (CD) claim, and who to the best of my knowledge, has never done an analysis of the debris patterns, structural remains, or video of collapse from many angles. This site is attempting to perform that function, which in my opinion, should have already been done by any professional organization making the claim Building 7 was collapsed on purpose with controlled demolition.

I’ve tried to think in terms of what a grand jury will be shown, and I believe it will be similar to what I have assembled. I ask readers to pretend you are a grand jury member. You have been assembled to hear the claim controlled demolition brought down Building 7. I’m not here to disprove that claim, but to show you what the evidence says did happen.

In order to grasp what the debris says, it is necessary to have foundational knowledge of the building, the neighborhood, and the damage. I am presently in the process of publishing those introductory chapters, and organizing the site.

An investigative approach requires ruthless objectivity. I am doing my utmost to allow the evidence to speak, and view it with no pre-conception. The photographic and video evidence will be there for readers to critique my reading of it. If I am unsure of a structural member being discussed, or it’s original location in the building, I point it out. Otherwise, I’m careful to be sure of structural member identification. This is no different than an auto accident investigation. Examination of skid marks, damage, and debris reveal how the accident occurred. Reverse engineering of the debris from Building 7 reveals how it fell.

The site is organized by chapter, or Fact, numbered in sequence. A running list of Facts are on the right column at the top. I encourage readers to start with Fact 1 and read in order. That list does not show for some reason, when you go to a page from the top menu, such as “Home”, or “Orientation”. I provided a link back to Fact 1 at the bottom of each of those pages. Click there and the list will then show and you can select another fact to study. I also encourage readers to visit the orientation page. Basic knowledge of the building and surroundings are vital for understanding what you are looking at in the debris. Future chapters will include debris analysis in order to show how the building fell, including illustrations of the the lower perimeter wall failure, based on the evidence. I will continue publishing chapters in a logical sequence as they are ready, at least one a week.

This is not a de-bunking site. The simple fact that it is necessary to write this material though, shows that it will be impossible to not fall into the de-bunking mode. There is a growing number of youth who are being convinced those buildings were intentionally collapsed with CD, yet the structural remains do not support that claim. Addressing that claim and it’s sources is unavoidable. Primarily, this site is to present the debris evidence, and illustrate what it means.

Comments are welcome. I encourage discussion, critique, questions, etc. I welcome opposing views, and encourage referral to any debris or structural evidence I may have overlooked which says otherwise. I welcome truthers. I know you are committed to your belief, and I respect that. The structural evidence however, has been omitted from the debate. I’m filling that gap, if you will.

Thank you for stopping by. Be sure to follow the blog for new posts.

Joe Hill

Fact 1


Building 7 Fact 3: How The Gash Got There

Follow along and explore the hard evidence of debris, debris patterns, and video of collapse. This is the type evidence which will be presented to a grand jury if there were to be a new investigation. Those who claim controlled demolition brought down WTC7 have to overcome this evidence with structural evidence of CD in order to open a new investigation. My research finds the Structural remains of Building 7 show no sign of controlled demolition. ____________________________________________________________________________________________

If the gash is fact, what caused it should be evident in the many WTC1 collapse videos. Indeed, there is one distinct piece of falling wall which originates from about the 60th floor and hurtles out of the smoke, directly on line with WTC7 in the vicinity of column 20. For readers who believe the distance perimeter wall fell from the Tower is because they were exploded outward, this piece began it’s fall after the collapse line had passed. Click on photos for detail:



Note when the piece first appears it is standing vertical, and it is a third of the way between WTC1 and 7! The upright angle tells us what was occurring in the dust below, which will be shown later in this chapter. Now watch the video. Watch at regular speed a few times, and you will see the piece strike between WFC and the Woolworth spire. Note the speed it is traveling at impact. Start at 1:34 and:


Another west view, more from the north, shows how deep the falling arc fell into WTC7: WTC7SourceOfGashWestViewComposite

North views confirm this piece lines up in the vicinity of columns 19 & 20:


Note collapse of the Tower has progressed well past the point of origin of this piece of perimeter wall. Start at 0:17:

All videos of collapse from north, east and west, show this piece of perimeter wall emerge from the smoke and dust at the same point during collapse. If anyone wishes to see more of the video references, just leave a comment. There can be no doubt; this is the piece of falling perimeter wall which gouged WTC7. Some have argued it impossible for the perimeter wall to travel the 329 feet between WTC1 and 7. It is well within possibility. A 32 story tall piece of perimeter wall falling over would indeed strike WTC7:


But I don’t think that is exactly what occurred. The anomaly of the piece emerging vertical, well outside the footprint of WTC1 puzzled me, until I remembered another puzzling anomaly; the lower north wall of WTC1 leaning against WTC6, yet not enough debris can be seen between the north wall and the core to push the north wall into WTC6: Operation Noble Eagle

What explains the lean of the north wall and part of it bent away from center? Granted, WTC1 collapse was largely internal, which splayed the perimeter walls outward, but with the top of the North Tower falling south, resulting in relatively little debris in the north part of the footprint, splaying of the lower, stronger, north perimeter wall did not make sense, until I was studying the source of WTC7 gash. Now it makes sense, and it fits with what we know. Because the top fell south, most of the debris fell in the southern half of the footprint, peeling the south wall like a banana, leaving a tall spire (60 or more floors) of the north wall swaying, and leaning slightly to the north, much like the core column spires were swaying before it collapsed, seen here. The swaying spire then tipped to the north, pulling the lower wall further north until it hit WTC6. The upper perimeter wall was then flung along it’s arc, something like this:


Falling in this manner is the only explanation for the piece emerging vertical. Note the gouges in WTC6 on the north side of the building. They corroborate the falling spires, and show a likely path of the spire which created the gash in WTC7. The large central hole in WTC6 was created by a large slab of perimeter wall from higher up than the 65th floor: 6WTCFallingSlabComposite

Watch WTC6 get pummeled starting at 9:55 (a dramatic view of WTC7 getting hit as well): The north side gouges were created later, by the lower 65 floor perimeter wall collapse:


Fact: The south face of WTC7 was slashed top to near bottom.

Fact: Barry Jennings most likely witnessed the gash being made, not an explosion (this fact will be developed further).

A grand jury will be shown all this corroborating evidence and more. The gash, Jennings’ location near the falling perimeter wall, and Jennings’ description of damage are corroborated and indisputable fact. The next questions answered for a grand jury are “How deep did the gash penetrate WTC7? All the way to the core?”, “Was there any other damage?”, and “Why does the gash matter?” Be sure to follow this blog for those answers, to be published soon.

Building 7 Fact 2: – The Gash

Building 7 Fact 2: – The Gash

Follow along and explore the hard evidence of debris, debris patterns, and video of collapse. This is the type evidence which will be presented to a grand jury if there were to be a new investigation. Those who claim controlled demolition brought down WTC7 have to overcome this evidence with structural evidence of CD in order to open a new investigation. My research finds the Structural remains of Building 7 show no sign of controlled demolition.


Before delving into the structural evidence, it is important to know about this fatal damage to the south face of Building 7. Watch this brief clip:

Haven’t seen this before? How did it get there? Be sure to follow this blog for those answers. This chapter establishes that indeed, Building 7 was slashed top to near bottom on the south face:


Photo by Tom Franklin 9/11/01:


When I first noticed this dark vertical line on the south face of WTC7, like most observers, I dismissed it as a shadow, or other building feature. Veiled in smoke, and because of it’s even shape, it was easy to overlook.  Further study several years later revealed it to be a fatal breach, largely responsible for building failure

(Click on photos for enlargement)

This photo shows gash from top down 7 floors. It actually begins as a gouge:


A close-up of the top reveals more. Enlarge for detail:


Middle portion:



The next photo I believe shows the lower portion of the gash. I cannot be positive of the column locations, but it appears to me the southwest corner of WTC7 is right at the corner of the white building on the left, which is Verizon Building. That would make the damage shown here indeed the bottom area of the gash, and part of the central hole described by firemen, who could see only parts of it due to the smoke.


Debris corroboration:


A comparison with the Bankers Trust Building:


A composite of the above photos:


The reason the line of the gash is cleanly vertical is because the piece of perimeter wall which did this damage was cradled between two columns as it fell, much like the edge of a sword. The nature of damage indicates the plane of the falling perimeter wall struck flat or at an angle, then turned sideways, and turned back to flat near the bottom.

WTC7 perimeter wall, and a panel of WTC1 perimeter wall being lowered into place:

WTC7GashWallFramework    WTC7GashPerimeterWallPanel

The lintel I-beams of WTC7  (horizontal piece between each column) were sandwiched between the columns, and were no match for the 50 or more tons of plummeting steel perimeter wall from WTC1. The only resistance was the welds on each end of the lintel. The WTC1 perimeter wall fell between two of those columns (photo is not the actual columns which were hit, but from the east wall).

The piece of perimeter wall from WTC1 which struck WTC7, based upon the width of the initial gouge at the top, was at least 2 panels wide when it struck, then turned sideways where the hole narrowed. Since it was falling at an arc, the fact it ripped through the wall down to at least the 23rd floor means it was longer than one panel.

Most of the falling wall panels from both towers were in units of 3 or more attached panels. Each panel weighed approximately 15 tons.

There is no question the south face of WTC7 was severed top to at least the 23rd floor, and likely to near the bottom. Those 24 floors of perimeter wall breach alone would be fatal for the building. NIST it seems, did not have this information when modeling collapse of WTC7, which makes their models moot, and is the source much confusion and distrust of the NIST report. Controlled demolition proponents claim south face damage was minimal.  These photos show damage to the building was fatal. Integrity of the perimeter wall, or “curtain”, in a large span design, is vital for lateral and diagonal stability.

How the building collapsed (to be addressed in another chapter) confirms the south face breach. Note the NE part of the building is folding vertically toward the camera at onset, and continues as collapse progresses. There is more curvature of the north face near the top than lower, which means the SE corner was leaning toward the camera, but the west part of the building was resisting, trying to fall south.

7Shiftannotated  WTC7GashFoldConfirmation

An argument can be made the SE corner could fall to the north without there being a gash, since the roof truss was at this point destroyed. It could, but without a break in the perimeter wall curtain on the south side, it would force the SW corner to the west. Any direction of lean in the east sector of the building would have distorted the SW corner. No such distortion can be seen in the above photos. There had to be a breach of south face in order for the perimeter wall collapse to initiate as it did.

The sudden lean of the SE corner occurred as soon as the west penthouse kinked, or when the roof truss failed completely.

An overhead illustration of the roof at initiation:


The fold of the north face at initiation (of perimeter wall part of collapse) confirms the south face top down breach.

The logical next question is how the gash got there. Video evidence confirms a section of WTC1 indeed hit the top of WTC7 in the vicinity of column 20, covered in the next chapter, “WTC7 Gash – How It Got There”.

Video sources:

Building 7 Fact 1: Barry Jennings Did NOT Witness A Bomb In Building 7 Before The Towers Fell.

Building 7 Fact 1: Barry Jennings Did NOT Witness A Bomb In Building 7 Before The Towers Fell.

Follow along and explore the hard evidence of debris, debris patterns, and video of collapse. This is the type evidence which will be presented to a grand jury if there were to be a new investigation. Those who claim controlled demolition brought down WTC7 have to overcome this evidence with structural evidence of CD in order to open a new investigation. My research finds the Structural remains of Building 7 show no sign of controlled demolition.
The Barry Jennings story is fact 1 because most controlled demolition proponents use his account of events on 9/11/01 as evidence of explosions in the building. In trying to corroborate his story, I found his time line did not add up, and his description of events fit more in line with a plummeting slab of WTC1 perimeter wall than any explosion. He was in a dark, enclosed stairwell. His interview with ABC Channel 7 News on 9/11/01:
The explosion he described would have been in this part of the building:
Here’s a photo of the south face of WTC7 after the South Tower collapsed (click photo for enlargement):
No sign of any explosion.
The explosion would have occurred in the area just above the promenade. Jennings was in the west stairwell on the 6th floor, and he stated the explosion was below him; that it destroyed the stairwell below him, dropping him so that he had to climb back up to the 8th floor.  This photo was taken from the following video. It has shots in and around Building 7 after collapse of WTC1. It has shots of the area under the Promenade, and no damage there either. It also includes an interview with Officer Bennette in the lobby, and there is no indication of any structural damage; only broken windows and debris from the collapse of the South Tower:
Jennings was in the west stairwell. Richard Rotanz, Detailed fire commander of FDNY to OEM, inspected WTC7 at approximately 1 pm on 9/11/01. I spoke with him and asked specifically which stairwell he used. He stated he entered the building from the east, ascended to the 15th floor using the east stairwell, and did not go into the west part of the building. He knew enough from that short inspection to predict building failure within hours. Barry Jennings then, would have been in the west stairwell; he stated it was destroyed from the 6th floor down. The west stairwell is close to the area where perimeter wall from the collapse of WTC1 would have landed. As fast as the falling steel was traveling, and with Jennings being in an enclosed stairwell, it surely sounded like an explosion when it hit bottom. It is doubtful he would have heard anything until.
But this is not the only evidence of a mistaken time line.
-He noted the building was getting very hot during the same time frame he crawled back up to the 8th floor, prior to when he claims each tower collapsed. The building would not have gotten “very hot” until after collapse of at least the South Tower, whose collapse is believed to have ignited fires, but I can find no evidence of fire prior to collapse of the North Tower. The alarms were going off due to the smoke and dust in the building from South tower collapse, apparently. Regardless, the building getting hot prior to Jennings’ timeline for each Tower collapse shows him to be mistaken. The 8:51 a.m. temperature reading was 68°F at Central Park, 72°F at La Guardia, and 73°F at both JFK and Newark Airports.
-He stated the explosion was beneath him and blew him back. An explosion beneath him should have blown him upwards. A 50 ton slab of steel falling near him would have blown him back. The gentleman he was with, Michael Hess, described the moment as a sudden wind and much more dust and ash then what was present before.
-He exhibited no explosive type injuries. He should have fragment wounds at least.
-Vesey Street and the Promenade directly above it, which the lobby of WTC7 overlooks, prior to either Tower collapsing, was crawling with first responders and evacuees. No one reported an explosion in 7!
There are other question marks in the interviews. Too much for here, but I am happy to discuss in greater detail in the comments.
Reach your own conclusions. I believe the Jennings account points more to the horrific damage sustained by Building 7, rather than any explosive having been detonated. His description of damage matches perfectly with multi-ton slabs of steel perimeter wall panels slamming through the building.
The second interview is no longer available in full. Parts of it can be found on various videos. Here at the 4:56 mark Jennings mentions the heat as he climbed back up to the 8th floor:
Edit 2/3/14: I found a video with most of the 2nd interview which starts at 0:25:
The next question is, did a part of WTC1 falling perimeter wall penetrate WTC7 deep enough to have caused the damage Jennings described? The next two facts, “The Gash” and “How It Got There”, will address that question. The answer is yes. But don’t take my word for it. Let the facts speak.

Thank you for reading. Future posts will be more pictures and fewer words.

Joe Hill