9:00pm bbc2 "9/11 - truth behind the third tower"

[farros]

Sunday 9.00pm The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 — The Truth Behind the Third Tower

On September 11, 2001 the World Trade Centre collapsed after a devastating terrorist attack. However, a third 47-storey building, apparently untouched by the hijacked aeroplanes, was also levelled seven hours after the twin towers. This programme investigates the circumstances that caused the seemingly unscathed structure to fall and looks at the findings of the official report. Update of the documentary broadcast in July this year.

[lightgiver]

Sunday 9.00pm The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 — The Truth Behind the Third Tower

On September 11, 2001 the World Trade Centre collapsed after a devastating terrorist attack. However, a third 47-storey building, apparently untouched by the hijacked aeroplanes, was also levelled seven hours after the twin towers. This programme investigates the circumstances that caused the seemingly unscathed structure to fall and looks at the findings of the official report. Update of the documentary broadcast in July this year.

Its its from the BBC its bound to be bullshit,the other one was,they are just a bunch of gutless tossers,trying to cover their propagandist spew.

They need to put a debate on with half truthers and half non truthers and all the evidence available and air a debate in the open and not have selective audiences,they have not got the guts.

It will be all one sided as usual,taking people away from the real truth:(

i will give a watch though,so i can get mad;):DThanks for info.

[dmt head]

Cheers for the heads up

[amandaooo]

I think the makers of this are Jane Austin fans and WTC7 is the heroine of the tale. One hot flush and she drops in a dead faint into her own footprint.







EDIT This whitewash is clearly todays news - can you not repost it?

[farros]

It really wasnt too bad, the times I thought why they werent bringing up important points they soon came on eg the larry silverstein 'pull it' quote. I think it will certainly turn more people on to the idea of it being an inside job.

[91181]

Another one .Geez they are desperate , i swear i must of seen two others on the same subject allready... Glad i stoped paying my license this year :D

[lightgiver]

Just as i thought pile of crap:p

[london_lad_84]

It really wasnt too bad, the times I thought why they werent bringing up important points they soon came on eg the larry silverstein 'pull it' quote. I think it will certainly turn more people on to the idea of it being an inside job.

The programme was bollocks, they never answered why numerous witnesses heard explosions, they just concentrated on parts which appeared to fit a state theory, utter trash.

[keystone]

To save me posting it twice:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=584924&postcount=10

[lightgiver]

To save me posting it twice:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=584924&postcount=10

Yes i agree what you are saying,but the programme was flawed and pro official story,i could print a written account,but i feel most know the score.;)

911 was an inside job.

I will just give 1 example of many,to refute the bbc statement of no explosions being heard?

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=UhGcBxONSvc

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=ot2AM9CgPCQ

BBC must have forgotten about these ones:rolleyes:

[floriferous]

From what i saw of it, it was an attempt to say yes there may have been a conspiracy but only relating to WTC7 and not WTC 1 and 2 and implicating the owner (Silverman or something like that) as the scapegoat in the process.

The aim of it to deflect the real conspiracy with a minor one. They said WTC 2 fell in 11 seconds but no mention that that was a little odd. They also said WTC7 fell a bit like a controlled demolition but forgot to say the other 2 building also fell in the same way.

[keystone]

Yes i agree what you are saying.........Yes I agree with what you are saying also but it's almost inevitable that the programme would be flawed in one way or another really. It was only an hour long after all.

BBC must have forgotten about these ones:rolleyes:Yes a bit odd.

[keystone]

From what i saw of it, it was an attempt to say yes there may have been a conspiracy but only relating to WTC7 and not WTC 1 and 2 and implicating the owner (Silverman or something like that) as the scapegoat in the process.

The aim of it to deflect the real conspiracy with a minor one. They said WTC 2 fell in 11 seconds but no mention that that was a little odd. They also said WTC7 fell a bit like a controlled demolition but forgot to say the other 2 building also fell in the same way.

It was a programme specifically about WTC7 not 1 & 2, not the Pentagon, not Shanksville and not 911 in the round. Your conclusions are therefore perplexing.

[keithm]

george galloway on talksport right now said he watched it and this proves beyond doubt the official story.

he said, if you still believe in the conspiracy theories,you are a lunatic.

[keystone]

george galloway on talksport right now said he watched it and this proves beyond doubt the official story.

he said, if you still believe in the conspiracy theories,you are a lunatic.A. Galloway is a goldplated, 24 carat asshole.

B. He talks shit.

C. He watched a completely different programme to me then.

Just my 2 cents. :D :D

[lightgiver]

Yes I agree with what you are saying also but it's almost inevitable that the programme would be flawed in one way or another really. It was only an hour long after all.

Yes a bit odd.

Yes a lot of oddities indeed;)

Does your avatar name come from this:confused:

A keystone is the architectural piece at the crown of a vault or arch and marks its apex, locking the other pieces into position. This makes a keystone very important structurally. In an arch, the keystone is usually larger than the voussoirs that make up the arch and may serve primarily an aesthetic purpose. Some say that a keystone is not as important structurally as the voussoirs, since the removal of any of the voussoirs would cause the arch to collapse but this is not necessarily true of the keystone.

Old keystones, crucial in medieval buildings, can decay due to vibration, a condition known as bald arch.

In a vault, keystones may mark the intersections of tracery.

Mannerist architects of the 16th century enjoyed building an arch with a slightly dropped keystone as seen below in example at Colditz Castle.

http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/3788/120pxentranceofcolditzcaf4.jpg (http://img183.imageshack.us/my.php?image=120pxentranceofcolditzcaf4.jpg)

[iitokio]

It was a really feeble attempt from the BBC to dispell the 9/11 conspiracies. They failed to mention some really vital points as usual and also whenever they were showing clips of 9/11 truthers, it was always when they looked a bit looney.
And towards the end when one of the fire department guys said "Why would the government kill its own people?". By him saying that line he was showing exactly why they did it.
I was laughing hard when they narrator said "who benefited from 9/11" ( i think it was the narrator anyway :confused: )
Makes me wanna go out and give everyone i see an infobomb!

[analog matrix dweller]

I got the impression they put the 'explosions' down to floors collapsing

I believe it was an inside job ,but it did get me thinking , how did they rig these towers with thermite etc ?

i always thought flight 93 was headed for WTC7 ,but when it didnt make it, well ,fuck it ,pull the thing down anyhoo....

[keystone]

It was a really feeble attempt from the BBC to dispell the 9/11 conspiracies. They failed to mention some really vital points as usual and also whenever they were showing clips of 9/11 truthers, it was always when they looked a bit looney.It's describing this programme as a "feeble attempt to dispell 911 conspiracies" that makes 911 truthers look a bit looney. It was nothing of the sort. It was relatively balanced. Saying that is quite unobjective and totally as daft as George Galloway saying that the programme totally proved the "official story".

Yes they did miss out stuff they should have put in but the prog was only an hour long.

[keystone]

Does your avatar name come from this:confused:

I suppose it could. There's also the Keystone Kops as a potential source (people have said I'm as crazy) or it could actually be my name. It's not uncommon.

Does it matter?

[lightgiver]

I suppose it could. There's also the Keystone Kops as a potential source (people have said I'm as crazy) or it could actually be my name. It's not uncommon.

Does it matter?

Yes i was thinking keystone cops,no it does not matter i was just interested,because you are a f mason are you not:confused:I apologize if i am wrong, i was thinking of stone masonry and that's were you find keystone:)

But the truth is the BBC are playing games.

[keystone]

Yes i was thinking keystone cops,no it does not matter i was just interested,No worries

because you are a f mason are you not:confused:I apologize if i am wrong,Why should you apologise = it's not an insult is it? But I am and still no probs.

i was thinking of stone masonry and that's were you find keystone:)Yes that's quite right.

But the truth is the BBC are playing games.Quite probably but some peeps post some really stupid, daft things and look surpised when other people decribe the whole "911 truth movement" (ghastly phrase whoever invented it wants shooting) as a sandwich short of a picnic as a direct result.

[lightgiver]

No worries

Why should you apologise = it's not an insult is it? But I am and still no probs.

Yes that's quite right.

Quite probably but some peeps post some really stupid, daft things and look surpised when other people decribe the whole "911 truth movement" (ghastly phrase whoever invented it wants shooting) as a sandwich short of a picnic as a direct result.

Yes i understand, truth as many connotations,so what word could one use? we do need the truth after all,
and i respect your chosen path.