The BBC is psychic?!

http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publi ... 4001.shtml

After coming across this link in a blog I often browse over i read it over. I being a "truther" (why do we need silly nicknames) of course had to scrutinize it in order to think on it for a bit. I then searched www.digg.com to see if there was a buzz about it and was there... within moments copies were found on youtube, google video, etc. but as i watched the live footage, and I DID SEE IT with my own eye it would be disconnected immediately. Luckily for those who posted it so many have seen and captured the footage that it made it way across the net in a hurry. I'm not sure if there is a good link to it as I will post one once I'm out side of my day job.

The stills at the above website show the BBC reporter reporting that building 7, the Soloman Brothers building" had collapsed 23 minutes before it did so... not only that, but the reporter was saying almost exactly that when she is standing with building 7 smoldering in the background.

Can someone please explain this so that I dont draw conclusions.

http://www.truthring.org/?p=3558

This is a link showing more footage from other accounts including video of that day.

 

You should probably stop smokin'.

Just for a few days.

Honestly, doesn't look like one of the Towers in the background, but some other building.

 

Building 7 is not one of the towers... it was the third building that collapsed "by fire" that fell much later in the day. It is seen just over her left shoulder and is depicted in the other link i posted.

 

I should imagine the first people anyone planning to intentionally destroy a large building would turn to would be the British Broadcasting Corporation.

Having had a quick look at various reports, they all seem to agree that the building was about to collapse, it is possible the either the BBC reported the collapse when they should have reported its imminent collapse. Also, there are no timestamps on the report. Anyone who regularly watched BBC, especially their 24 hour news channel (which was used to interrupt normal service) will see a clock on display all the time. There was uproar at the end of last year when they removed the clock from the news shown in 4:3 format and it was quickly replaced.

If 9/11 if a conspiracy I doubt the BBC had prior knowledge or were complicit in it.

 

So your saying that because there was a consensus that the building was on fire and may collapse, something that has never happened to a steel highrise in history, the BBC who was the farthest from it geographically was able to more accurately predict that the building would fall when policemen, firefighters, and emergency workers didnt know WHILE it was happening? Check that second link out. The original excerpt of this was taken from the BBC archives online.

 

Had 2 steel highrises that were on fire not just collapsed? I thought the chronology was that the twin towers had fallen? I have to say I don't care enough to check that.

No, that is not at all what I said. There are several reports that that build was likely to collapse and had been evacuated because of it. The BBC were, as you say, far from the incident, and so could easily be mis-informed. It would not be the first time that the BBC has had to retract a story.

Anyone that has been involved in any shocking event, however minor, will find account for events and time differ - look at witness statements from a car crash for example. I should imagine that what happened that day was not only scary, but very confusing. There will be conflicting information between people the whole day. Some people will remember information that others do not. I doubt we will ever get a true picture of the events that unfolded.

Finally, are you really saying that the best way to conspire it to pre-inform the mass media?

 

Then why reply to this post... 3 steel high rises in history have collapse due to fire. All on the same day. 9-11-01. There is an example of a highrise fully engulfed for many hours but no collapse. Search www.youtube.com or google video for the Windsor Building in Madrid, Spain.

This isnt a car crash as most car crashes, well, outside of london, avoid being taped, televised, and broadcast to most of the civilized world. Time lines can indeed be constructed from all this and I hope someone does so that this piece of footage can be put to rest.

What I am saying is that it is also possible that details were given as to predetermine the causes of any building failure. Which should have been impossible to determine since a steel structure of that nature has never fallen because in such circumstances... and most certainly not at freefall speed, and even more certainly not in its own footprint.

 

What you are not saying is that the BBC is complicit in some conspiracy?

As already stated, I am not supporting or disagreeing with conspiracy theory. I am saying, once again, that if there was a conspiracy, why would they publish the timetable of events to the media? Not even the most self obsessed evil genius would do that and try to blame someone else.

On top of that, the BBC has been running to schedules and running orders for 90 years, why, on this most special of days would they deviate?

If the BBC were forwarned of the action, I would assume ABC, CNN, Fox (I don't know many of the US networks but you can assume a full list) would all have been warned. Where are the whistle blowers? Af far as I can see, not one person has come forward with a document saying "here is the order of demolition....".

That, is if you believe the BBC story was released in the timescales stated. To date, I have not seen enough evidence to convince me of this. A backdrop behind a reporter is not evidence. The chances of that being live and not a blue/green screen backdrop are slim.

For me, I'm going to bow out on this one now. I think from here on, we would just go round in circles.

I based my thoughts on scepticism, if I was to get really excitable about this I would try to find as many primary, unedited sources to look at from people who were there. From watching football managers, we can all see how easy it is to maniipulate meaning in quotes.

Good luck.

 

A blue screen? A backdrop? The shot of her starts out with the anchor telling you she is live in NY and the camera actually zooms in to the scenario behind her... On the left of the screen there is a reflection from a window.

You not explaining anything you're just assuming the 'trusted' BBC. A BBC which apparently has gone the was of FOX news. Within the last month the BBC aired a 'Conspiracy Files' Documentary which was supposed to be a balanced piece on both sides of the 9/11 theories. It was essentially a big pile o' propoganda, a hit piece as some say. In that production, the BBC reports that Building 7 unexpectedly fell. Is that not a contradiction?

How are we going around in circles here? Notice how i used the word EXPLAIN in that quote.

One more thing... you MUST support conspiracy theory here... because there is no explanation. In fact, no one knows who pulled of the attacks, OBL never admitted to it and if he did the FBI would have said he was wanted for this crime. They havent. http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

I'll quote this one for you...
"Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

Where is the 9/11 accusation?

 

You might enjoy reading some of Alex Jones' website Prisonplanet.com. He has many DVDS about stuff like this and there is loads of 9/11 related stuff on that website. He also has stuff about the OKC bombings as well. You should check it out.

 

First... I realize there is no reasoning with Moonbats, I've tried it before and you guys are incorrigible.

Second.. digg is useless unless you know how to read it, it is held hostage by moonbats.

so dont expect me to comment any further on this bullshit nonsense except to point out that the WTC is the first steel building{s}, that wasnt asbestos coated to suffer a major fire that large, fueled by petroleum.

 

The only conspiracy here are the ones defending bbc, also bbc 24 and cnn also reported the samething before wtc 7 went down.