EXHIBIT A

The Amazing, Incredible--Pick Your Word

Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7

At around 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001 World Trade Center Building 7 (also known as the Salomon Brothers Building) a 47-story skyscraper housing offices of the CIA, Secret Service, IRS, Securities and Exchange Commission, and Mayor Giuliani's emergency bunker crumbled down into its footprint in less than 7 seconds in an apparent controlled demolition (see videos 1 and 2 below)

Building 7 was not hit by an airplane, had only minimal damage from falling debris (far less than several buildings that did not collapse,) and relatively small fires on only a few floors. How those fires started remains a mystery, and arson cannot credibly be ruled out.

The building's owner, Larry Silverstein, had signed a 99-year lease on the rest of the WTC complex including the twin towers just six weeks before, and had insured the complex heavily, including against acts of terrorism. Mr. Silverstein admitted in the PBS documentary America Rebuilds that he suggested to the "Fire Department Commander" that instead of trying to put out the fires burning inside the building, "maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it" and that "they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." (video 3 below.)

His spokesman has since denied that he meant "pull [the building down]". According to his spokesman, by "pull it" Silverstein meant "pull [the contingent of firefighters from the building]."

Silverstein collected almost $800 million dollars in insurance on the destroyed building, in addition to several billion more for the rest of the destroyed complex, even though he had only paid $15 million towards his 99-year lease. His investment, which made little sense at the time because of the fact that the twin towers were full of asbestos, paid off spectacularly.

Unlike the twin towers, building 7 was rapidly rebuilt and is today open for business though no plausible explanation for its collapse has ever been offered by anyone--other than intentional demolition with explosives. Mr. Silverstein is having trouble finding tenants for his new building. One need not wonder too hard why that may be.

Time to see the evidence for yourself and draw your own conclusions. Please note: if any videos don't play (i.e. say "loading" forever) double click on the image instead of the play button--that will take you directly to the site hosting the video! Please note that 9/11 truth-related videos are often removed from google™ and you tube™ and so you may have to search for the video elsewhere online until we can find an alternative and fix the link!

Now consider this:

Building 7 was where the SEC was storing files related to numerous Wall Street investigations. The files for approximately 3,000 to 4,000 cases were destroyed. [ National Law Journal, 9/17/01 ]

Lost files include documents that could show the relationship between Citigroup and the WorldCom bankruptcy. [ The Street, 8/9/02 , more ]

OK, this surely seems weird, but it has all been explained, right? Well... not exactly.

According to the Bush administration and the U.S. State Department's "conspiracy theory debunking" page, FEMA concluded that Building 7 collapsed as a result of fire and damage from the falling towers (that were 300 feet away from Building 7, with another building between them.)

FEMA's report, though, only speculates as to what may have caused the collapse, reaching no firm conclusions. FEMA's mandate, moreover, seems to have been to consider every explanation for the collapse except controlled demolition.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, a division of the Department of Commerce, has delayed its own report on building 7, stating in its initial report that:

The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.

To date there has been no final report issued on the collapse of building 7, despite clear evidence that it was demolished by use of explosives. In March 2006, NIST awarded a contract to a company named Applied Research Associates to continue looking for some other explanation that would exonerate Mr. Silverstein. Then in August another group was hired, including experts in controlled demolition like Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc. Are these folks impartial? How much are they being paid for their service? Is that a wise investment of taxpayer funds? Where is the oversight?

Let's hear what one authority, a Dutch demolitions expert, has to say...

GO ON TO EXHIBIT B