BBC Aware of WTC7 collapse 23 mins before it does?

[seamus]

There is something seriously wrong here. I DOWNLOADED the video and now it's gone off my computer. Maybe google used the http connection to make the file wipe itself.

this thing is getting blasted off the torrent sites like crazy. It's the make/break story for us all not to look like nutters anymore ;)

I have downloaded it and will put it on as many places as I can find to put it!!!.

The oligarchic nerve!

s

[seamus]

http://www.mediafire.com/?5j2yjmycyty

here is a link to the missing google video. we'll see how long it lasts.

[megatron]

nice work man , i have been on this for the last 2 hours. i have uploaded it to you tube , just doing google vids now.

i will post the links on here when there done.

[anoninnyc]

i am anoninnyc but i haven't uploaded any videos

[seamus]

http://www.meganova.org/torrent/d579ec51dc6d17e7d0fac9a6534c9ba3e06c12c5/911+-+WTC7+-+23+Minute+Warning.torrent

is working.

[seamus]

nice work man , i have been on this for the last 2 hours. i have uploaded it to you tube , just doing google vids now.

i will post the links on here when there done.
lots o luck.

I tried posting to UK google video and US google video, with the name "Puppies and Kittens playing" and after a very long time processing, there were errors all three times.

s

torrent's the place to beeeee

[megatron]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt9kU9VZ-f8
ok thats you tube

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7535401055684448882
thats google

[notaslave]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt9kU9VZ-f8
ok thats you tube

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7535401055684448882
thats google

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=policestate1984 also has it. I added to my faves thought it was your copy. I have sent a friend invite to you.

[seamus]

Good on ya!

[limelady]

Well done guys!!

What a scandal!!!!

I LOVE IT

Lets hope this piece of juicy video footage tips the scales!

LL

[i_am]

Well done guys!!

What a scandal!!!!

I LOVE IT

Lets hope this piece of juicy video footage tips the scales!

LL



I Love it too

As fast as they take it down, more go up. WTG guys

[seamus]

I think they have stopped trying to take them down. It only fuels the "Oh, so they have something to hide, eh?" flame. Next stop: Damage Control! Let's see what fairy-tale Aunty Beeb can come up with this time.



LOL :cool:


s

[megatron]

made this vid with all the evidence included

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD9XpRQRH6E

[anoninnyc]

now noone can call us conspiracy nuts. this is conspiracy FACT!!!

[seamus]

Did you see the clip where dan rather says "there it goes... a controlled demolition".

s

[anoninnyc]

i didn't see that. checked out of the library the popular mechanics debunking 911 book, what a load of horse manuer. weird thing is i wanted to send the youtube link of the bbc thing to likeminded people i know of on youtube and had trouble doing so... had to cut and paste the address of bbc video on youtube rather than the pull down thing with my favorited videos.

[pollock]

Thank you thank you thank you, because of people like you :cool: (and me if I had the technical knowhow) the truth might set us free!
Lets never give up!

[anoninnyc]

people with technical knowledge. i am not one of them, need to save this clip and keep posting and reposting all over the internet. this is the most solid proof i have yet seen. i mean, there are solid explanations, but this is for the average person who doesn't understand that the towers could not have fallen from the airplanes alone.

my theory:

cia and mossad knew what al qaeda was going to do (at the very least)

they helped them along perhaps without them even knowing it. by letting the hijackers on the plane, etc. letting it happen. not to mention how the usa really funded osama and the taliban all these years

cia or whoever these villains are put the bombs in the buildings and set them off when the planes hit.

they needed to get rid of building 7 more for the sec documents in there than even the cia. note all of the trading irregularities prior to 911. thus the bombs were already in building 7 and they took it down. or pulled it as they said.

This is just a theory. All i know is that building 7 is where their work got sloppy. any thoughts???

[limelady]

made this vid with all the evidence included

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD9XpRQRH6E

You put that together?

EXCELLENT! We have some clever people here :)

Well done and thanks for the link!

[pollock]

I just sent the links to my family!

[klinker]

Diggs is censoring this story. Almost 1000 diggs and it should be in the top ten but it is not. :mad:

[limelady]

Diggs is censoring this story. Almost 1000 diggs and it should be in the top ten but it is not. :mad:

Maybe it takes a day or so for them to update?

[klinker]

That's not how Diggs works. The ranking list updates are dynamic and done on the fly. They are burying it that's for sure. Google and youtube gave up trying to pull the video in the end.

[limelady]

That's not how Diggs works. The ranking list updates are dynamic and done on the fly. They are burying it that's for sure. Google and youtube gave up trying to pull the video in the end.

O.K. Seems like you're right and they are suppressing this. Are you taking screen-captures of their lack of producing the goodies?

[klinker]

O.K. Seems like you're right and they are suppressing this. Are you taking screen-captures of their lack of producing the goodies?

Nope but there is no shortage of those that are gathering the facts. I have already e-mailed them asking why they are censoring the story.

[newworldorder]

Have a quick look at WWW.prisonplanet.com

Jane Stanley being interviewed 23 minutes before the WTC7 also known as Saloman Brothers Building or Building 7.

Did they press release to early quite clearly they did as she talks about the collapse of WTC7. When quite clearly it is standing tall right behind her. I have e-mailed the BBC, but have not heard back yet.

regards steve britton (newworldorder)

[megatron]

why is this thread sinking. is it not as important as fluoride in the water ?

[lord rothlizard]

Well done guys, keep up the good work! I think most people on the planet know it was an inside job. Even my mother who thinks I'm filling my head with rubbish agrees with me on this one.:D

[warrior]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

the link is still on youtube for now

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/february2007/270207trustanything.htm

[warrior]

i saw that clip this morning, a great clip and proves there was foreknowledge, lets hope the word spreads further

[midwich cuckoo]

Have a quick look at WWW.prisonplanet.com (http://WWW.prisonplanet.com)

Jane Stanley being interviewed 23 minutes before the WTC7 also known as Saloman Brothers Building or Building 7.

Did they press release to early quite clearly they did as she talks about the collapse of WTC7. When quite clearly it is standing tall right behind her. I have e-mailed the BBC, but have not heard back yet.

regards steve britton (newworldorder)

I too have emailed the BBC but I really don't expect a reply.

[anoninnyc]

why is this thread sinking. is it not as important as fluoride in the water ?

this is freaking huge. though i do see the obvious lies they will come up with to debunk. someone on general thread said they will say that it was a bluescreen behind her of delayed footage or some bs like that. but the fact that the videos kep on getting pulled is a sign to me that they are afraid of this story.

[john white]

Auntie gets owned!

A beautiful day

[midwich cuckoo]

Here's the BBC's response to the recent wtc7 story -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

Sorry I can't seem to cut and paste it here.

Needless to say their response doesn't prove anything either way.

Be sure to read the excellent comments below the response.

[limelady]

Hmmm, well after reading all the comments under the BBC statement, it doesn't look like anyone has bought it! They have MASSIVE egg smears all over their faces!

LL

[21_12_2012]

hahaaa ... how do you feel BBC !!!
Gutted....and worried.....hopefully.:D

[anoninnyc]

yeah, they lost the footage. sorry i am american can anyone tell me what a cock up is? like a f**k up? yeah, to lose tapes of only the most important day in history. they got owned. score one for our team. victory. they are unravelling. truth has power.

[tinmenace]

Is this the Dan Rather one you're talking about?

http://www.tyrannyalert.com/dan.htm

[i_am]

yeah, they lost the footage. sorry i am american can anyone tell me what a cock up is? like a f**k up? yeah, to lose tapes of only the most important day in history. they got owned. score one for our team. victory. they are unravelling. truth has power.

what a cock up is? like a f**k up?
Yep!

What a joke :rolleyes:

THEY MADE A MISTAKE???? Some mistake to report something that is yet to happen and should by all sane standards never have been an option.

THEY NO LONGER HAVE THE TAPES???? Why? Were they confiscated like all others that showed anything that went against the official story? Sure is a cock-up!

IF ANYONE HAS A TAPE..........???? WTF? They have obviously viewed it on You tube as they quote a comment, Duuuh!

They haven't even tried to debunk it, just said that if they were told something before it happened , 'it was an error.' Bloody hell, if I had been fed that sort of 'error' I would want to know by whom, why, how.

[dondaz]

This is good news for the movement. A lot more things on 911 are going to come out this year. More people are going to come forward with hardcore evidence. I can feel it.

This is great!

[limelady]

This is good news for the movement. A lot more things on 911 are going to come out this year. More people are going to come forward with hardcore evidence. I can feel it.

This is great!

Yep!

For the controllers, 9/11 was meant to be the 'goose that laid the golden egg' - unfortunately for them its going to be the event that ends up cooking their goose! :D

LL

[midwich cuckoo]

If you haven't already, have a look at this - The BBC responds (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1366)

[limelady]

If you haven't already, have a look at this - The BBC responds (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1366)

Yes, thanks. I've already been there and left them a little comment. ;)

[midwich cuckoo]

I tried to leave a comment took me a while to type too, but it wasn't accepted, in fact it wasn't even checked!.

[chris]

It's funny that they are becoming the tin foil hat loons with explanations like that....I love the infowar. This is a great time to be in and a great thing to be involved in.

[janeway]

Since last night I searched everything to see that footage of the BBC, and each time it was already deleted or whatever, not for showing!
Google, Youtube, and many other ones; I also downloaded the 1 gig file and went to bed, it was a very slow download, this morning it was gone? Erased from my computer?!:confused:

Anyway I found it via another link and had to laugh all the way through it.
This is so HOT!
And all the efforts of trying to delete the footage is sensational; googlevideo site was down for 2 hours last night (I heard someone telling this).
So the BBC has direct influence in what Google and Youtube shows?
The more efforts they do, the more they will get it hit directly in their face.

This is steaming hot and they will burn themselves.
And thanks to all the wizzkids/man/woman who put this footage directly on the internet again, one way or the other. Thanks.

[bigus_dickus]

the bbc might have had the info that it was to collapse as some other people did who were clearing the area at the same time the live coverage was taking place. she may have mixed the warnings with the events that already happened, but what's for sure is that they were prepared for the collapse of the particular building as we can see from other footage.
this vid just confirms the other footage, it does not make the bbc part of the conspiracy.

because in that way, every other channel that got the same information and aired it, would be part of the conspiracy too, but they could have made a mistake, or repeated the info from bbc or some other source. we can't automatically reach to such conclusions with no sufficient evidence.

[harx bhullar]

It has nothing to do with the BBC being "in on it".

It proves the allegations that there we're warnings wtc7 was going to collapse some 25 minutes before the fact. In itself nothing suspicious. There were reports of danger of collapse some 3 hours before the actual event. Somewhere the collapse-threat got picked up and misinterpreted as it having collapsed already. The flawed newsreport got sent out through bbc's news-coordination unit or somewhere else up in the chain, and the bbc just ran it.

So far so good.

But with Silverstein saying "pull it", and the cnn footage where police officers are warning people to get back because "theyre bringing it down", AND with the bbc-reporter saying the president had been informed, there's no way back. It's the smokiest gun in the west..

if WTC7 can be proven to have been CD'd, it's game over.. No way around that.

[deca]

why did she not check her info about the building falling if it was just hear say,
all she would have done is turn here head, plus would they not try to get a shot
picture of the fallen building.The news must of come from a realiaby source!!!!!
bbc busted!!!!!

[albie]

We should all e-mail them with our corrections.

[sid1]

Check out the editors blog - read the comments. Do let him know what you think!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

The original footage is here:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/270207trustanything.htm

[john white]

Bickus dickus and co:

Are you trying to crack me up? "shows nothing" etc LOL!:

The BBC report the building as having already collapsed: when reporter Jane standly is standing in a hurridly rented office space with a clear view of building 7 right behind her: as she also reports the building has collapsed: 20 minutes later: it does collpase

So the BBC is repeating statemetns given to them without checking them out, and here is the system caught out manufacturing history: except for those without eyes to see!

Its all coming out thick and fast: a perfectly timed leak with more to come

In the meanwhile, here's more to check out:

Breaking news on this story:

From PUMPITOUT.com:
"Yesterday I tried getting a hold of Jane Standly and the guy said she was gone for the day. I forgot about the 5 hrs time difference. He told me to call her today and and shed be there. He gave me her direct number: 011 - 44 - (0)208 - 576 - 4440

Started calling at 7:30am, when someone finally answered her phone this is what they had to say !
click link to listen or right click and save as to download !"

Jane's Office:
www.pumpitout.com/audio/janes_office.mp3

Enjoy!

Al K Myst

Props to Al K Myst, right click mp3 link and "save target as", then play from your hard drive (didnt work for me direct)

Very interesting

[john white]

ROFL!

That blog is good reading sid

more on this story:

Breaking news on this story:

From PUMPITOUT.com:
"Yesterday I tried getting a hold of Jane Standly and the guy said she was gone for the day. I forgot about the 5 hrs time difference. He told me to call her today and and shed be there. He gave me her direct number: 011 - 44 - (0)208 - 576 - 4440

Started calling at 7:30am, when someone finally answered her phone this is what they had to say !
click link to listen or right click and save as to download !"

Jane's Office:
www.pumpitout.com/audio/janes_office.mp3

Enjoy!

Al K Myst

Props to Al K Myst, right click mp3 link and "save target as", then play from your hard drive (didnt work for me direct)

Very interesting

[sean]

I just phoned up the BBC News room, and was told there will be no further official statement from the BBC, apart from the editors blog page - where the editor may or may not respond to the comments.

Everyone should remember that the blog page ISN'T an official route for getting information from the BBC, and so i would suggest phoning the complaints line and asking for the original sources for the news report.

I spoke to the guy that runs the newsroom, and upon asking how i would go about finding out where the sources for the original report came from he informed me that he was going to hang up the telephone.

[deca]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/280207timestamp.htm

[bigus_dickus]

Bickus dickus and co:

Are you trying to crack me up? "shows nothing" etc LOL!:

no, but, have it your way.

The BBC report the building as having already collapsed: when reporter Jane standly is standing in a hurridly rented office space with a clear view of building 7 right behind her: as she also reports the building has collapsed: 20 minutes later: it does collpase

right. can you repeat it one more time please? i didn't hear it right.

So the BBC is repeating statemetns given to them without checking them out, and here is the system caught out manufacturing history: except for those without eyes to see!

do you mean that the BBC is one credible media source that is impossible of transmitting untrue information?

do you also mean that you have always trusted the BBC until now? and you feel betrayed, as if they turned their back on you and humanity?

what do you get out of this?

[sean]

We can try and force the BBC's hand by bombarding them with complaints to the BBC information line. This is the ONLY official route of trying to find out what happened. Ofcom cannot deal with news or BBC accuracy, as they are a law unto themselves. The newsroom will simply hang up the phone and have no obligation to give information. And the weblog is merely the Editors opinions, and not an official response to complaints or views of the public.

Have a look at the editors blog page - http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

That's the level of information they are willing to give us.

If we want any kind of public response that has to deal with the issues, the best we can do is phone and or email their complaints department - www.bbc.co.uk/complaints (http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints)

[seamus]

It's funny that they are becoming the tin foil hat loons with explanations like that....I love the infowar. This is a great time to be in and a great thing to be involved in.

You are sooooo right! :D

This is in fact the most exciting time that has ever been. I'm about to wet myself!

s

[notaslave]

First he says in his blog ...A) "We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening."

Then he says .. B) "We did what we always did - sourced our reports, used qualifying words like "apparently" or "it's reported" or "we're hearing" and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving."

And goes on to say .. C) "Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I've spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn't remember minute-by-minute what she said or did - like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing;"

So how could he be sure that A) We didnt get told in advance?

Doesnt make sense to me, looks like bullshit, smells like bullshit therefore ... it's bullshit

[john white]

no, but, have it your way.



right. can you repeat it one more time please? i didn't hear it right.



do you mean that the BBC is one credible media source that is impossible of transmitting untrue information?

do you also mean that you have always trusted the BBC until now? and you feel betrayed, as if they turned their back on you and humanity?

what do you get out of this?

Well in case you've really missed the point, it's a big inconstancy in the 9/11 "story" regarding a skyscrapper the size of Canary wharf that collapsed without the majority of people even hearing about it in a manner entirely consistant with controlled demolition, which was not even mentioned in the 9/11 Whitewash commision report, and this footage is a useful tool for exposing the crime and has the PTB ducking for cover like cockroaches

You were talking to me about waking up?

[deca]

thease guys didn`t get there timing wrong
http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/5739/wtc7smallsy3.gif (http://imageshack.us)

[sean]

Richard Porter - Head of BBC News World - Email response to me asking where the missing footage has gone, and offering him the video footage I have that the BBC supposedly "lost"


I don't know the answer to that question...it happened before I worked for BBC World. If you send me a copy of your footage, I'l reimburse you for any cost. I'm based at Television Centre in London.

Richard

[seamus]

That story was reported as lame and subsequently removed by the digg
community. Please review our FAQ (digg.com/faq) for more information on
the promotion/burial of stories.

--digg support

well DUhhh. It's still there! it hasn't been removed. This dolt didn't even look at it. I say we all go and bury every story there for being lame in comparison to this

s

[seamus]

This Time It's CNN!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1LetB0z8_o&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Einformationliberation%2Eco m%2Findex%2Ephp%3Fid%3D20521

http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=20521

Maybe y'all have seen it. I been away most of 2 days.


s

[seamus]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-770929074608938354&hl=en-GB

hurry while it's still there!

s

EDit. uh, this is embarrassing, but, uh... did anyone save it? it's GONE already.

[midwich cuckoo]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-770929074608938354&hl=en-GB

hurry while it's still there!

s

EDit. uh, this is embarrassing, but, uh... did anyone save it? it's GONE already.

So I see, they've done it again!.:mad:

[seamus]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.


This time I saved it!!!


s

[happyone]

I sent a complaint to the BBC, below is a copy of the email I have JUST received, BTW I never once mentioned the word "conspiracy" in the email I sent them:

Quote:
>From: "BBC World" <bbcworld@bbc.co.uk>

"Hello and thank you for your email in reaction to claims made in an article published online.
>
>The notion that the BBC has been part of any conspiracy is patently ludicrous. We reported the situation as accurately as we could, based on the best information available. We cannot be categorical about the exact timing of events that day - this is the first time it has been brought to our attention and it was more than five years ago. If in the chaos and confusion of that day our correspondent reported that the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been a genuine error."

[thirdwave]

I sent a complaint to the BBC, below is a copy of the email I have JUST received, BTW I never once mentioned the word "conspiracy" in the email I sent them:

Quote:
>From: "BBC World" <bbcworld@bbc.co.uk>

"Hello and thank you for your email in reaction to claims made in an article published online.
>
>The notion that the BBC has been part of any conspiracy is patently ludicrous. We reported the situation as accurately as we could, based on the best information available. We cannot be categorical about the exact timing of events that day - this is the first time it has been brought to our attention and it was more than five years ago. If in the chaos and confusion of that day our correspondent reported that the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been a genuine error."


So what they are saying is.... we do not tell you the news... we just tell you what we are told to tell you... in this case no one at the BBC new the building collapsed but at some point we were told it had collapsed so we thought we would officially announce it live on TV for millions to hear.

wriggling indeed, but certainly not wriggling out of it :)

it does raze the question as to how many other things do they get wrong due to their "best information available"? and who gives them this info??

I mean a building collapsing is something you cant just think you saw by mistake and then think....oohhh sorry i thought that building collapsed, must have been a fly or something...

And it also is a crazy coincidence that they actually got the info wrong.... and THEN by amazing coincidence the very building collapses!!

I think the BBC should be given a medal for proving them selfs and their psychic abilities!!

[dondaz]

I think the BBC should be given a medal for proving them selfs and their psychic abilities!!

They've been learning from Finton Dunne - The Psyop Master!:D

[happyone]

So what they are saying is.... we do not tell you the news... we just tell you what we are told to tell you... in this case no one at the BBC new the building collapsed but at some point we were told it had collapsed so we thought we would officially announce it live on TV for millions to hear.

wriggling indeed, but certainly not wriggling out of it :)

it does raze the question as to how many other things do they get wrong due to their "best information available"? and who gives them this info??

I mean a building collapsing is something you cant just think you saw by mistake and then think....oohhh sorry i thought that building collapsed, must have been a fly or something...

And it also is a crazy coincidence that they actually got the info wrong.... and THEN by amazing coincidence the very building collapses!!

I think the BBC should be given a medal for proving them selfs and their psychic abilities!!

Amongst other things I replied asking them if that was their same response to the mother who lost her son during that collapse :confused:

[carvey]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question but why is this footage just being shown now and not 5 years ago? Thanks

[tinmenace]

Forgive me if this is a dumb question but why is this footage just being shown now and not 5 years ago? Thanks

No such thing as a dumb question when it comes to this. It's a good question, and who really knows the answer. What we do know is that it's not fake, clearly it's real.

So, what if someone on the inside realized what a big hoax this is and decided that he/she couldn't live with himself if he didn't expose it. What if he knew it was THAT important to mankind and our struggle against evil, and risked EVERYTHING to get the information out? It's possible isn't it? Maybe that's why the tapes are missing...someone stole them and leaked them.

If that is true, then it wouldn't surprise me if someone ends up missing or dead due to a suspicious self-inflicted wound. This is how they operate. But, at least the truth is pushing through. At least there are brave people that will not allow fear to stop them from doing the right thing.

[fintandunne]

9/11 Campaigners:
Beware the BBC-WTC7 Sucker Play

by Fintan Dunne, Editor http://BreakForNews.com
1 March 2007

Leading CIA-run 9/11 Fake websites are running hard with the story
that the BBC announced the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7
well before it's eventual demise, and are touting this supposed gaffe as
a major embarrassment for the official version of events, and a shot
in the arm for the 9/11 Truth movement.

Of course, it's the complete reverse, but don't expect the CIA Fakes
to point that out to 9/11 campaigners hungry for any gain in their
battle to expose the grisly truth of September 11th.

Many of the truth campaigners, already sitting on a veritable raft of
incriminating evidence that the official tale is bogus, are keen to add
what Alex Jones' Prison Planet website has called the BBC's "Psychic
clairvoyance" to their list of gripes against the mainstream version.

Writing on Prison planet, Paul Joseph Watson bluntly says: "Of course
they were told that WTC7 was coming down", and presses the BBC to
reveal the source of it's misinformation.

The BBC has responded that if they misreported, it was "an error, no
more than that". They quote a blogger saying "so the guy in the studio
didn't quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves
conspiracy..."

SWINGS AND ROUNDABOUTS

There is admittedly some wry humor in the sight of a reporter advising
that WTC7 has collapsed, while it stands proudly in the background.
But the real joke is on the truth movement.

Understanding why requires an appreciation for political dynamics,
something of which the cover-up team are keenly aware, but which
comes harder to those unversed in the slimy tricks of the trade of public
opinion management and manipulation.

The CIA Fakes, who espouse 9/11 truth -while continually undermining it,
are steadfastly keeping the movement focused on the misdeeds of it's
"enemies" in the mainstream media and the political establishment. It's
a clever emotional tactic which neuters the effectiveness of the whole
movement.

The reason why, is known to every media manager in every political
party which has a support base larger than the relatives of it's own
members.

Rhetoric about how nasty the other guys are is great fodder for the true
believer membership, but is of little use in attracting the huge group
known as the 'swing voter'. The process of public persuasion is one of
steadily winning over the middle ground. One percent here, two percent
there eventually leads to gaining a clear majority.

One of the most potent tactics in winning that ground is to try engineer
situations where the 'other guys' seem to be the extremists while one's
own party is portrayed as a bastion of sensibility. Of course the media
managers in the 'other guy' party are as aware of this and are as adept
at refusing bait and 'spinning' things the opposite direction. In modern
politics this produces a balanced tug-of-war where gains are hard to
come by.

JOKE BACKFIRES

That kind of appeal to the middle-ground is exactly the clever game
being played by the engineers of the BBC-WTC7 'controversy'.

To the undecided, the question of the BBC calling it wrong on the WTC7
collapse seems like no big deal. Two skyscrapers had already fallen that
day, and word had been circulating for some hours prior to the BBC
misstatement that the burning Building 7 was in imminent danger of
collapse. The question of why that kind of word was circulating is
another issue entirely, by the way.

So, on the face of it, as far as the undecided are concerned, making a
big deal about the BBC error can be portrayed as the raving of fanatics.

Which is exactly how the BBC are portraying all this. Expect other media
to follow suit in due course. And expect the BBC to chalk this down in
their book of lunatic fantasies of the 9/11 truth Movement. To be
wheeled out at every suitable occasion to deem themselves as the
aforementioned bastion of sensibility.

Meanwhile, expect the CIA Fake websites to rail against the BBC and
keep pushing their demands for the organization to come clean. All of
that will build a nice file of quotable quotes from the CIA-controlled
luminaries in the 9/11 truth movement to be used by the mainstream.

Really, all this might well have been a storm in a teacup, were it not
for a couple of things used to hook the interest of the 9/11 truthers.

A video of the BBC broadcast went missing on Goggle, and now the BBC
has apparently 'lost' it's tapes of their own transmission. Both of
these were smoke screening lures to try convince the 9/11 campaigners
that there really was something of advantage to them being suppressed.

Actually, the whole thing, triggered by the original 'discovery' of
video of the BBC transmission, has been carefully timed to follow
hard on the heels of the BBC's own one-sided 'Conspiracy Files' episode
attacking the 9/11 Truth Movement.

It's designed to copper fasten perceptions carefully built up in that
program, that 9/11 campaigners are lunatics who tread insensitively on
the memories of the bereaved while propagating wild allegations.

And so, as if on cue, in fact precisely on cue, comes a package of
wild assertions wrapped in suspicious circumstance and pushed by
CIA-controlled personalities and websites --designed to prove the BBC
right in their recent demonization based on carefully selected 'facts'.

So the BBC lost their 9/11 tapes, did they? I think not. The only
thing lost in this case is yet another round of the clever courting
of middle ground opinion over the true nature of the 9/11 attacks.

But then, you hardly expect the 9/11 truth campaigners to win in a
mainstream arena where the opposition is playing one-sided, dirty
PR games and is aided and abetted by the CIA-engineered leaders
and spokespersons for the 9/11 truth movement.

Even if ordinary 9/11 truth campaigners wise up to the latest devious
episode in this information war, it will matter little. The CIA Fakes
will shrill on relentlessly, providing more and more quotable quotes
to be used against the people they nominally represent.

USE THE INTERNET

The only arena where this battle for minds will be won is the internet.

It's as stacked a deck as the mainstream media, due to the vast army
of well-funded CIA Fake 9/11 websites. But at least the ordinary
9/11 truth campaigners can articulate a more balanced view in forums
and on blogs. Sans the simplistic booby-trapped sloganeering of their
own CIA-chosen 'leadership'.

Only by exposing the deeper manipulations such as the one detailed
here, can any ground be gained. In truth, the numbers are vast who are
deeply suspicious about the official tale of 9/11. Given the facts,
their suspicions would soon harden into convictions.

The 9/11 campaigners have a vast array of facts much more convincing
that mere bitching about the accuracy of a staged BBC error.

But, they'll never get those facts into the mainstream. Where even
as I write a travesty of fact is being passed off as a legitimate 9/11
controversy, and an elaborate farce is being played out to try hold
the line on the crumbling edifice of the official account of 9/11.

We must expose the CIA Fakes. Unless and until we do, they will
continue to play fools to the gallery of public opinion.

Spread the word.

Fintan Dunne, Editor
BreakForNews.com

Read "The CIA Fakes":
http://www.BreakForNews.com/TheCIAInternetFakes.htm

[john white]

A video of the BBC broadcast went missing on Goggle, and now the BBC
has apparently 'lost' it's tapes of their own transmission. Both of
these were smoke screening lures to try convince the 9/11 campaigners
that there really was something of advantage to them being suppressed.

Actually, the whole thing, triggered by the original 'discovery' of
video of the BBC transmission, has been carefully timed to follow
hard on the heels of the BBC's own one-sided 'Conspiracy Files' episode
attacking the 9/11 Truth Movement

Check this out: this is the meat of Fintan's Article (apart from rubbishing Alex Jones and then saying how it undermines the truth movement to rubbish people)...

Firstly, how does Dunne know its a smokescreen? Hes simply decided to define it as a smokescreen: he does'nt know what the BBC executives decided to do. But he's perfectly prepared to use his "rationality" to "sell" a scenario of BBC bosses leaking this footage onto the net, then co-ordinating with Google and You-tube to have it pulled, put up again, pulled, put up again, pulled, to stoke interest, then leaving it up to sucker people onto the bait

But where has this scenario comefrom? Finton's imagination! Fair enough, nothing wrong with imagination, but dont sell it as truth...and then of course its "all perfectly timed to follow up the conspiracy film": well that I do agree with

Here's another explanation: there was more to that conspiracy film than met the eye, because it was so bad at debunking it made viewers with a bit of grey matter think: those 9/11 truth questions wernt properly answered.... journalists find ways to work around restrictions... and someone was sat on this footage (probably from inside the beeb, theres a lot of "little people" inside the BEEB who are far from happy, as there are within all these News corporations) waiting for the best time to release it (same as the 25minutes long film from an apartment building overlooking the towers on superhigh quality that was released on the 5th anniversary, clearly private citizens footage). They released it: its egg on the credibility of the BEEB's reporting (at least), the BEEB failed to supress it spreading around the net, and now the paid mouthpeices are coming out doing "damage limitation"....

All just my imagination of course...

[limelady]

Check this out: this is the meat of Fintan's Article (apart from rubbishing Alex Jones and then saying how it undermines the truth movement to rubbish people)...

Firstly, how does Dunne know its a smokescreen? Hes simply decided to define it as a smokescreen: he does'nt know what the BBC executives decided to do. But he's perfectly prepared to use his "rationality" to "sell" a scenario of BBC bosses leaking this footage onto the net, then co-ordinating with Google and You-tube to have it pulled, put up again, pulled, put up again, pulled, to stoke interest, then leaving it up to sucker people onto the bait

But where has this scenario comefrom? Finton's imagination! Fair enough, nothing wrong with imagination, but dont sell it as truth...and then of course its "all perfectly timed to follow up the conspiracy film": well that I do agree with

Here's another explanation: there was more to that conspiracy film than met the eye, because it was so bad at debunking it made viewers with a bit of grey matter think: those 9/11 truth questions wernt properly answered.... journalists find ways to work around restrictions... and someone was sat on this footage (probably from inside the beeb, theres a lot of "little people" inside the BEEB who are far from happy, as there are within all these News corporations) waiting for the best time to release it (same as the 25minutes long film from an apartment building overlooking the towers on superhigh quality that was released on the 5th anniversary, clearly private citizens footage). They released it: its egg on the credibility of the BEEB's reporting (at least), the BEEB failed to supress it spreading around the net, and now the paid mouthpeices are coming out doing "damage limitation"....

All just my imagination of course...

A nicely put together little piece there John......spot on! ;)

[fintandunne]

Readers should be aware that John White who posted above is on his own
damage limitation exercise ever since we broke the story of Alex Jones and
the claimed 7/7 bus bomb survivor. White is a moderator over at
nineeleven.co.uk where he moved that Jones topic thread when he could,
to limit reader access to the truth.
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=55677#55677

Just letting you know there is an agenda.

"John White: ...to "sell" a scenario of BBC bosses leaking this footage onto the net,
then co-ordinating with Google and You-tube to have it pulled, put up again, pulled,
put up again, pulled, to stoke interest,..."

I never said BBC leaked the footage to the net. Never alleged they had
involvement in pulling it from Google or Youtube. There are plenty of useful
stooges to do all that. However I am saying I do not believe they no longer
have footage of their own 9/11 transmissions.

[john white]

White is one human being with an opinion: you clearly dont like it Finton: great, thats what freedom is all about!

Now what could "the agenda" be? hmmm let me see... people join internet forums to read information and express their opinions about various matters the forum deals with...

The whole "truthseeking" scene is crammed with people like you Finton: look into the shadows long enough and the shadows look back...

(oh and I moved the "Jones topic" to the "controversies" section of the UK 9/11 board becuase it was a load of gossip and rumourmongering without any substantive information whatsoever...but I didnt delete it though! simply put it with the rest of the substanceless fruit loopery where it belongs. By all means follow Finton's link anyone whose bothered...I dont think it tells the story Finton sees! :) )

"Damage Limitation exercise!" Hah! Your not worth more than five minutes of my day...

[carvey]

If this was aired live why was it not recorded by at least someone watching at the time and put on the net? I just don't get why it's being released now.

[dondaz]

Great post on Fakey Fintan Mr White. To think he actualy gets paid for pumping out his lies and deciet.

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u39/dazp5/pearl-harbor-b4.jpg

Pic source: http://www.infowars.com/cartoons_9.htm#spank

For those who don't know who Fintan Dunne is:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1212

[ah42]

Yes, thanks. I've already been there and left them a little comment. ;)
Limelady, why can I not get this link to work? The BBC responds

[limelady]

Hello ah42

I'm not sure whyyou cannot get through. I just went and checked the link again and it seems to still be working fine for me.

The only thing I can think of is that perhaps you may have to adjust you cookie settings to allow access. Or perhaps your PC security settings are not allowing you to enter that site for some reason?

Has anybody else had problems with the BBC site?

Lime

[teslafire]

Having now shown this to a variety of people, the question keeps coming up:

If they knew WTC7 was on fire and was about to collapse (so they are being fed) is it that much of a stretch to think they simply jumped the gun on the announcement?

The disconnect at the end could have just been a move to save journalistic integrity more than the BBC being in on the conspiracy.
They read what they get from the state dept or the White House.

This is a valid objection, my personal opinion on the matter is that BBC is obviously tied in, but there is no solid proof of BBC's involvement in a cover-up. At most they can be seen as unethical for not being up front about their error, but to go beyond that creates a cloud of unnecessary controversy.

This is exactly the kind of accusation that makes the movement lose focus in my estimation.

And by the way, Fintan, don't you think its a bit 'Victor Thornish' of you to go around subtly accusing John White of censoring you?

Maybe he's just got a different opinion...flighty accusations don't help and only engender more distrust, IMHO.

[jimijams]

Having now shown this to a variety of people, the question keeps coming up:

If they knew WTC7 was on fire and was about to collapse (so they are being fed) is it that much of a stretch to think they simply jumped the gun on the announcement?
How could they know the building was about to collapse from fire? No building's beside the twin towers had ever done so before this day and they had at least been hit by planes.
There was no reason in my mind to suspect a building with fires on only a few floors was in danger of imminent colapse.

[seamus]

How could they know the building was about to collapse from fire? No building's beside the twin towers had ever done so before this day and they had at least been hit by planes.
There was no reason in my mind to suspect a building with fires on only a few floors was in danger of imminent colapse.

Small, Isolated Fires


s

[teslafire]

How could they know the building was about to collapse from fire? No building's beside the twin towers had ever done so before this day and they had at least been hit by planes.

They don't know anything other than what they are told, and they aren't in the business of questioning authorities...I mean they're journalists what do you expect?

The firefighters knew it was coming down too. Its more than possible that an alert was sent of the building's imminent demise to the reporters on the scene too. Everyone is waiting for Silverstein's "pull".

I feel like that was the initial story that later got changed when people realized you can't plan a controlled demo in a "burning building" in less than 8 hours.

Then they had to keep mum about the whole thing and say that "pull" referred to the firefighters in WTC7.

A retarded cover-up to be sure, but the more cover that has to be waded through the less interested average joe becomes.

Here is where Mr. Dunne rings true I think. The bloodletting of provocative conspiracy elements like this allows the controllers to control the flow of the truth movement, dictating its plotpoints.

A controlled "expose" would be the best way to cover-up a headline crime in plain sight. Just a perspective to offer, but I'll also go out on a limb and notice that 23 minutes makes me want to dive into the numerology craze...

[jimijams]

but I'll also go out on a limb and notice that 23 minutes makes me want to dive into the numerology craze...
What's Going On?
Currently Active Users: 32 (9 members and 23 guests):D

[teslafire]

yeah yeah yeah

[domtak]

The BBC merely passed on the news they'd been (spoon) fed by whoever was in control of it that day. CNN apparently were reporting the collapse an hour before - the video of that footage has the guy talking about "the collapse of wtc7" as fact and as he turns to look across NYC he realises the building is still standing and suddenly it's "about to collapse" again.

The BBC (or CNN) certainly were not in on the conspiracy - to come to that conclusion does not help the overall story.

What is worth focusing on is that WTC7 was built to withstand a lot of damage. No steel building has ever collapsed from fire. And when it did collapse it fell far too symmetrically. If you didn't know the circumstances of the day and watched the footage of it come down - without question you would say it was a controlled demolition.

Someone up top knew it was coming down and the news leaked out too early.

D

[notaslave]

http://www.petitiononline.com/wtc7bbc/petition.html

petition the bbc over 1700 signatures so far.

[lightbeing]

http://www.petitiononline.com/wtc7bbc/petition.html

petition the bbc over 1700 signatures so far.


Make that 2719.....

[largejack]

Make that 3019.

So much for George Galloway, no reply, so much for Michael Meacher, no reply, so much for the hundreds I sent off to student groups, stop the war coalitions around the country, etc, guess what, no reply.

Can't they see we need to join the dots to get the full picture?

Anyway, keep the pressure up, if just one of the signers finds five new signers, and they in turn find 5, by the end of it we would have millions!

[turtonlea]

The Good people here are doing a wonderful job. The BBC is worried. Reuters, The Daily Mirror, The Sun, Sky Television, and many more are worried. Last Evening on the streets of Manchester, and Liverpool young people were distributing free of charge. The film footage of the BBC film and also CNN’s report of 911, this has been copied from You tube and is detailed footage on the free CD its title is The Ultimate Con 911 Documentary Trailer 1 and printed on the front of the cd is the Petition web address. If you do the same as these brave young men and copy a few cd’s of the BBC footage and The Ultimate Con 911 Documentary Trailer 1, and get people to sign the petition you will have helped to slay the lies. Journalist, are not trained the way they were , they are just glove puppets for those in power they know if they were to tell the truth they would lose their job even their life. Give the man on the street the info ask him to make copies and give to his friends send copies to MP’s,
Get all your family to sign the petition and remember every newspaper, every journalist who ignored your plea, Go underground but make sure everyone sees the film. After you have slayed the dragon, History will record who did what and who tried to hide the truth. Even Microsoft tried to stop the truth with Codec. Spread the word on the Street, stop paying the TV licence, and do not buy newspapers that have helped to spread the lies and tried to destroy people like David Icke, and the many young men and women who have been made mentally ill because know one would listen to their pleas of help. The children who have suffered because know one would listen. Now s the time for all who want a different world to become people of action. Make your copy and give it to a friend free of charge tell them to show it on their families DVD.
Finally, the media are becoming intimidated, once the words on the street they loose control. They know that when the petition reaches 20, 0000. The game is over.

The forces that the Queen of England told her butler about are forces of good and are on the side of truth. Blair, Brown, and Bush now know that evil will never triumphs over good. START BURNING THOSE DISC, LET GRANDAD AND GRANDMOTHER SEE THE TRUTH.

[mavri]

this is my comment i put on google video of BBC and WTC7.(they remove movie 5 minute later):

"The news about BBC and WTC7 is a bomb.
In general the force who made 9\11 control official media,
the opposition(gatekepeers) and the leadership of 9\11 truth
movement.
This international masonic evil circle already control
western(usa,uk,canada,france,germany,israel,italy ect);
eastern(russia,china,japan,korea ect)and
muslim(jordan,egypt,saudi,iran ect) country.
They need a total nuclear war for building a one-(fascist,totalitarian,evil )world govenement !!!.
They also control the usa's patriotic movement,and
anti- NWO site.

We are near a war in Persia;
please check dollar bill,logo CBS and iran's flag.........."

[wakeupworld]

Make that 3019.

So much for George Galloway, no reply, so much for Michael Meacher, no reply, so much for the hundreds I sent off to student groups, stop the war coalitions around the country, etc, guess what, no reply.

Can't they see we need to join the dots to get the full picture?

Anyway, keep the pressure up, if just one of the signers finds five new signers, and they in turn find 5, by the end of it we would have millions!

Galloway works for the BBC on Talk Sport Radio, maybe he will talk about it on his sky tv programme.

[zircon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt9kU9VZ-f8
ok thats you tube

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7535401055684448882
thats google

That is very interesting. They want us to be stupid and to not to question; but they show us all the time what they are doing.

[zircon]

Make that 2719.....

3816 at the last view

[mrguitarbear]

I think the BBC probably isn't going to comment on this for several reasons.

Firstly , because the BBC hopes that this WTC7 business will blow over and go away and that they won't have to deal with it. Because Auntie looks a bit stupid now. It reported a building had fallen down on 9/11 when it obviously hadn't , and it had the building on film.

Secondly , because they hope that enough people are going to rant and rave about this on forums and blogs and make themselves look like obsessives or lunatics : that they will discredit themselves. The BBC takes a dim view of conspiracy theorists and the like , it considers itself superior to them.

Thirdly , because in general the BBC supports the Establishment , the rule of law and order , politics , democracy and so on - it is conservative with a small ' c' and owes its funding to HM Government anyway so it has to be careful what it says. This is a hot potato that it doesn't want to handle ( it prefers to deal with safe , boring stuff about shares and interest rates and whatever ).

If this story becomes big enough , the BBC will go with it and report , but don't expect it to be at the cutting edge of news or whatever , its a big cowardly and slow-moving lion. The Beeb is quality at what it does , but its not a radical organisation ( despite what it might say ).

[midwich cuckoo]

...and owes its funding to HM Government anyway...

No!, the British public funds the BBC through the mandatory license fee.

[mrguitarbear]

Yeah , its our money but the Government decides what to do with it so effectively the Government funds the BBC.

[obeeah13]

try this link, just checked it & is still there;)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=49f_1172526096

[mrguitarbear]

Its really funny - the BBC has tried to rubbish the 9/11 conspiracy theories and ridicule the truth movement , but its ended up providing the truth movemnt with its biggest piece of ammunition so far ! :p

[thedame]

That's a really great link and piece of information... one of the strongest pieces of WTC evidence I've seen...

[digitalmuzik]

This is one of many films that should be seen by everybody. I heard about Google video messing with the top 100 positions and removing the film Loose change. How many times did they get away with that before they got rumbled. I dont know whats going to happen when we have the internet taken away from us, how do we comunicate these peices of information to each other? I fear our time to act is running out fast. Its very easy to say words like, "I'm free " and "I won't bend to this madness" but untill we can walk into parliment 10,000 strong, united as one and shout "WE won't bend to this madness" we will never get heard. You know and I know the government hears us just fine, but its the people of this land that are already squashed into submission that worry me. We have a long way to go to get any success against this elite force that we face and I think just knowing whats going on out there is no way near enough because most people accept our government is corrupt but believe our government are corrupt on our behalf I hear rubbish like "we're better off then other countrys... we got the NHS you know" People refuse to akcknowledge that in the very near future all of the power the Elite are and have been massing over the years will be turned on us, and I dont mean another congestion charge hike or another 4 million cameras. If you haven't seen a film called V for Vendetta, have a look I don't think the futures gonna be too far from it. lets just hope we can unite as one.

[ashyr]

okay hers my plan

can someone upload the video in a sense like link so i can download the file
im going to convert it into all formats. and put it on my flash mobile fone and use my bluetooth hacking software to plant it on peoples fones. but most of all to have it on a mobile device means ican take it anyware

[ashyr]

wow. this has some weird fps issues.
the video i can manage to get converted back to mpg. but it doesnt like it to much. cant encode much with it. its like its not really a mpg. anyone know more bout this?

[moose]

How do i get a hardcopy so i can show people that think im mental.

It makes me laugh at the error, its so blatant!!!!

Also, 4184 on the petition

How many signatures are needed before they are 'forced' to give information?

the only problem i thought of is that, the people who will be forcing them are the exact same people who are conducting these acts of so called 'terror'.

[bigus_dickus]

here watch this

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[majicdragon]

Who remembers a french politician... either a forign minister or something like that, saying, "two weeks ago all this was just talk"

He said it on cnn and it was within the first three days of the attacks.




i dont expect, i just hope.

[majicdragon]

Make that 2719.....

4281.

[tinmenace]

The Dixie Chicks took such a beating, but they stood their ground.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.


~I made my bed and I sleep like a baby
With no regrets and I don’t mind sayin’
It’s a sad sad story when a mother will teach her
Daughter that she ought to hate a perfect stranger
And how in the world can the words that I said
Send somebody so over the edge
That they’d write me a letter
Sayin’ that I better shut up and sing
Or my life will be over~

-Lyrics (http://www.elyrics.net/read/d/dixie-chicks-lyrics/not-ready-to-make-nice-lyrics.html)


http://www.globalfailure.com/images/DixieChicks.jpg

[on the road]

this is going to wake a hell of a lot of people up around the world.

happy days :p

[woolfie]

The link is great ;)

Concerning WTC7....I was watching a film tonight "The Legend of Hell House" and whilst conducting a controlled experiment that got out of hand the bloke said "pull it" meaning switch the equiptment off/stop the experiment...had to mention this as this is the only time Ive heard this said apart from by Silverstein....He would of been of that era also! I still say he is dodgy though as why would the fireman even be talking to him...surely at the end of the day with the sources of intelligence etc kept within Guliano's (sp?) office/floor it should of been there concern more than his.....if you can understand what im trying to say.... :rolleyes:

[masonfree party]

By CB_Brooklyn


Lenin, the first Communist dictator after the takeover of Russia in 1917, is widely credited with the following quotation, "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves."


There are three basic versions of the 9/11 events. Although differences and/or overlapping may occur, the following three versions generally describe what most people believe:


1. OGCT. This is known as the “Official Government Conspiracy Theory”. This version states that a guy from a cave in Afghanistan conspired with 19 boxcutter-wielding Muslims to hijack airplanes, outwit the USA’s entire multi-trillion dollar defense system, and cause the Twin Towers to collapse. This is the version pushed by the government and media as being the truth of 9/11.

2. APCT. I call this the “Alternate Propaganda Conspiracy Theory”. This version states that, more or less, there were hijackings on 9/11, but the planes might have been taken under remote control to ensure they crashed as planned. Airplanes most likely crashed at the Pentagon and Shanksville, but planes definitely did crash into the Twin Towers. The Twin Towers and WTC 7 collapsed from conventional explosives and thermite, and molten metal was found in the rubble. This is the version pushed by the government and media as being the “wacko conspiracy theory” that the “truth movement” believes.

3. REAL. This, simply, is the REAL version, backed by actual evidence, Laws of Physics, and common sense: There were no hijackings, no plane crashes, the corporate media broadcasted cartoons of an airplane impacting the South Tower, and the WTC complex (not just the Towers and WTC 7) was destroyed with Directed Energy Weapons (DEW). The government and media steer clear of these.



Refer to the Lenin-credited quote above.

Is it possible the “truth movement” has been run by the 9/11 perpetrators since day one?

Is it possible that certain individuals have been planted to steer the “truth movement” away from the perpetrators? Is it possible these plants have affiliations with directed energy weapons (DEW)?

Is it even possible that some of these plants are “in on it” while others got suckered in? You be the judge.

[vandalis]

When i first seen that video i was like: "Hey... It's still there!!"
But the news reporter kept saying it had collapsed, even though you can plainly see it hadnt. Then it collapsed into itself in a neat tidy pile.

That shows in itself that somthing "dodgy" was going on.

[gordonfreeman]

Well, it's 9:11 PM right now in my place.

[sunyatta60]

http://www.petitiononline.com/wtc7bbc/petition.html

petition the bbc over 1700 signatures so far.

4425 Total Signatures :D

[kriss_crow]

4439

It's hell more I would do.
That's all I can do now.

[weston white]

This post reminded me of something... I read in an article several months back, that a radio broadcaster announced the Pearl Harbor attacks 5 minutes before it actually took place, I was wondering if anybody could verify this is true?

[bustabass]

have the BBC given a reply to this strange anomally? good work lads!

[weston white]

No they deny any wrong doing, contributed it to merely confusion that occurred during the hectic day and later claimed that all of their 9/11 footage had been lost, thus they are no longer able to confirm or deny anything related to 9/11. One of their sister networks that had copies of the BBS's 9/11 footage from the day offered to give them a copy so that they could review it, but the BBC claimed that they would not be able to use that footage to verify anything either because they could not verify if that footage from their sister network was itself altered.

[bustabass]

cheers weston, the best bit about this story is we pay those wankers to lie to us! i've seen the video in question, how the hell can't it be verified, the reporters must remember something about it ?!!

[weston white]

Exactly!

Something I have always wondered though was if they shot the reporter on green screen and just had a camera man there setup with a live shot. Anybody know where that reporter was at during 9/11? Is she assigned to New York, was she actually in the vicinity during the attacks? If not would she have had enough time to respond there from where ever she was actually at? It just seems peculiar to me that she was live reporting a building collapse with the building a few blocks away standing tall. Would she not wonder, what was that sound, I must have a look, or what building are we referring to so I can point to it during the broadcast, or I am right here in plain view of a building that is collapsing I have to see that, I mean after all, how many people get to see a massive building collapse, right? It all just seems too fishy to me.

[weston white]

Exactly!

Something I have always wondered though was if they shot the reporter on green screen and just had a camera man there setup with a live shot. Anybody know where that reporter was at during 9/11? Is she assigned to New York, was she actually in the vicinity during the attacks? If not would she have had enough time to respond there from where ever she was actually at? It just seems peculiar to me that she was reporting a building collapse with the building a few blocks away standing tall. Would she not wonder, what was that sound, I must have a look, or what building are we referring to so I can point to it, or I am right here in plain view of a building that is collapsing I have to see that, I mean after all, how many people get to see a massive building collapse, right? It all just seems too fishy to me.

Not to mention that CNN also broadcast WTC7 collapsing head of time as well... guess they were going off of the BBC reports then right? lol

[shredmasteruk]

bear in mind the sort of things that reporters hear in their earpieces, they are bombarded with information.

It was known that WTC 7 was leaning, and in danger of collapse.
In the chaos of that day, the chinese whispers effect would explain things.
In danger of collapse, -> firefighters can't fight the blaze and it will collapse -> has it collapsed ? -> it has collapsed.

Easy mistake to make.

There wasn't anyone inside it, there was no motive for a covert blackops group to deliberately destroy it, (there's these things called shredders, which can destroy incriminating evidence), it was a building damaged by the collapse of another building, which had been on fire for hours, and those fires were unfought.

The BBC report is not sinister at all. What is sinister is the attack dog mentality that CT's have had towards them, ever since they released their conspiracy files documentary last year, a documentary which humiliated Dylan Avery and Alex Jones.

Thankfully the David Icke forums are a nicer place than the loose change forums, or I'd have been censored weeks ago. Kudos to you all for allowing differences of opinion here.

[weston white]

You keep saying that the building was leaning over, if so why did it not fall over onto its back or begin to rip into two pieces? Why did it instead explode? What evidence is there that the building was leaning, I know of none, this is merely a want to be theory that has been mixed into the pile because it sounds really good on its surface, though if you actually research the matter, you find it to be completely false and misleading.

No reason to perform 9/11, really now.


Motive

The Enron case files as well as dozens upon dozens of other businesses under federal investigation were reported to have been within the FBI office located within WTC7.

Both WTC1 and WTC2 were in an ongoing deferment for a multi-billion dollar asbestos removal conformance mandate obligation.

The Pentagon was being pressured to answer for an unaccounted for 2.3 trillion dollars and as well for several other instances of hundreds of millions of dollars that were also unaccounted for; it was reported that the accounting records were destroyed when the "plane" crashed into that portion of the Pentagon on 9/11.

The We The People Foundation in the years and months prior to 9/11 were publishing ads in major newspapers regarding the IRS Income Tax and Federal Reserve Frauds and demanding accountability from government officials. Do to 9/11 a major hearing scheduled to be held in September of 2001 was permanently canceled. Official Website: http://givemeliberty.org/

George W. Bush has stated publicly and on numerous occasions that he wanted to finish up what his father George H. W. Bush as President began with Iraq (Desert Storm) and that he wants to be thought of a "war president" and the "decider".

To obtain a "legitimate" reason to finally take control of Iraq and begin a long-haul movement to take control of literally all of the oil in the Mideast region.

Iraq under Saddam Hussein had in 2000 dumped the U.S. Dollar in favor of trading in the more favorable Euros.

To enable conglomerations to globally profit off of a massive and self-serving “never-ending” war campaign (through illegal “no bid” contracting).

To greatly advance the causes and beliefs of the New Age and New World Order movements, ergo: population control through restriction of liberties and spying, global eugenics through the dumping down and poisoning of the mass-populace, control of religion, world order control by the banking elites (Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Bushs, Lis, DuPonts, etc.), etc.

Mid-Eastern oil interests were not cooperating with American Oil companies in the battle over control of “Peak Oil”and routing of oil their pipelines.

[shredmasteruk]

WTC 7 leant as it fell,

http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7f2.jpg

it caused damage to the post office building behind it.

AND, its collapse had been predicted hours earlier as I say.

"You see where the white smoke is? You see this thing leaning like this? It's definitely coming down. There's no way to stop it. Cause you have to go up in there to put it out and it already - the structural integrity is just not there in the building. It's tough, it's.. it's.. You know we can handle just about anything, this is beyond..." Firefighter Miller.

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

I suggest you also take a good hard look at some debunking sites Weston.

[bustabass]

fair point shredmasteruk, but why did'nt the 9/11 comission include wtc7 collapsing in its report? given the seriousness of the contents inside the building,( as weston pointed out ) maybe they thought such an explanation would have been laughed at given all mounting evidence to the contrary ( i.e. building falling at freefall speed, experts saying it looked like a controlled demolition etc etc). i dont claim to be an expert but if it was as simple as you say it could be, then why no OFFICIAL explanation?

[weston white]

Again if the building was leaning over why did it not fall over? Why did it instead choose to explode?

[angelmoon]

on zone reality tv just thought you may what to watch x x

[oiram]

Nope but there is no shortage of those that are gathering the facts. I have already e-mailed them asking why they are censoring the story.
If you interested!
Here is a tool to save Video clips of different formats! http://www.saveflv.com/
The file will be saved in .flv extension! All you need to do put the video address YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. click on the right mouse button on download that will copy the whole clip to your computer!

Tool to save Video clips to you computer!
http://www.saveflv.com/

[oiram]

How do i get a hardcopy so i can show people that think im mental.

Use this tool http://www.saveflv.com/ will save the file in .Flv format just put the address of the file http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD9XpRQRH6E and download!
http://www.saveflv.com/

[eelhouse]

There is something seriously wrong here. I DOWNLOADED the video and now it's gone off my computer. Maybe google used the http connection to make the file wipe itself.

this thing is getting blasted off the torrent sites like crazy. It's the make/break story for us all not to look like nutters anymore ;)

I have downloaded it and will put it on as many places as I can find to put it!!!.

The oligarchic nerve!

s


Just playing devil's advocate here for a minute....do you not think that the so-called "live" background was merely an older video replaying befor the WTC7 went down? We know that the media like to give the impression that everything they show is live. Or have I missed the point? :(

[helloperator]

Sounds like a good excuse...sure to be used/ has been used already

[eelhouse]

Sounds like a good excuse...sure to be used/ has been used already

Having given this some thought I tried posting to the following:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

I cannot post and keep getting "server error", Intersting though that the last posting (4 days ago) uses the 'green-screen' argument following a barrage of anti BBC postings!

Anyway, this is what I wanted to post:

"This is NOT "clearly a green-screen". When was the last time that you ever saw a camera zoom in to such a screen? as happens in this clip. Ridiculous claim!

Also where are the lights that light up the back of the reporter's hair? Can anyone see them...?
The laws of physics do not allow light to turn a corner! The simple explanation is the light coming in from the window behind the reporter

Also the white line on the left of the picture and the apparent discontinuity of the far left image can easily explained as a window frame and a reflection from the next window.
No, I'm afraid I am not convinced by your posting Mark."


Maybe someone else could give the URL a try?

[gribz]

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are pretty well known by now. The BBC addressed them earlier this month with a documentary, The Conspiracy Files, shown within the UK.

Until now, I don't think we've been accused of being part of the conspiracy. But now some websites are using news footage from BBC World on September 11th 2001 to suggest we were actively participating in some sort of attempt to manipulate the audience. As a result, we're now getting lots of emails asking us to clarify our position. So here goes:

1. We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.

2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I'm quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate - but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did - sourced our reports, used qualifying words like "apparently" or "it's reported" or "we're hearing" and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

3. Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I've spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn't remember minute-by-minute what she said or did - like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing; what she was being told; and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I'd love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don't help clear up the issue one way or another.

5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today "so the guy in the studio didn't quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy... "

Ha ha, one major error! And how would you have managed to do such an error!!

[andydj69]

So i guess the BBC employ people who can now predict events before they actually happen

[chattanova]

http://img34.picoodle.com/img/img34/4/5/31/f_911deesm_37fcfbd.jpg

[pepsirat]

And yet people still dont want to belive the truth. Their is too much evadance to egnore.

[seanmiller]

Anybody actually got definitive proof of the time this was broadcast, as there's no "clock" onscreen?

The video feed behind the reporter is largely irrelevant because it may not be live...

I recall watching the news about WTC7 on the BBC that day and as far as I remember they pretty much immediately showed a video of it collapsing... which doesn't really tally with this assertion that they announced it 25 minutes before it happened...

Sean

[gribz]

Anybody actually got definitive proof of the time this was broadcast, as there's no "clock" onscreen?

The video feed behind the reporter is largely irrelevant because it may not be live...

I recall watching the news about WTC7 on the BBC that day and as far as I remember they pretty much immediately showed a video of it collapsing... which doesn't really tally with this assertion that they announced it 25 minutes before it happened...

Sean

Did you watch it while You were in the UK?

The footage of the WTC7 being on the background is from BBC World News - total different channel to BBC 1 etc.

[lightgiver]

The time is on Loose Change;)

[mrguitarbear]

Its here now , seems the BBC have found their footage after all.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2008/07/controversy_conspiracies_iii.html

[jingokaz]

So the BBC did not know ahead of time.
__________________
http://www.gogoplat.com/bess.jpg

[goldman]

<rant>
I get so sick of this cover-up when I read it, :mad: I saw the new video from Alex Jones. A firefighter says he heard a countdown through his set before they detonated this building. He was also the first entering the twin-buildings and heard that the elevators where blown up 5 minutes after the plane hit.

What more proof do we need?
</rant>

the 9/11 CHRONICLES - TRUTH RISING
it's somewhere in this movie: The 9/11 Chronicles: Part One, Truth Rising full length - YouTube

On 53:42 minutes he talks about this.

[phonicboom]

So the BBC did not know ahead of time.

Didn't know? ... They reported it!

[geronimo]

Didn't know? ... They reported it!

Not only that but they 'lost' the footage then conveniently 'rediscovered it' Now follow the BBC's latest 'explanation'
for the WTC 7 collapse and how they have 'solved' that little problem...

geronimo

[phonicboom]

Not only that but they 'lost' the footage

Yeah! :D they lost it by placing it on the "2002" shelf! They placed it on a shelf marked 9/11/2002 - so the whole rest of the 2002 shelf (if it even existed in 2001) would have been empty at the time! Who thought of that one :eek:

I gave better excuses for not doing homework.

"the cat ate it"

[i_am]

The BBC admitted at the time that it was live and their lame excuse was that the reporter had made a mistake.

Duh!! Some mistake!!

They could give no explanation as to how the tape had gone missing or why the transmission was so abruptly terminated.

[diamond dogs]

The BBC admitted at the time that it was live and their lame excuse was that the reporter had made a mistake.
.

I have wondered if they were working to a timed script thus they announced the 'demoltion' at the scheduled 'arranged' time but for some reason there was a glitch, possible change of plan/delay prob from someone inside the building?? Just a thought..

[skip7]

When George W. Bush said he saw the first plane hit the first building, he said he thought it was "pilot error" and a "terrible accident." Everybody said he was lying because there was no film of that the first day.

BUT he was telling the truth.

They must have had a camera aimed at the First Tower just waiting for it to hit, with a closed curcuit hookup directly to his room in Florida! That's why he had "no reaction" when told the second plane had hit, and "America is under attack." He knew exactly what was going on.

[largejack]

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?wtc7bbc

[lightworks]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

www.luogocomune.net

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4380137365762802294

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=386470406528921790

[lightworks]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4628461537770214767&hl=en

[deafbred]

unexplained denial of signifigance

the Truth Stands ForEVER

lots refuse it's NOW

[moonshine]

Psychology & WTC7

Asch 'Conformity' experiment and the Milgram 'Obedience' experiment go a short way to explaining how on earth people can think that fire bought down WTC7 on 911, i.e. because an authority figure said so. But with one dissenting voice the group think breaks down. Speak the truth and more people will also.
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.



YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[moonshine]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[lightgiver]

When George W. Bush said he saw the first plane hit the first building, he said he thought it was "pilot error" and a "terrible accident." Everybody said he was lying because there was no film of that the first day.

BUT he was telling the truth.

They must have had a camera aimed at the First Tower just waiting for it to hit, with a closed curcuit hookup directly to his room in Florida! That's why he had "no reaction" when told the second plane had hit, and "America is under attack." He knew exactly what was going on.

yeah did you see the secret service whisking him away:rolleyes:;)

[bendoon]

BBC "We have just had a report that Tony Blair, who is giving a speech on the latest ME peace initiative at the UN today, was suddenly embarrased when his trousers fell down"

23 minutes later Tony Blairs trousers fall down when giving a speech at the UN

[biblegirl]

BBC "We have just had a report that Tony Blair, who is giving a speech on the latest ME peace initiative at the UN today, was suddenly embarrased when his trousers fell down"

23 minutes later Tony Blairs trousers fall down when giving a speech at the UN
http://www.lifeshore.com/smiley/data/media/3/3D_emoticon_S388.gif

That's pretty funny.

[bendoon]

I cheated, copied it from somewhere else, reworded it though.

[dragon33]

The whole thing was clearly scripted, like so many news items these days!

The BBC say that conspiracy theorists are claiming that the BBC are part of the conspiracy, but no one is claiming that the BBC are that clever! This is a typical straw man argument.

They were just dummies following the official script without question, like most mainstream media outlets these days. Unthinking morons behind smiley faces.

[oiram]

New collapse footage of WTC7 and North Tower - Nov 2008
New collapse footage of WTC7 and North Tower - Nov 2008 - YouTube

[bvwh]

Well, I wouldn't say that the bbc knew in advance, I wouldn't say the bbc know anything, they just repeat what they're told whilst doing their best to look like real investigative journalists.

I could even believe that the reporter didn't know that what she was reporting as collapsed was in fact still standing behind her, as most brits could probably only pick out the twin towers, the empire state building and the statue of liberty out of the NY skyline! Yeah, you'd like to think that a journalist based in NY would know, but then again, we all know that very few of these people deserve the title of journalist in the classic sense.

What is clear however, is that someone knew wtc7 was coming down and that the reason for it wasn't just fire.

For me, the proof of 911 being an inside job is the pentagon, as I simply cannot believe that the central hub of the biggest military force on the face of the planet would allow any kind of threat to approach it. The fact that the threat was a non military, unarmed passenger plane makes the official version of events even more laughable.

If the threat of that plane was genuine, it wouldn't of got close...unless they wanted it to.

I know I'm not really adding to this much discussed topic, I just wanted to say my bit after wading thru countless pages on the subject.

[slartibartfast]

What is clear however, is that someone knew wtc7 was coming down...

I would agree with that. Implying a cause other than construction methods, damage and fires is just a step too far for me.

[trondh]

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4140247/11151981

This video popped out as the result of a hysterical reaction. Alex Jones was scared that the truth was about to reach his fans, and he needed a diversion, some "breaking evidence" to present on his blog.

Email from a Jew pretending to be a Gentile on february 22nd, 2007:
(I exchanged emails with him for 20 days before I realized he was trying to feed me disinfo and attempting to make med paranoid)

bravo

Good job man, I have been suspicious of Alex Jones for a LONG time. Nobody sending out this much information can be trusted.

Are people really so naive to think that the 9/11 Truth movement wasn't inevitable? I mean look at JFK, they learned a lot from the way the public reacted to that one. I am confident that the magnitude of the lie of 9/11 requires there to be gatekeepers in the truth movement.

Alex Jones is always acting over the top, you'd figure he'd calm the @#$% down to make conspiracy theorists seem rational, but all he does is give the believers of the official story more fodder.

Videos like this one just make him look like a kook.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Orj55fo1u9I

Did you know "prison planet" is a Scientology term?
Xenu - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Teegeeack/Earth was subsequently abandoned by the Galactic Confederacy and remains a pariah "prison planet" to this day, although it has suffered repeatedly from incursions by alien "Invader Forces" since that time.

THANK YOU for speaking up on Alex's blog, people act like they scrutinize all the info they get, but act like complete sheeple to everything Alex says.

You don't have to add me, but I just wanted to say that what you did definitely opened some minds.

Email to Eric Hufschmid:
There's no turning back now, for Alex. He's doomed. I'm exposing him on his blog, and almost no one is arguing with me.

From Eric Hufschmid:
I just saw that. Good job!

February 27th I was blocked from writing on Alex Jones' blog at the same time as the video from BBC popped out of the archives...

Alex Jones and BBC were hysterical

An astounding video uncovered from the archives today...

This amazing clip was on Google Video (now back again here), but was removed within hours of the story breaking. However, hundreds of people had already managed to download the clip and it has gone viral on the Internet and the censors won't be able to shut the lid this time. A You Tube upload is available here but we fully expect this to be removed soon. You can watch it for the time being at this link and also here. A WMV link is here (on our server) and a Quicktime here. Bit torrent versions of the file can be found here. An avi version can be found here.

To be clear, the Salomon Brothers Building is just a different name for Building 7 or WTC 7.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/260207building7.htm

It took Alex Jones more than 5 years to "uncover" this file, and here he seems scared that the file is going to jump right back into a black hole inside his archives...

Quite shortly after the video "hit" YouTube BBC felt obliged to respond:

We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I'd love to get hold of it.

As one of the comments on You Tube says today "so the guy in the studio didn't quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

Richard Porter is watching over YouTube everyday, looking for revealing videos. He'd love to get hold of the video he's reading comments to. In his article he has a snapshot from Alex Jones' website showing the video:

http://home.chello.no/liberal/bbcworld_203.jpg
img alt="An image of the website hosting the alleged BBC World footage"

The Jewish idiocy is overwhelming...

I learned when it happened that Alex Jones and BBC were working together...

The Salomon Brothers Building

Salomon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Salomon can refer to:

People with the given name Salomon: The king Solomon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

King Solomon (Hebrew: שְׁלֹמֹה, Standard Šəlomo or Šlomo ) is a figure described in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) and the Qur'an. The biblical accounts identify Solomon as the son of David.

The Bible accredits Solomon as the builder of the First Temple in Jerusalem, and portrays him as great in wisdom, wealth, and power. Solomon is the subject of many other later references and legends.

During Solomon's long reign of 40 years, the Hebrew monarchy, according to the Bible, gained its highest splendour. This period has been called the Augustan Age of the Jewish annals. In a single year, according to 1 Kings 10:14, Solomon collected tribute amounting to 666 talents of gold.

The Temple in Jerusalem

The Temple in Jerusalem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or Holy Temple (Hebrew: בית המקדש, Bet HaMikdash ; "The Holy House"), refers to a series of structures located on the Temple Mount (Har HaBayit) in the old city of Jerusalem. Historically, two temples were built at this location, and a future Temple features in Jewish eschatology. According to classical Jewish belief, the Temple (or the Temple Mount) acts as the figurative "footstool" of God's presence in the physical world.

The First Temple was built by King Solomon in seven years during the 10th century BCE in 957 BCE. It was the center of ancient Judaism.

Jewish eschatology envisions the construction of The Third Temple in Jerusalem associated with the coming of The Messiah, and thus, adherents of Orthodox and Conservative Judaism anticipate a Third Temple.

[goldman]

I hardly think this can be seen as evidence of foreknowledge. I think it's a weak argument since in a crisis anything can happen, wrong info leaks etc, and maybe they got their info from the firemen who said "it's gonna blow". If you consider that most firemen radio communication wasn't working, it's only on the word of mouth. The reporter faces the camera and just got a tip from someone that the building collapsed, maybe parts of the building collapsed and maybe that info got through as a complete collapse.

So I'm not sure, but I don't think the BBC was scripted. :)

[trondh]

maybe parts of the building collapsed and maybe that info got through as a complete collapse.

It never partially collapsed. You should know that.

In the video Jane is hiding the WTC7 behind her head as it is the topic. We can see small parts of WTC7. It's as if she's hiding the full standing WTC7 behind her head on purpose. When they zoom in on the building she moves her head in the wrong direction, as to reveal that she is lying. When they have zoomed in on she changes the subject.

It's a set-up. Alex Jones needed a diversion, some "breaking evidence" to present on his blog. Alex Jones and BBC work together.

CNN also made a clip, which is just as ridiculous.

WTC 7 Foreknowledge - YouTube

"We are getting information now that one of the other buildings, building 7 in the world trade center complex, is on fire and... has either collapsed or is collapsing, and I... I... Y..You, to be honest, can see these pictures a little bit more clearly than I."

Just as Brown says "has either collapsed" we can see a close-up of a fully standing WTC 7. But then again - he honestly admits that he's almost blind and has a blurry vision. He then turns around to look at the green screen for quite a while, probably to see WTC 7 a little bit more clearly, and to give us the opportunity to study the back of his head.

Two videos, both implying the same, with two complete incompetent reporters pop out simultaneously more than 5 years after they allegedly were broadcasted...

Presidents and/or owners:

Jew - CBS - William S. Paley, Leslie Moonves
Jew - NBC - Jeffrey Zucker
Jew - ABC - Stuart Bloomberg and George W. Bodenheimer
Jew - ABC News - David Westin
Jew - CNN - Gerald Levin, Reese Schonfeld (co-founder)
Jew - FOX - Gail Berman, Rupert Murdoch
Jew - MBS - Ronnessen
Jew - Daily News - Maxwell, real name Hoch
Jew - US News - Zuckerman

Jew - New York Times - Sulzberger
Jew - BBC - Michael Ian Grade, Mark Thompson
Jew - Sirius Satellite Radio - Mel Karmazin, Scott Greenstein
Jew - ITV - Murdoch, Grade
Jew - Paramount Pictures - Bradley Alan Grey
Jew - 20th Century Fox - Sherry Lansing
Jew - News Corporation - Peter Chernin
Jew - Columbia Pictures - Kaufman
Jew - Warner Brothers - Barry M. Meyer
Jew - Clear Channel - Lowry Mays, Andrew Levin

Jew - Warner Co - Martin S. Davis
Jew - Dreamworks - Spielberg
Jew - Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista Television - Micheal D. Eisner
Jew - VIACOM - Sumner Murray Redstone, real name Rothstein
Jew - MTV - Murray Rothstein
Jew - Nickelodeon - Murray Rothstein
Jew - Universal Pictures - Stacey Snider
Jew - Universal Studios - Ron Meyer

[dreamweaver]

Trondh, terribly sorry to let the facts get in the way of your obsession with Jews, but your list of media owners is riddled with inaccuracies:

William S Paley died in 1990 (it's rather difficult to control a company from beyond the grave)
ABC is owned by Disney (founded by a Christian, not sure about religion of current owners)
Robert Maxwell died in 1991, his media empire in tatters, his London Daily News collapsed in 1987, his family do not own the NY Daily News
Michael Grade does not currently control the BBC
Mark Thompson is a Christian
Murdoch does not own ITV (and there is controversy over whether he is in fact a Jew, even among Nazi sites like Stormfront)
Michael Eisner is no longer CEO of Disney

Those are the errors in your list that I found, there may well be more. You really need some help with this obsession of yours.

[trondh]

Trondh, terribly sorry to let the facts get in the way of your obsession with Jews, but your list of media owners is riddled with inaccuracies:

William S Paley died in 1990 (it's rather difficult to control a company from beyond the grave)
ABC is owned by Disney (founded by a Christian, not sure about religion of current owners)
Robert Maxwell died in 1991, his media empire in tatters, his London Daily News collapsed in 1987, his family do not own the NY Daily News
Michael Grade does not currently control the BBC
Mark Thompson is a Christian
Murdoch does not own ITV (and there is controversy over whether he is in fact a Jew, even among Nazi sites like Stormfront)
Michael Eisner is no longer CEO of Disney

Those are the errors in your list that I found, there may well be more. You really need some help with this obsession of yours.

The list was given to me by a Jew, and you know the current owners are Jewish and that that is the reason for the massive cover up of 9/11 in the media. Just because a leader change, the religion doesn't. The Jews have a whole bunch of big lies to protect.

George Bush also says he's a Christian. But only Jews have reasons to lie about 9/11.

You know Murdoch is a Jew. You're obsessed with shifting the blame away from the guilty. You know very well that the world is controlled by Jews.

Some Jews admit being Jews, some don't. Mark Thompson admits having a Jewish wife. I've shown you the Jewish idiocy from BBC.

Frank Collins, the leader of the American Nazi party was a Jew. Hitler was a Jew. They censor me at Stormfront. They won't let me post the video where http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4176805/11241723.

Michael Ian Grade CBE (born March 8, 1943) is a British businessman and a distinguished figure in the field of broadcasting. He became Executive Chairman of ITV plc on 8 January 2007 after his resignation from the role of BBC chairman. Born into a Jewish show business family, his father was the theatrical agent Leslie Grade, and his uncles were the impresarios Lew Grade and Bernard Delfont. He was educated at Stowe School, and St Dunstan's College, London.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Michael-Grade

The Pentagon, which is formed as the center of a pentagram, which Jewish Eliphas Levi identified as a symbol of evil, had its groundbreaking ceremony on 9/11-1941.

Exactly 60 years later, the Jewish mass murderer Larry Silverstein blew up his buildings killing the Gentiles in them...

9/11 was planned before the WTCs were built. These evil people plan their evil way ahead in time...

Steven Spielberg is lying his ass off in Schindler's List. It's Jewish lie propaganda.

The FOX Jews joke about the crime
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4148754/11175385

Prior to 9/11 some Israelis pretended to be students, because they live their lives pretending, and they infiltrated everything in the government, by repeatedly saying they wanted to sell some cheap art. Everyone was fooled by this trick because the Israelis are so smart. They even infiltrated secret offices and unlisted private homes of law enforcement officers.

Then these clever Israelis investigated the upcoming event and found out that Laden was about to demolish Silverstein's buildings.

The bad thing about these Israelis was that they didn't tell us Gentiles about it. They just let Laden go through with it...

Evil lying Jews on FOX pretending to argue with another Jew
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/4148713/11175317

The Fox Jews show footages of WTC 7 being demolished while the Fox Jews say:

Just because it looks like a controlled demolition, do you have e e... do you have any evidence who loaded up that building with some... ah.. with some.. ah.. (explosives).. explosives?

They're joking about the mass murders they are covering up...

http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1212104/4313346

Every second in this show is a lie. You can see the malice in their eyes. They're evil.

The Newhouse Empire Founded by the Jew Sam Newhouse it is headed by S. I. (Si) Newhouse who runs a tightly knit family. They own 26 newspapers in 22 cities.

Gerald Levin former Chief Executive Officer AOL-Time Warner later replaced by Richard Parsons. AOL is the largest Internet service provider in the world, with 34 million U.S. subscribers Its subsidiary HBO with 26 million subscribers is the nation's largest pay-TV cable network.

Michael Eisner former Chief Executive Officer Disney. The Disney Empire is the second-largest media conglomerate today. Michael Eisner hired the Jews Jeffrey Katzenberg, Michael Ovitz, Sanford Litvak and Joe Roth as executives in turn.

In August 1995, Eisner acquired Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., which owns ABC television with its ten TV stations major metropolitan areas as New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Houston. ABC has 225 affiliated TV stations and 2,900 affiliated radio stations in the US. They produces well over 7,000 radio programs. They own 54 radio stations and operate others with many in major metropolitan areas like New York, Washington, and Los Angeles.

Fox Peter Chernin, who was president and chief operating officer, Gail Berman (Fox Entertainment Group); Mitchell Stern (DirecTV) ; Jane Friedman, chairman and CEO of Harper Collins; and Thomas Rothman, chairman of Fox Filmed Entertainment.

Barry Diller Owner of InterActive Corporation, which owns Expedia, Ticketmaster, The Home Shopping Network, Lending Tree, Hotels.com, CitySearch, Evite, Match.com, and other Internet businesses.)

DreamWorks founded by recording industry mogul David Geffen, Jeffrey Katzenberg (former Disney Pictures chairman), and director Steven Spielberg.

ABC Senior vice president for news at ABC, Paul Slavin, Bernard Gershon is senior vice president/general manager of the ABC News Digital Media Group, in charge of ABCNEWS.com, ABC News Productions, and ABC News Video Source.

NBC Universal. Edgar Bronfman, Jr. who headed the liquor giant Seagram Company Ltd. until its recent merger with Vivendi. His father, Edgar Bronfman, Sr., is president of the World Jewish Congress. In 1998 he acquired control of Polygram, the European record giant, from the Dutch manufacturer Phillips for 10.6 billion. Jews hold many top positions, Ron Meyer, is president and chief operating officer of Universal Studios. Stacey Snideris the chairman of Universal Pictures and Jeff Zucker is the president of NBC Universal Television Group.

Columbia Pictures, is owned by Sony. Chairman Amy Pascal

Sony BMG Music Entertainment, CEO Andrew Lack, formerly president and CEO of NBC, Howard Stringer, formerly of CBS, who hired Lack.
http://wake-up-america.net/jews_in_the_media.htm

[energi]

I remember posting that video on a smaller, swedish messageboard - to much ridicule, most replies stated that I was a nutjob, and the video was taken down/thread deleted after a week or two :mad:

[seamus]

I remember posting that video on a smaller, swedish messageboard - to much ridicule, most replies stated that I was a nutjob, and the video was taken down/thread deleted after a week or two :mad:
What do expect from the Swedes? I mean, they still have an overtly Christian Queen, FFS!

S

[dusthead]

Dear me!

The BBC make a stupid mistake and all of this ranting explodes!

It's worth noting that this subject has been covered in massive detail from all sides and is almost totally resolved. Even the folks who made 'Loose Change' agree that they should not have included it in their film and the BBC are extremely embarrassed about the whole thing (as well as confused by the conspiracy theories).

Where does all this Jewish stuff come from?...

There's this person who runs a big company and HE'S A JEW! He talks to a person who works for a political party who is coincidentally A JEW! They know a lot of other JEWISH people who do important stuff and are all JEWISH! IT'S A CONSPIRACY I TELLS YA!

Needless to say I don't get it. By the same token we could say that white people are also in a conspiracy to run everything (although Mr Obama perhaps negates that premise now). Or is that just what they want me to believe?!!

There's a lot of Jewish people out there. You bump into them sometimes and some of them work in high places. But then again so do a lot of Christians, Islamics, Muslims, Aethiests, Satanists, gays, lesbians and disabled people and they don't seem to be generating any conspiracy theories.

[benjaminfreedman]

Dear me!

The BBC make a stupid mistake and all of this ranting explodes!

It's worth noting that this subject has been covered in massive detail from all sides and is almost totally resolved. Even the folks who made 'Loose Change' agree that they should not have included it in their film and the BBC are extremely embarrassed about the whole thing (as well as confused by the conspiracy theories).

Where does all this Jewish stuff come from?...

There's this person who runs a big company and HE'S A JEW! He talks to a person who works for a political party who is coincidentally A JEW! They know a lot of other JEWISH people who do important stuff and are all JEWISH! IT'S A CONSPIRACY I TELLS YA!

Needless to say I don't get it. By the same token we could say that white people are also in a conspiracy to run everything (although Mr Obama perhaps negates that premise now). Or is that just what they want me to believe?!!

There's a lot of Jewish people out there. You bump into them sometimes and some of them work in high places. But then again so do a lot of Christians, Islamics, Muslims, Aethiests, Satanists, gays, lesbians and disabled people and they don't seem to be generating any conspiracy theories.

dusthead, ONE of the reasons it's suspicious...to put it lightly...that there SO MANY JEWS in important and high positions, having such a great concentration of power and wealth, is that Jews comprise ONLY 1.8% of the US population and ONE-TENTH of ONE percent (0.1%) of the world's population!!! Believe me, if they were more easily identifiable by their physical characteristics, there would be questions from EVERYBODY about this. For example, if 1.8% of the US population were Mongolians, who have a distinctly different physical appearance than the majority of Americans, and yet everywhere you looked, from CEOs to high-level politicians, there were Mongolians, people would think, "hmmm...there's just something not right about the statistically unproportional representation of Mongolians here..." Because most Jews are physically similar in their appearance to other whites, there's nothing visually obvious for anyone to question. However, when people DO start to question it, they're immediately labeled "anti-Semitic" (which is laughable because these Khazarian, Askenazi "Jews" are not even Semites), which causes most of them to shut the fuck up.

Note that most Jews (at least in the US, I don't know any other Jews) are good people and are not a part of this extreme Zionist movement of deception and really have no idea that it even exists. Oh, speaking of deception, MOSSAD's official motto is, "By deception thou shalt do war."

[dusthead]

dusthead, ONE of the reasons it's suspicious...to put it lightly...that there SO MANY JEWS in important and high positions, having such a great concentration of power and wealth, is that Jews comprise ONLY 1.8% of the US population and ONE-TENTH of ONE percent (0.1%) of the world's population!!! Believe me, if they were more easily identifiable by their physical characteristics, there would be questions from EVERYBODY about this. For example, if 1.8% of the US population were Mongolians, who have a distinctly different physical appearance than the majority of Americans, and yet everywhere you looked, from CEOs to high-level politicians, there were Mongolians, people would think, "hmmm...there's just something not right about the statistically unproportional representation of Mongolians here..." Because most Jews are physically similar in their appearance to other whites, there's nothing visually obvious for anyone to question. However, when people DO start to question it, they're immediately labeled "anti-Semitic" (which is laughable because these Khazarian, Askenazi "Jews" are not even Semites), which causes most of them to shut the fuck up.

Note that most Jews (at least in the US, I don't know any other Jews) are good people and are not a part of this extreme Zionist movement of deception and really have no idea that it even exists. Oh, speaking of deception, MOSSAD's official motto is, "By deception thou shalt do war."

Thankyou for putting your argument in a rational and calm manner - a rare thing on this board (in fact my original post was probably a bit firey).

I take all of your comments on board, but at the same time I can draw connections between many other groups independent of the Jews.

There are whole networks of people from the same acting families who make stupid amounts of money from really bad movies. The Christian Scientologists often bolster one another into high places, as do many religious groups. There are communities I could mention in parts of the UK who have managed to build a wall around themselves and exist by their own rules, only giving employment on the basis of cultural background (outsiders will not be tolerated!).

Now I could say that it's all a big conspiracy and these people want to take over the world (maybe they do!). But in all honesty, I don't think nepotism is an issue here. Nepotism has occurred all the way through history and not just with Jewish groups. It's not a fair system, but business empires are built on it, and as long as the system of money continues, so too will this high-brow networking.

I'm more concerned with events and individual responsibility.

If I go down the route of thinking 'They did that because they are Jewish', I am ignoring the reality of the situation and using their background as a focus.

My point is, I don't really care where anyone is from, or whether they got their job through family connections. All I'm interested in is whether they are decent human beings. If they are not, and they are causing human suffering, the issue needs addressing, and that has nothing to do with whether they are Jewish.

I find it hard to accept that all the corrupt Jews get together and hatch evil schemes against the rest of society. It suggests they are like Darth Vader and his cronies on the 'dark side of the force'. Isn't that a little bit 'cartoony'?

However, if you were to suggest that a group of criminals meet up to plot a crime, that is easier to take on board. By coincidence they may be Jewish, but that would have little to do with the crime itself.

In another way, we could look at George Bush and Tony Blair - both were staunch followers of the bible. This does not mean everyone else who believes in the bible is part of the same global network - just that they share a common belief.

That's the way I see it anyway.

It's an interesting subject.

[white horse]

Thankyou for putting your argument in a rational and calm manner - a rare thing on this board (in fact my original post was probably a bit firey).

I take all of your comments on board, but at the same time I can draw connections between many other groups independent of the Jews.

Now I could say that it's all a big conspiracy and these people want to take over the world (maybe they do!). But in all honesty, I don't think nepotism is an issue here. Nepotism has occurred all the way through history and not just with Jewish groups.

...

I find it hard to accept that all the corrupt Jews get together and hatch evil schemes against the rest of society. It suggests they are like Darth Vader and his cronies on the 'dark side of the force'. Isn't that a little bit 'cartoony'?

...

However, if you were to suggest that a group of criminals meet up to plot a crime, that is easier to take on board. By coincidence they may be Jewish, but that would have little to do with the crime itself.



I would suggest that you look more into Zionism.

Zionists have spent the last 2000 years in an effort to get back the land of Israel and recreate the Temple of Solomon. This is a specific and defined 'conspiracy' and is second only to breathing for a Zionist. This is not just a wish list, it is the very life blood of their movement; they spend every waking momenet, every breath, every beat of their hearts, putting evey ounce of effort towards that goal.

Phase one is acconplished; they have manouvred the world into the creation of an official state of Israel (semi-illegally).

The final phase will be to take over the Dome of the Rock, have it demolished and build a replica of the Temple. THAT is what every Zionist spend his every breath towards.

Zionists are supposes to be forbidden from listening to any music with a beat, in case it induces feelings of joy. These people are fobidden form feeling any form of happiness until the day that the Temple is built.

This is noordinary 'conspiracy'; this does not mean that every 'Jew' is involved and that everything they do is a conspiracy; but you have to understand that for Zionists NOTHING will get in the way of this aim, no amount of human blood (and remember also to a Zionist us non-Hebrews are no better than animals, we are NOT God's chosen people, THEY are, THEY see themselves as special).

I think we have to recognise this, and learn to decipher where these real conspiracies are; after all, as manypeople have pointed out, this is no ordinary nepotism, after all there are so many 'Jews' insuch high and powerful places it's gotta rasie an eyebrow or two!

Nepotism is part of human nature, it exists at every level of society and has done and always will do; but Zionist nepotism is extremely dangerous and can lead to deaths on massive scales; in thousand, tens of thousand, even millions. These deaths will not matter if it brings the end result; the creation of the Temple.

Check it out...

[benjaminfreedman]

dusthead, I see where you are coming from...100%. I agree with white horse's underlying premise, which is that you've got to understand how these Zionists think...what do they believe? What do they believe about themselves and about others? The reason the world is the way it is is because the majority of people out there, regardless of their religion, etc, really don't believe in anything and don't believe that what they do matters. The masses have been lulled into apathy, thus you have an infinitesimal amount of people with very deep convictions able to run down the masses and implement their agenda. To their credit, the Zionists show what humans are capable of achieving when focused on a common goal. It just so happens that their goal is to rule us like cattle, so it's not the best example of what could be achieved. :eek:

One thing that's important to understand is that these extreme Zionists do not follow the Torah. It forms a part of what they believe, but it is not the foundation, and their interpretation of it is perverted (don't let them fool you). Anything you read that seems good or noble about what they believe...whether it's the Torah, the Talmud or the Kabbalah...is perverted based on the principle that 1) they are God's chosen people and 2) you are a goyim...the soul of an animal trapped in a human body. To them you are human cattle, and nothing more. Anything that seems to be noble about their beliefs applies only to themselves. For example, to them, "That shalt not murder" means don't murder any other Jews. Murdering goyim is okay, and so on and so forth. Also, on the Day of Atonement, they pray the Kol Nidre, which means that they vow before God that any other vow or oath the take for the rest of the year is not a vow or oath and is null and void, meaning they never have to keep their word.

I don't mean to drone on, but quickly, another Kabbalistic belief is that they are both the right and left hand of God, meaning that God wills (not allows) both good and evil to occur in order to bring about his overall purpose, and that whether they do good or evil, that they are acting on God's behalf. Truly messed up.

Anyway, while I agree that Nepotism certainly occurs wherever you look, what I am saying is that this Zionist conspiracy is far more than just that. It is their ultimate goal to rule the world with crushing power, no matter how long it takes. Behind every movement and secret society and every war, you will find Zionist Jews pulling the strings. I am not talking about a few Jews being vaulted into a high position here and there by another Jew in a high position, I am talking about MASSIVE concentration of power and wealth.

It really takes a lot of research to find all the connections and all the players. There's a lot of info on www.iamthewitness.com (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/www.iamthewitness.com). A lot of (old, out of print) books put into PDF, audio interviews, etc,etc. Also, on RBN, John Stadtmiller did a series of readings the last week or so dealing with Zionism. He goes over a ton of info...you would glean a lot.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/index.php?cmd=archives.year&ProgramID=1&year=9

Go into January and then February and download both Hours 1 & 2 of these shows: 1/26, 1/28, 1/29, 1/30, & 2/2

"The Jewish people as a whole will become its own Messiah. It will attain world dominion by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of monarchy and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship.
In this New World Order the children of Israel will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. The Governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property and everywhere to make use of the resources of the state. Thus will the promise of the Talmud be fulfilled, in which is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands."
— Baruch Levy, Letter to Karl Marx, 'La Revue de Paris', p.574, June 1, 1928

[kidderowski]

If I can find more sites for you to post on, I will let you know!

The day it happened is the only time I've seen it on mainstreem TV.

It cannot be my imagination as three people at work on the same night asked the same question and for some reason they now don't remember it.

Too busy with the more important things in life, like consuming!

[revolution]

The power elite of the world have conspired to deceive us and rely on us to conform.
We are being programmed & conditioned by a relentless propaganda machine,the drivers of which are our Political leaders/Elite whom do not harness the high Morals,Justice and Equity that the masses desire. They have their own agenda and consider us with absolute contempt which must be challenged.If not,our children will live in a world where freedom & choice will be missing. Immaterial of political labels the Elite are as one . Our lives would be very much richer without them.

[revolutionplease]

lol can you post a link for that clip of wtc 7 the old links are all ,,,well erm FU*&ED

[gribz]

lol can you post a link for that clip of wtc 7 the old links are all ,,,well erm FU*&ED

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[seamus]

lol can you post a link for that clip of wtc 7 the old links are all ,,,well erm FU*&ED
mine still works:

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

[goldengoose]

mine still works:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgcB3z57fsQ


Why would anyone find interest in one of the fantasy movement's silliest canards?

There are two possibilities:
1) The BBC, listening to reports that WTC 7 was about to collapse, jumped the gun and reported that it had already collapsed. That sort of thing happens frequently in reporting. The last Pope's death was announced three different times before it actually occurred. Following the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan, the death of his press secretary, James Brady, was announced. Brady is still alive.

2)Members of your imaginary conspiracy sought out a representative of the network they regarded as most implacably hostile to George Bush and handed him a script. The BBC rep asked if WTC 7 was really going to collapse. The comic-book super-villain replied that it was. The BBC rep asked The Big Question: WHY THE SCRIPT?

The evildoer was stuck for an answer, as, indeed, all of you are. Listen closely:

Either the building collapses, or it does not. If it does not, what is the purpose of a script announcing that it did. If it does collapse, WHY THE SCRIPT?

[lordzoma]

NO steel structure in history has ever been brought down by a fire.

WTC 7 did not collapse, it was brought down with charges just like wtc 1 and 2.

It is blatantly obvious that the entire event was scripted and planned to the T but the reporter for the bbc skipped ahead.

Anyone who doesn't understand this premise is simply ignoring reality.

[goldengoose]

NO steel structure in history has ever been brought down by a fire.

WTC 7 did not collapse, it was brought down with charges just like wtc 1 and 2.

It is blatantly obvious that the entire event was scripted and planned to the T but the reporter for the bbc skipped ahead.

Anyone who doesn't understand this premise is simply ignoring reality.


You have been caught spewing nonsense. It is not "blatantly obvious" to demolition professionals, who agree that the collapse of WTC 7 does not resemble a controlled demolition. The audio records do not contain any sounds of a simultaneous series of explosions. The reason these sounds aren't present is that there were none. No physical evidence of demolition exists: no detonator caps, no bits of wiring, no chemical signatures of shaped charges--NOTHING!

Predictably, you ignored my main points altogether. An imaginary super-villain, for unfathomable reasons, hands a script to a network hostile to the conspiracy he represents. The script outlines an event that is going to take place no matter what. WHY THE SCRIPT? WHY, OF ALL NETWORKS, THE BBC?

The FDNY, which lost 343 men that day, established a collapse zone around WTC 7 several hours before the actual collapse because it was the department's professional judgment that the building was dangerously unstable and likely to fall.

It is ironic that someone embracing a baseless fantasy accuses rationalists of ignoring reality.

[seamus]

You have been caught spewing nonsense. It is not "blatantly obvious" to demolition professionals, who agree that the collapse of WTC 7 does not resemble a controlled demolition. The audio records do not contain any sounds of a simultaneous series of explosions. The reason these sounds aren't present is that there were none. No physical evidence of demolition exists: no detonator caps, no bits of wiring, no chemical signatures of shaped charges--NOTHING!

Predictably, you ignored my main points altogether. An imaginary super-villain, for unfathomable reasons, hands a script to a network hostile to the conspiracy he represents. The script outlines an event that is going to take place no matter what. WHY THE SCRIPT? WHY, OF ALL NETWORKS, THE BBC?

The FDNY, which lost 343 men that day, established a collapse zone around WTC 7 several hours before the actual collapse because it was the department's professional judgment that the building was dangerously unstable and likely to fall.

It is ironic that someone embracing a baseless fantasy accuses rationalists of ignoring reality.

so you think that it was the department's professional judgment, and not the order to "pull it" from larry silverstein (which we have all seen video of him attesting to) that caused the setting up of the perimeter? and you think that the few small fires made the huge structure dangerously unstable, yet it managed to fall down into its own footprint? and all of this was simply too unimportant for the 9-11 commission to even mention the collapse of building 7?

hmm... that sounds like a baseless fantasy if i ever heard one.


s

[thirdwave]

Building 7 was officially meant to have been a controlled demolition..

this is what was said after... I think there was slight controversy in that at firs tthey said it was fire that brought it down... and they then said it was "pulled" because there fire was so strong "they did not want to risk any more deaths" ...

So although this does show you how manufactured and controlled the news is and how the people speaking just say what they are ordered to say when they are told... it does not really expose much... as they can simply say.. "oops we were told they were about to pull the building... and we thought they already had"

the questions that should be asked is how the hell did they manage to pull the building if it was full of fire.... bombs already put inside?

[seamus]

round the circle again!

pulling a building takes days of planning and placement of explosive if not weeks!

of COURSE the explosives were already in there!

[mathew]

of course?

if there were explosive then why didnt they show up on the audio records?
and why dont demolistion experts agree that building 7 was a demolishion.

I dont belive the official story especially since there IS NO OFFICIAL STORY WITH REGARDS TO BUILDING 7, yes it has simply been ignored.

But....... until further evidence I will have to simple speculate that something magical happenend on that day where everything is covered up and the holes in the story lead to nowhere keeping the truth hidden and the seekers crazy.


maybe the whole reason for building 7 collapsing was for this type of activity.
or maybe no one knows at any level of goverment, lol.........

what do you suppose Bush was told about building 7...............


what we need is lie detector test on everyone who was involved including terrorist and politicians.

INFACTTTTT we should use reverse big brother tatics on politicians everywhere and say well if you have nothing to hide give up your privacy
the movement should be abou transparency for the future

I mean if they have nothing to hide..... watcha think?

[scottishlass]

Nope. I think it's something else altogether. It concerns mutidimensional/time 'travel'. Ive had exactly the same thing happen; it's quite disconcerting at first! The first time I noticed it, a tile had fallen from the roof. I moved it and laid it against the back wall so the grass didnt go yellow. The next day, it was back in exactly the same spot. I thought it strange that a neighbour must have replaced it, but the next time I saw her I asked if she had been marking the spot or something and she said no. She hadnt touched it. This year, a neighbour told me a story which was so bizarre he must have worried about divulging it, he said he always keeps his gate locked and the key in a specific place. Then one day he found that his gate was open and the key was missing. The next day, the gate was relocked and the key back where it should be. He couldnt explain it. He KNEW he hadnt lost the key OR replaced it. A year ago, I located a specific landmark on Google Earth, an island off the coast of Nova Scotia using my mother's laptop. I pinned it so I could come back to it later. Next day it had vanished as had a whole lot of other markers I'd placed. At first I thought it was just me making a mistake, like you would, but soon I found that an MSN conversation History file contained information that was DIFFERENT to what *I KNOW* was said between myself and the other person. It was more than a bit worrying as I looked at the file and found myself having supposedly quoted my correspondent saying "Voices in my head are telling me to kill you". Hm.
I know, you can imagine what I was thinking! The same file contained the exchanges of a conversation with someone who supposedly at the time was in NZ, and had asked
Can you hear an engine running? Several months later, I went to meet a new friend 200 miles away. Overnight, I woke up because I could hear the very distinctive sound of my car's Magnex exhaust - I thought my car (on her drive) was about to be nicked...this sound continued for several hours. I had NOT been drinking nor had I taken any drugs etc. I was perfectly healthy, quite happy, but this was bizarre. More recently, Ive gone out to my car and several times found it still wheel locked but the doors unlocked. I assumed someone out there had a duplicate Remote fob and had opened it...but taken nothing. The CD was still there. I dismissed that as strange but believable. Then one day I got into it after it had stood cold overnight; the engine was WARM. Something like 4 months later, when I cleared out my unused Yahoo Inbox, I found a message from an unknown sender, from around that same time with the Subject Heading "I borrowed your car, I hope you don't mind". Fu*k me. Now THAT is strange!

[seamus]

Fairies can account for most of that. They are fond of starting the cars at my dad's garage and revving the engine until he gets halfway down the hill with his shotgun. Then they hit the brakes a couple of times (to make the lights go on), shut off the engine, and disappear.

he had previously banned them from coming onto the property since they had before been leaving car doors just open so as the batteries would go flat. But it upset them so badly to be banned from the property that he allows them now to come up to but not into the garage. The fairies (actually Cherokee "little people") around his house have a nasty habit of moving tools you put down while using repeatedly, letting you search all over for them, and then putting them back in plain sight after you have acknowledged that it must have been them and gone off to do something else.

now imagine... this, on a thread about the WTC7 demolition?

S

p.s., scottishlass, it does sound like you're flipping through dimensions. I and many others have had the experience, for example, of hearing that some celebrity had died, registering that in our memory, and then hearing months or years later that they had just died! It's not really a stretch to think that an island might not be in this reality but be in one right next door, butterfly effect and all that.

[crocoduck]

There is something seriously wrong here. I DOWNLOADED the video and now it's gone off my computer. Maybe google used the http connection to make the file wipe itself.

this thing is getting blasted off the torrent sites like crazy. It's the make/break story for us all not to look like nutters anymore ;)

I have downloaded it and will put it on as many places as I can find to put it!!!.

The oligarchic nerve!

s

I'm afraid I don't quite understand. In what way is the BBC reporting the building collapsed before it happened inconsistent with the "official story?" If it's true that the building was about to collapse anyway, then it's more plausible that the BBC misreported that error as opposed to them being involved in the "demolition" plot and making the exact same mistake.

[keystone]

I'm afraid I don't quite understand. In what way is the BBC reporting the building collapsed before it happened inconsistent with the "official story?" If it's true that the building was about to collapse anyway, then it's more plausible that the BBC misreported that error as opposed to them being involved in the "demolition" plot and making the exact same mistake.

I do not accept that what we witnessed on that day was anything less than controlled demolition in common with many others.

There's no denying that the reporter reported the "collapse" with WTC 7 clearly still standing in the background behind her.

I'm prepared to accept the possibility that the piece was aired on the basis of a report that they had received and in the feeding frenzy taking place at the time the report was repeated without checking the facts first - all in the interests of being "first with the news" you understand.

It's not an enormous leap of speculation to assume that because a) It was obviously a controlled demolition and b) the BBC reported it before it happened that the BBC was somehow complicit in the event. I don't buy that although they have shot themselves in the foot rather by "losing" relevant tapes.

Imaginations run riot unfortunately.

Cheers

[seamus]

well, I think it more exposes the whole thing, rather than pointing a finger directly at the BBC.

[crocoduck]

I do not accept that what we witnessed on that day was anything less than controlled demolition in common with many others.

There's no denying that the reporter reported the "collapse" with WTC 7 clearly still standing in the background behind her.

I'm prepared to accept the possibility that the piece was aired on the basis of a report that they had received and in the feeding frenzy taking place at the time the report was repeated without checking the facts first - all in the interests of being "first with the news" you understand.

It's not an enormous leap of speculation to assume that because a) It was obviously a controlled demolition and b) the BBC reported it before it happened that the BBC was somehow complicit in the event. I don't buy that although they have shot themselves in the foot rather by "losing" relevant tapes.

Imaginations run riot unfortunately.

Cheers

The OP had said that this information would make truthers seem "not so crazy," or something to that effect. And I realize that most people here have beliefs similar to your's. It's just not exactly clear to me why anyone should expect the fact that the BBC reported the collapse before it happens as evidence for a demolition. It's perfectly consistent with the "official story."

In fact, I think it's much less consistent with any "inside job story." Why would anyone plotting this demolition tell BBC? And why would the BBC report it before it happened if they knew it was all a demolition?

I'm just saying, a government conspiracy doesn't follow from the BBC reporting the collapse of WTC before the fact.

[crocoduck]

well, I think it more exposes the whole thing, rather than pointing a finger directly at the BBC.

You think it exposes a conspiracy? In what way?

[keystone]

It's just not exactly clear to me why anyone should expect the fact that the BBC reported the collapse before it happens as evidence for a demolition.I agree - it isn't.

I'm just saying, a government conspiracy doesn't follow from the BBC reporting the collapse of WTC before the fact.I agree.

Cheers

[bendoon]

You think it exposes a conspiracy? In what way?

What would be the odds on them guessing that a building was going to collapse and then it did ?

[keystone]

What would be the odds on them guessing that a building was going to collapse and then it did ?What would be the odds on them being told it had collapsed by soeone else, accepting said statement as gospel and then re-reporting it straight away without checking first?

[ssyx]

What would be the odds on them being told it had collapsed by soeone else, accepting said statement as gospel and then re-reporting it straight away without checking first?

This is what happened I would imagine.
Some people knew WTC7 was coming down before it did but the BBC just read their lines too early.

I am not convinced their is much research done by TV news programmes these days.

[crocoduck]

What would be the odds on them guessing that a building was going to collapse and then it did ?

If it were about to collapse anyway, and it were ALREADY EVACUATED (which it was), then the odds would be very high.

[crocoduck]

This is what happened I would imagine.
Some people knew WTC7 was coming down before it did but the BBC just read their lines too early.

I am not convinced their is much research done by TV news programmes these days.

It makes sense for the BBC to know about it collapsing before it did if the "official story" were true. It would not make sense for the BBC to know if it were just a controlled demolition. Why would these alleged conspirators run the risk of telling the BBC this information? What would they have to gain by such a leak?

[ssyx]

It makes sense for the BBC to know about it collapsing before it did if the "official story" were true. It would not make sense for the BBC to know if it were just a controlled demolition.
Not sure what you're meaning here :)


Why would these alleged conspirators run the risk of telling the BBC this information? What would they have to gain by such a leak?
Well in my view they did run the risk, the risk of giving the news outlets the news a little early, and that's how this thread is here.

[crocoduck]

Not sure what you're meaning here :)



Well in my view they did run the risk, the risk of giving the news outlets the news a little early, and that's how this thread is here.

I don't believe that it follows from the fact that the thread is here that the alleged conspirators told the BBC about the "demolition" in advance.

What I meant was that this particular anomaly fits perfectly well with the "official story," since the claim there is that WTC7 was about to collapse due to extensive damage and the resultant fire inside the building. If this were the case, a collapse would be expected, and it's not very difficult to see a news agency such as the BBC in such a chaotic situation to confuse "about to collapse" with "just collapsed."

Furthermore, this particular anomaly doesn't fit in with any of the "inside job" hypotheses at all. For an alleged conspiracy to inform the BBC of an imminent demolition would be a completely unnecessary risk.

[nihil]

are you talking about that woman (BBC talking-head) that shouted some rant about a fallen builiding...

while the same building was still there, in front of the camera !!

Plain proof of the fact that all the news on 911 were scripted.

Same for 'live' footage. Same for photographs.

[crocoduck]

are you talking about that woman (BBC talking-head) that shouted some rant about a fallen builiding...

while the same building was still there, in front of the camera !!

Plain proof of the fact that all the news on 911 were scripted.

Same for 'live' footage. Same for photographs.

Why is that proof it was "scripted?" Can you please explain how you go from premise to conclusion here?

[bendoon]

Why is that proof it was "scripted?" Can you please explain how you go from premise to conclusion here?

Because the odds of it happening by chance are so astronomical.

[crocoduck]

Because the odds of it happening by chance are so astronomical.

Well, if the "official story" were true, then it wouldn't have happened by chance. It would have happened because they knew the building was going to collapse for the stated reasons, and wanted to be the first media organization to report it.

Furthermore, it seems the chances of an alleged conspiracy leaking this information to the BBC actually would be astronomical, since that would be taking a huge risk for no apparent reason.

[nihil]

I just followed this MEDIA ACCIDENT on YouTube - before I got banned.

I remember a guy who uploaded his phone call to the very same anchor woman

who seems to see the real facts before they happen...

This guy - I can't remember his account name because he got banned too - just asked the BBC

talking-head if She knew what was going to happen...

Answer: She Hangs Up .

[crocoduck]

Of course they knew it was going to happen. The building was evacuated. They knew the fires inside in the absence of any firemen or even water would destroy the building. But it's not clear how that fits into a story of an "inside job." The fact that they misreported this incident only makes sense in the context of the "official story."

[stannrodd]

Why is that proof it was "scripted?" Can you please explain how you go from premise to conclusion here?

There could be quite a simple explanation such as .. using footage from earlier .. in the "blue screen" background .. unknowingly showing the WTC7 building standing .. which they were probably unfamiliar with .. anyway.

I can get that from my broadcasting experience .. but I can also see it as a lame excuse from another perspective.

To me it will remain indeterminate for now.

More to the point .. why was the building evacuated so early in the day .. before either tower collapsed ..??

That to me is a curiosity which needs to be looked at seriously.

Stann

[crocoduck]

Why would the alleged conspirators bother revealing this detail to the BBC? What depends on the BBC having that information? Those kinds of problems are what I mean by this anomaly not fitting at all within the context of the "inside job" beliefs.

Maybe there is a good response to them; but if there is, I haven't heard it yet.

[nihil]

Let's say WTC7 was partially occupied by NSA/CIA Offices .

A mere deposit of confidential Files, Data, maybe papers that could be soon released as result of declassification. Before this access to Classified Information, the National Security Agency (NSA) undertook a review of documents for declassification in 1996.

Project OPENDOOR: NSA announced (April 2, 1996) it had some 1.3 million pages of declassified documents to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). They dated from the beginning of World War I to the end of World War II.

[crocoduck]

Let's say WTC7 was partially occupied by NSA/CIA Offices .

A mere deposit of confidential Files, Data, maybe papers that could be soon released as result of declassification. Before this access to Classified Information, the National Security Agency (NSA) undertook a review of documents for declassification in 1996.

Project OPENDOOR: NSA announced (April 2, 1996) it had some 1.3 million pages of declassified documents to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). They dated from the beginning of World War I to the end of World War II.

What's that have to do with the BBC?

[bendoon]

Why would the alleged conspirators bother revealing this detail to the BBC?

Because the major News stations cover was scripted for the whole day, the BBC just messed up by getting ahead of scedule.

[crocoduck]

Because the major News stations cover was scripted for the whole day, the BBC just messed up by getting ahead of scedule.

You're just repeating the original assertion. Why would this need to be scripted? Why would the conspirators take such a huge risk? What depended on the BBC reporting that particular event? It doesn't make any sense in the context of the "inside job" beliefs.

[nihil]

Let's put it this way: that day of September, 2001 every news station on the earth was connected to NY . Almost a complete day with the smoke from the towers, the people running and so on . There are some clues that give an example of what I consider as:

Scripted .

Images were broadcasted almost immediately . But the backgrounds on the towers give huge hints of what the people, that knows a little about video-content-creation, calls Layers .

I mean the towers, as seen on FOX and BBC, have the backgrounds so
differently looking that a post-production modification seems to be appliable .

I mean: they broadcast in zero time a heavily modified video, with Layers and so on ??


CHOPPED OUT - Fri, 21 Mar 2008


http://www.livevideo.com/flvplayer/embed/26FF074654024E898A802DF02C1260A4 (http://www.livevideo.com/flvplayer/embed/26FF074654024E898A802DF02C1260A4)


Quote: On 9/11, the US TV networks used computer generated sceneries of Manhattan. The layering techniques and softwares used for these simulations seemingly blended real and digital images - but the EXACT way this was done is frankly not for us to define. However, the technology certainly exists and it is naive to think this was difficult/impossible to achieve. In "CHOPPED OUT", I compare two shots - 11 minutes apart - both of them showing a reversing helicopter in the same corner of the screen and over very much the same spot of Manhattan. Additionally, both camera shots 'catch' the chopper at the end of a wide zoom out action. The odds of all these similarities occuring in two distinct shots, 11 min apart in time are pretty close to nil. If you still believe it may be a "coincidence", I will let you believe this and you will have 'wasted' only 4 minutes of your life.

News are just what they want us to know, think and bother about .

[crocoduck]

Let's put it this way: that day of September, 2001 every news station on the earth was connected to NY . Almost a complete day with the smoke from the towers, the people running and so on . There are some clues that give an example of what I consider as:

Scripted .

Images were broadcasted almost immediately . But the backgrounds on the towers give huge hints of what the people, that knows a little about video-content-creation, calls Layers .

I mean the towers, as seen on FOX and BBC, have the backgrounds so
differently looking that a post-production modification seems to be appliable .

I mean: they broadcast in zero time a heavily modified video, with Layers and so on ??


CHOPPED OUT - Fri, 21 Mar 2008


http://www.livevideo.com/flvplayer/embed/26FF074654024E898A802DF02C1260A4 (http://www.livevideo.com/flvplayer/embed/26FF074654024E898A802DF02C1260A4)


Quote: On 9/11, the US TV networks used computer generated sceneries of Manhattan. The layering techniques and softwares used for these simulations seemingly blended real and digital images - but the EXACT way this was done is frankly not for us to define. However, the technology certainly exists and it is naive to think this was difficult/impossible to achieve. In "CHOPPED OUT", I compare two shots - 11 minutes apart - both of them showing a reversing helicopter in the same corner of the screen and over very much the same spot of Manhattan. Additionally, both camera shots 'catch' the chopper at the end of a wide zoom out action. The odds of all these similarities occuring in two distinct shots, 11 min apart in time are pretty close to nil. If you still believe it may be a "coincidence", I will let you believe this and you will have 'wasted' only 4 minutes of your life.

News are just what they want us to know, think and bother about .

You're not answering my questions at all.

[nihil]

What's that have to do with the BBC? TV Goons knew it beforehand, they just forerun the script .

[crocoduck]

What's that have to do with the BBC? TV Goons knew it beforehand, they just forerun the script .

How do you know they knew about it beforehand because it was part of a "script" and not because it was known to be about to collapse at the time?

[nihil]

.
Ok . Do You work for the BBC?

The ruins of a WTC7 Do NOT exist at the very time of the airing of that talking woman . It is all broadcasted . They have failed . Thousand and thousand of People saw this on the net . Plain and simple: Is that woman capable of Prophecies? Was she instructed to act as a TALKING HEAD, a Parrot, a Puppet for those who planned that ignominous day?

***

On September 11th 2001, BBC World reported at 4:57pm Eastern Time that the Salomon Brothers Building (more commonly known as WTC7 or World Trade Building 7) had collapsed.

This even made the 5pm EST headlines, what is - so to speak - bizarre is that the building did not actually collapse until 5:20pm EST. What is even scarier, is the journalist trying to correct the error with a live commentary on the FALLING STRUCTURE .

...while the WTC7 was in plain view on her left .

***

9/11 was unusual enough, without BBC World being able to foretell the destiny of WTC 7. Still arguing why I called SCRIPT that silly event?

BBC launched the headlines too early, so a panicked supervisor did a last call to that journalist and she started a discourse based on nothing... THEY HAD TO DIVERGE YOUR ATTENTION from the aired headlines!

They failed, because the fixed camera had that building in plain view for all the world.
.

[crocoduck]

Ok . Do You work for the BBC? The ruins of a WTC7 Do NOT exist at the very time of the airing of that talking woman . It is all broadcasted . They have failed . Thousand and thousand of People saw this on the net . Plain and simple: Is that woman capable of Prophecies? Was she instructed to act as a TALKING HEAD, a Parrot, a Puppet for those who planned that ignominous day?

No, I do not work for the BBC. You didn't answer my question. Here it is again:

How do you know they knew about it beforehand because it was part of a "script" and not because it was known to be about to collapse at the time?

There's no need to prophecize about this if it were already known to be about to collapse, which is perfectly consistent with the "official story."

[nihil]

Well, if you follow the official story the case's closed for me .
By the way I edited my previous post . Go to liveleak, see it, grab a pen and
WRITE DOWN THE TIME .

[crocoduck]

Well, if you follow the official story the case's closed for me .
By the way I edited my previous post . Go to liveleak, see it, grab a pen and
WRITE DOWN THE TIME .

Why do you believe that matters? If it was already known to be about to collapse, which is what the "official story" holds, then it would not be surprising for an error like this to occur. So this anomaly is perfectly consistent with the "official story" and makes absolutely no sense in the context of any of the (contradictory) "inside job" beliefs.

[nihil]

Have you seen the video?
Have you seen the WTC7?
.IT IS ON THE RIGHT !

[crocoduck]

Have you seen the video?
Have you seen the WTC7?
IT IS ON THE RIGHT !

Yes, I have seen it.

I'll repeat myself:

If the "official story" were true, then it was known that WTC 7 was about to collapse at the time of said report. In fact, the building was already evacuated in anticipation of such a collapse.

So it is not surprising that an error of this kind was made in the context of the "official story" being true.

What does not make any sense at all is an error of this kind being made in the context of any of the "inside job" beliefs.

Obviously, we both agree that an error was made. I just happen to believe that the error was made in a context that actually makes sense, and not that any and every anomaly proves some huge fantastic conspiracy.

[nihil]

.
The "official story" is false. It was known that WTC 7 was about to collapse at the time of planned collapse. In fact, the building was still there, in good conditions, as the images testify . Go look the video with a timeline of that events . The background was a previous footage? Could be, but WHY the woman says 'RIGHT NOW... AS YOU ( the viewer ) CAN SEE ON MY BACK' et cetera??

They failed at airing a SCRIPTED HEADLINE, than gave their worst on that broadcasted, LIVE(?), ingominous crime . Bye, it was hard to comprehend to me, too .
.

[crocoduck]

.
The "official story" is false. It was known that WTC 7 was about to collapse at the time of planned collapse. In fact, the building was still there, in good conditions, as the images testify . Go look the video with a timeline of that events . The background was a previous footage? Could be, but WHY the woman says 'RIGHT NOW... AS YOU ( the viewer ) CAN SEE ON MY BACK' et cetera??

They failed at airing a SCRIPTED HEADLINE, than gave their worst on that broadcasted LIVE (?) ingominous crime . Bye, it was hard to comprehend to me, too .
.

It was known that WTC 7 was about to collapse because there was extensive damage to the building from the collapse of the other buildings.

Yes, I know that you can see the building in the background. Obviously an error was made. I just happen to believe the error was made in a context which actually makes sense, which is that the "official story" is true.

It would make sense for the BBC to make this mistake if they were simply mistaken on whether or not the building had collapsed yet. It would not make sense for them to make this error if it were all just part of some huge conspiracy.

[nihil]

Ok, so the official story makes sense, the debris from one of the two towers did make the
Solomon Building collapse, SO the fantastically-controlled-collapse was authored by God, YHWH and Allah ... DOES This make sense ?

[crocoduck]

Ok, so the official story makes sense, the debris from one of the two towers did make the Solomon Building collapse, the fantastically controlled collapse was authored by God, YHWH and Allah . DOES This make sense ?

No, that does not make sense because there is no good evidence that a deity exists.

What makes sense is that the BBC made this particular error because they were simply mistaken and not because some huge conspiracy made them do it.

[nihil]

I have got a different opinion, Sir . It was a planned collapse .
It is hard to comprehend on an ethical scale .

[crocoduck]

I have got a different opinion, Sir .

Do you have any particular reason for that? Besides just that you simply want it to be true, that is.

[nihil]

http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/mat/wtcstudy.shtm
http://www.911myths.com/wtc7moresmoke.avi

Some deceptive links, the best they show is... the smoke . WTC7 is still intact .

Structural collapse my a$$ .

[nihil]

3 photos: The Parrot, the previous US Investigations and the Salomon Building when it is about to collapse, still intact, with the first signs of a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION .

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/8880/bbcwtc7pil.jpg

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/1388/cameronreport.jpg

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/8638/wtc7.jpg


You can investigate the Security service at the WTC or the fact that NORAD was conducting a test that wicked day . Adios .

[crocoduck]

3 photos: The Parrot, the previous US Investigations and the Salomon Building when it is about to collapse, still intact, with the first signs of a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION .

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/8880/bbcwtc7pil.jpg

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/1388/cameronreport.jpg

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/8638/wtc7.jpg


You can investigate the Security service at the WTC or the fact that NORAD was conducting a test that wicked day . Adios .

Yes, I know the building was still there while it was being reported as collapsed. As I've mentioned several times, this error makes perfect sense in the context of the "official story" and it makes absolutely no sense in the context of any of the contradictory "inside job" beliefs.

You've gotten yourself to a position where any and all anomalies automatically confirm your presupposed beliefs without them needing to actually form a coherent story.

Someone just saying that evidence exists but that it's hidden is a very dangerous thing to actually trust. That's basically the McCarthyite version of presenting evidence. Me personally, I'd rather actually be able to analyze the evidence instead of just believing that it exists on faith, simply because someone said so.

You might as well just believe the "official story" because the government claims to have secret, classified evidence verifying that. You have no reason to prefer one over the other, besides your own personal subjective preference.

[nihil]

My Subjective Ethical Choice is for a Peaceful Life with others, not a Life based on Deception, Egotism and Greed.

Stated that, evidence exists on a serious analisys of the attacks and the opinion of any engineer that trusts on the Laws of Physics that will confirm the perpetrated CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.

Truth's been kept hidden by MediaMongers and US Government to follow their own agenda, not mine... maybe YOURS??

[crocoduck]

My Subjective Ethical Choice is for a Peaceful Life with others, not a Life based on Deception, Egotism and Greed.

Stated that, evidence exists on a serious analisys of the attacks and the opinion of any engineer that trusts on the Law of Physics will confirm the perpetrated CONTROLLED DEOLITIONS.

Truth's been kept hidden by MediaMongers and US Government to follow their own agenda, not mine... maybe YOURS??

There's a law of physics? Wow, I must have missed that one. A UFT would be pretty big news, I should think... Do you have a link for that?

Pretty much everyone thinks that their own subjective choices are for nice things like what you describe. Hitler could have said the same thing. It's meaningless unless you have some kinds of facts to back them up.

Anyway, like I said, the BBC's error here is perfectly consistent with the "official story" being true and is perfectly inconsistent with any of the contradictory "inside job" beliefs.

If the truth is hidden, how did you find it? Again, just by your own personal whimsy, and not evidence. That leads one to a dangerous place where you have no reason at all to believe one thing over another.

[nihil]

A Skyscraper hit near his top falls down until ground zero .

Makes it sense .

[crocoduck]

A Skyscraper hit at his top falls down until ground zero .

Makes it sense .

wut

[antinwo]

Surprise surprise. Croc is promoting Disinfo about 911 now:D

[crocoduck]

Surprise surprise. Croc is promoting Disinfo about 911 now:D

How do you know what I am promoting is "disinfo?"

[nihil]

You discredit others posts with almost the same concept, just look at your last 20 posts...

[white horse]

Yes, I have seen it.

I'll repeat myself:

If the "official story" were true, then it was known that WTC 7 was about to collapse at the time of said report. In fact, the building was already evacuated in anticipation of such a collapse.

So it is not surprising that an error of this kind was made in the context of the "official story" being true.

What does not make any sense at all is an error of this kind being made in the context of any of the "inside job" beliefs.

Obviously, we both agree that an error was made. I just happen to believe that the error was made in a context that actually makes sense, and not that any and every anomaly proves some huge fantastic conspiracy.

If this were true there would also be an auditable trail thorugh agancies to an original report*... but there is non, the BBC hate this clip, they are trying to drop/delete it. They have admitted to accidentally deleting it from their archives which means they will no longer comment on it.

*This is just like Sir Ian Bliar a day or two after the Menezes shooting that he had been told the 'suspect' had wires protruding from his jacket and had jumped a barrier at the tube station and failed to stop for police. When in fact it was all untrue, and later Bliar was unable to provide any information as to where those reports came from. Under normal circumstances this kind of a event is easy to investigate for independant constitutionalised auditors; however in both 911 and Menezes if the perps are also in control of the access to evidence AND the departments who SHOULD be investigating then you are on to a loser...!

[crocoduck]

If this were true there would also be an auditable trail thorugh agancies to an original report*... but there is non, the BBC hate this clip, they are trying to drop/delete it. They have admitted to accidentally deleting it from their archives which means they will no longer comment on it.

*This is just like Sir Ian Bliar a day or two after the Menezes shooting that he had been told the 'suspect' had wires protruding from his jacket and had jumped a barrier at the tube station and failed to stop for police. When in fact it was all untrue, and later Bliar was unable to provide any information as to where those reports came from. Under normal circumstances this kind of a event is easy to investigate for independant constitutionalised auditors; however in both 911 and Menezes if the perps are also in control of the access to evidence AND the departments who SHOULD be investigating then you are on to a loser...!

There would not necessarily be a trail of sources from the error if the error was caused or influenced by the chaotic nature of the situation. Of course the BBC don't like a clip which shows that they made a mistake. That would be true whether or not they made that error for the usual reasons as opposed to it being the result of some huge fantastic conspiracy.

[white horse]

There would not necessarily be a trail of sources from the error if the error was caused or influenced by the chaotic nature of the situation. Of course the BBC don't like a clip which shows that they made a mistake. That would be true whether or not they made that error for the usual reasons as opposed to it being the result of some huge fantastic conspiracy.

Yeah but it was the result of a huge fantastic conspiracy?! :eek:

[crocoduck]

Yeah but it was the result of a huge fantastic conspiracy?! :eek:

But this anomaly does not make any sense at all in that context. And just asserting something will not make it true.

[nihil]

But this anomaly does not make any sense at all in that context and...

For the rest, Sir ??

[crocoduck]

But this anomaly does not make any sense at all in that context and...

For the rest, Sir ??

This anomaly makes perfect sense in the context of the "official story" being true. If the "official story" is true, then WTC 7 was heavily damaged and expected to collapse. This information wasn't transmitted properly through the BBC as a result of the chaotic situation and an error was made, changing "about to collapse" to "has collapsed." It's just an error in the tense used, probably motivated at least partially by the desire for the BBC to be the first to report a new development.

If it were "scripted," as has been suggested, then this kind of error makes no sense at all. If that were the case, we would expect to see news reports in lock-step. The variation of coverage, including mistakes like the one in question, is further evidence against the belief that such coverage was "scripted."

[nihil]

They broadcasted the SCRIPTED HEADLINES too early . And were busted .

[crocoduck]

They broadcasted the SCRIPTED HEADLINES too early . And were busted .

I know that is what you believe, but it makes no sense if it were all planned out. It does make sense if it were not planned out. This also requires fewer additional assumptions about huge fantastic conspiracies, which makes it more likely to be true according to Occam's Razor.