BBC World reported WTC7 collapse before it happened

Bongo · Post by **Bongo** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:34 pm

Still only the 7 odd minute version though... The 25 odd minute FULL version is the real killer... I have not seen it back up yet, but do have my own copy.. I will maybe try and Upload it to google.

... dam... that didn't work... Only lets you upload 100 Megs.. the file is about 180 something Megs

brian · Post by **brian** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:37 pm

I posted this earlier today. CNN reporting at "4:15 Eastern Daylight time"
WTC 7 may collapse

Aaron Brown CNN 4:10PM 20010911 WTC 7 Foreknowledge

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1LetB0z8_o

Obviously the media were fed the absurd line that the fire, not evident, and the damage, not evident, were about to result in the collapse. The BBC for whatever reason took it that step further - more fools them.

Five plus years later no one knows how it collapsed yet everyone and their granny it seems knew it was going to on the day. That, when no steel framed high rise has ever in history collapsed due to fire.

Surely the same mob that told Giuiani the WTC towers were about to collapse but failed to tell the rescuers eh.

QuitTheirClogs · Post by **QuitTheirClogs** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:45 pm

Part of the conspiracy? – Point 4 is a cracker

Richard Porter 27 Feb 07, 05:12 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2 ... iracy.html

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 c***-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... "

Richard Porter is head of news, BBC World

locsen · Post by **locsen** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:55 pm

over 24 hours now and still no answer to any emails from the various bbc departments.

i wonder how they lost the footage when it was on the BBC archive yesterday.

I will repeat what i have said before and what i have put on the bbc editors blog... bbc world employees are all vetted to either secret or DV'd to top secret level. there will be no answers from the anchor or the reporter, we need to keep bombarding every email address at the bbc to demand answers.

this will never go away.

Sherlock · Post by **Sherlock** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:59 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqqhX8gkhE0

full version ..

Care to yas
Di

locsen · Post by **locsen** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:04 pm

i think enough people worlwide have saved the full length version now for it to go properly viral, the full version is on lots of websites now as a sticky

the clock is ticking bbc

answers are needed

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:06 pm

Hilarious ducking and diving from the BBC. They don't have the original recordings??

oh please..... (oh *, I was laughing so hard, I filled my pants!)

If the BBC want their original recording, I have it, so if they bother to reply to my e-mail, instead of being the chickens that they are.... we will continue on with our 'field day' in triumpant splendour.

Busker · Post by **Busker** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:07 pm

Does anyone have any contacts with US Newsroom experience?

I'd like to know a little bit more about major incident procedures in the US Media.

Bongo · Post by **Bongo** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:09 pm

Locsen...

The clock is ticking BBC, answers are needed?

Not half dude... It would be as telling from their silence as it would be from any response.

....OOps... Just read the Editors Blog... we should raise the issue of the BBC negligently losing important Archives which are the property of the British tax payer! Lies... Lies.... LIES... A never ending 'vomit' of Lies!

locsen · Post by **locsen** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:15 pm

Not half dude... It would be as telling from their silence as it would be from any response.

aye, the ridiculous answer on the bbc editors blog just says it all.

if they think this one will just go away they are in for a shocker eh?

no wonder the NWO hate the internet, in a matter of hours one little post on a website has gone global, and actually got people taking positive action, even if it is only emaliing the bbc to demand answers or emailing their MP to make them aware (not that that would help IMO unless you have a good one)

tick

tock

tick

tock

come on bbc lets be havin it

hampton · Post by **hampton** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:16 pm

Graham wrote: Can't upload the whole thing to youtube. waayyy to big. how do I go about cutting an mpeg about?

google vdub

ianrcrane · Post by **ianrcrane** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:22 pm

Andrew Watson wrote:

Where are the regular posters?

I am baffled. This to me is a huge way of getting at the BBC cover-up of 9/11 , and so far it's only been discussed by half a dozen newish members.

Is everybody suffering from conspiritis, as one slighly disillusioned senior poster described himself?

Are we waiting for confirmation of the time of the broadcast?

I'm sorry folks , but if we can't run with this one we might as well pack up shop. I have emailed seven newspapers. I sent a mail to 40 UK Truth activists and have had three replies. including one saying we should drop it.
I can't believe what I am hearing. There is no way this is not genuine - the anchorman is called Philip somebody - I can check that and get back. It is a glaringly obvious proof that 9/11 was scripted and the media read the script - in this case an hour too early.

Andrew,

Whilst this forum is a great place to exchange information, there are times when our energies are best utilised through external focus. Consequently, I can assure you that much has been going on in the past 36 hours or so. The first priority was to establish the authenticity of the footage and more specifically, establish confirmation that the backdrop of Lower Manhattan was indeed a 'live' feed.

The pathetic responses from the BBC, amid claims of lost tapes, would suggest that not only is the footage genuine but they are accutely embarrassed that the footage has found its way into the public domain! Whoever is responsible for posting the original clip on Google Video evidently went to some considerable effort to ensure that there could be no misunderstanding about the magnitude of the content.

Now that the BBC have responded, the item now formally constitutes 'News' and I am given to understand that at least one of the National Papers are investigating the story with a view to running an item in tomorrow's edition. If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see how the Murdoch media empire tries to spin the revelation ... or simply elects to ignore it completely!

Meanwhile, it is imperative that everyone who considers themselves to be part of the 9/11 Truth Community, takes personal responsibility for contacting thye media and their 'elected' representatives, to ensure that the significance of the WTC7 lie is understood and that other anomolies in the OCT are exposed and subjected to greater scrutiny.

To paraphrase a certain John Reid impersonator, "This may not be the end, or even the beginning of the end ... but it might just be the end of the beginning."

All to play for!

Ian R. Crane

andrewwatson · Post by **andrewwatson** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:26 pm

Justin, I guessed a little fatigue had temporarily knocked back one or tewo of my correspondents.

It has spread like wildfire on the net. There are four pages of video clips on You Tube.

this can't work against us, can it?

Sinclair · Post by **Sinclair** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:29 pm

Andrewwatson said

Where are the regular posters?

I am baffled. This to me is a huge way of getting at the BBC cover-up of 9/11 , and so far it's only been discussed by half a dozen newish members.

Is everybody suffering from conspiritis, as one slighly disillusioned senior poster described himself?

Are we waiting for confirmation of the time of the broadcast?

I am excited about this new breakthrough, Andrew.

I am glad that everyone here is buzzing about this new development which, if the provenance of the broadcast can be put beyond any doubt, is a great breakthrough.

It is encumbent on us all to fully research this & to spread the word.

A copy of my post from Page 4 is below.

Sinclair wrote:Some background verification info (from a search on Jane Standley/BBC).

A synopsis of a BBC programme BBC NEWS: AMERICA UNDER SIEGE BBC NEWS SPECIAL, broadcast from 8.30pm to 10pm on BBC1, in the UK on the evening of 11th September 2001 (transmission details here), lists that the programme contains Jane Standley reports live from New York , so we know that she was reporting live from New York on the day.

(Note that this is not the BBC World transmission broadcast as contained on the GoogleVideo link, but it would no doubt include some of the same footage etc)

From the summary page
http://ftvdb.bfi.org.uk/sift/title/718689
BBC NEWS: AMERICA UNDER SIEGE BBC NEWS SPECIAL
(2001)

Copyright date
Not available Production start date
Not available Production end date
Not available Production countries

Great Britain
Notes
Unscheduled programme. Replaced The PHOTOGRAPHER'S CHAIR an epsiode from the MURDER ROOMS THE DARK BEGINNINGS OF SHERLOCK HOLMES series.

From the NFA Catalogue listing:

Davin Loyn reports on the events that took place in New York and Washington earlier today. Interview with Paddy O'Connell (New York Business Correspondent) and Stephen Evans (North America Business Correspondent) both recalling their experience of the events in New York today both via link from New York. [Stephen Evans was being interviewed by a film crew when one of the World Trade Center towers collapsed behind him.] In the studio Professor Ed Galea [Fire Safety Expert, University of Greenwich], based on his research into the World Trade Center bombing in 1993 discusses the possible time it would take to evacuate the buildings. David Learmount (Flight International) and Chris Hodgkinson (Former British Airways pilot) speculate on what took place on the hijacked passenger aircraft, the co-ordination of the hijackings and aviation security in America. Robert Hall reports from Heathrow Airport on the impact of the terrorist attacks on the airline industry and the suspension of transatlantic flights. Joined by Kevin Creighan (Flight Attendants' Union [and United Airlines cabin crew member]). Panel discussion on the reasons behind the attack with Jane Corbin [has reported on Osama Bin Ladin [that was quick!] for Panorama], Ehud Barak (former Israeli Prime Minister), James Rubin (former US Assistant Secretary of State), Dr Rosemary Hollis (Royal Institute of International Affairs) and Frank Gaffney (Center for Security Policy, Washington) via link from Washington. Jane Standley reports live from New York and Tom Carver reports live from Washington.
Jane Standley appears to have been the BBC New York correspondent at the time.

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:29 pm

The fact they have responded to the footage shows clearly they have accepted it as theirs. They could have taken the 'declined to comment' stance, but by not doing this, they have left themselves wide open to a full blown attack of unprecedented proportions.

The BBC are well and truly shafted now they have been exposed. Brilliant

ishaar · Post by **ishaar** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:31 pm

regarding the bbc reporters location with WTC 7 in the background. I was reading the coments on prison planet, A retired NY policeman had commented saying the reporter was in an external lift, the hazy image you see on the left is a reflection on a shiny metal lift wall.

I'm a recently retired cop. I always thought I was fairly good at looking for clues so here goes:
I don't believe this is a set or some kind of earlier footage playing behind the reporter. The sun lighting on the buildings are consistent with the lighting on the reporter. Both on the right side of the screen or to the left of the reporter. I believe the reporter is either standing in front of a window or in an elevator that travels the outside of a building. I lean towards believing she is in an elevator. If you look to the left of the screen (The reporters right hand side) you will see a shiny metal wall that has reflections in it. Also, behind the reporter, over her left shoulder, you will see some structure that is not part of the skyline. I believe it is part of the structure of such an elevator. If they try to explain it away as not actual footage behind the reporter, they will have a hard time given these facts.

Alex and all you 9-11 Investigators, I LOVE you!!
You guys are fantastic and I would have loved having you as a partner in my old job.

mike
Mike Montessano | 02.26.07 - 4:34 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

locsen · Post by **locsen** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:35 pm

ok now as well as every major news organisation and news paper i have now emailed all my local MSPs with the information

Jack Mcconnell
linda fabiani
donald gorrie
carolyn leckie
michael matheson
margaret mitchell
alex neil
john swinburne

(all firstname.lastname.msp@scottish.parliament.uk)

hopefully one of them will have the cajones to speak up

obviously not mcconnell, but one of them

*awaits obligatory knock at the door*

QuitTheirClogs · Post by **QuitTheirClogs** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:40 pm

Thai Censorship – Prophetic words by Richard Porter - 21 September 2006

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2 ... rship.html

Footage of the coup leaders appears to be allowed to go out uncensored, but anything involving Thaksin Shinawatra is being blocked. Does this mean, however, that the Thai people know nothing of what he is saying?

I doubt it very much. In this digital age, information travels freely - if it's not by satellite television, it's via email, the Internet, or by SMS. The crude censorship being deployed in Thailand may hark back to an age when Governments really could control all the information, and surely those days are gone.

Perhaps we should be grateful that at least they're admitting to censoring the media.

So the authorities are trying to restrict the new media as well as the "traditional". As I've said, I doubt if that can really be effective.

Thermate · Post by **Thermate** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:47 pm

BBC response is so lame. "lost the tapes"

yes, for good reason we see. "c***-up, not conspiracy" wow, straight out of the Bush administrations 911 spin dictionary that one...

"Sorry the dog ate my homework!" ...O K A Y.

karlos · Post by **karlos** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:54 pm

BBC for a long has been a zionist propaganda machine.

I cant access any of the BBC wtc 7 links anywhere have they all been censored?

Ussa1 · Post by **Ussa1** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:55 pm

I like the way thsy say "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." Why is there a presenter saying WTC7 has collapsed live
20 mins before it happened?

These comments are just making it worse for the BBC

Stefan · Post by **Stefan** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:03 pm

I'm sorry but I very much doubt the BBC were activley complciit in anything but the usual media coverup.

If they were complicit they might have known what WTC7 looked like and not chosen to set up with it in shot-

Someone sent out the press release too early- it proves preknowledge from whoever gave the BBC the press release and not BBC being a part of the 9/11 perpertrators.

Is that not a far simpler and easier to swallow explanation?

And is any "Zionist Plot Behind 9/11" proponent EVER intending to provide anything that even smells like evidence to back up their emotional guesswork?

Bongo · Post by **Bongo** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:07 pm

Ian Crane wrote:

The pathetic responses from the BBC, amid claims of lost tapes, would suggest that not only is the footage genuine but they are accutely embarrassed that the footage has found its way into the public domain!

...actully one of my first thoughts was that it could have been leaked from someone involved with the "Conspiracy Files" whitewash. Maybe an insider saw more information in the filming of that production than ultimately ended up in the final cut... and just maybe their conscience acted?

Ian also wrote...

Whoever is responsible for posting the original clip on Google Video evidently went to some considerable effort to ensure that there could be no misunderstanding about the magnitude of the content.

...and also had the skills necessary to achieve this!

QuitTheirClogs · Post by **QuitTheirClogs** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:08 pm

From 911Blogger:

Please define "c***-up" for us Yanks

http://www.911blogger.com/node/6501

Sinclair · Post by **Sinclair** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:27 pm

Bongo wrote: ...actully one of my first thoughts was that it could have been leaked from someone involved with the "Conspiracy Files" whitewash. Maybe an insider saw more information in the filming of that production than ultimately ended up in the final cut... and just maybe their conscience acted?

That's what I thought, the footage was leaked by a BBC insider....

rodin · Post by **rodin** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:34 pm

I remember someone saying a month ago they thought there was a BBC/WTC7 time bandit anomaly - at the time I responded if true it would be a rare slice of hard evidence. Was that poster involved in subsequently bringing this to light?

physicist · Post by **physicist** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:38 pm

BBC News 24 reported the collapse at 21:54 UK time, that's 4:54 pm New York time.

There is a video of it HERE

There's a time marker on it. You can download the file with a link at the bottom.

Can someone put it up on Google and youtube?

Carlos · Post by **Carlos** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:41 pm

uploading now

Bongo · Post by **Bongo** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:45 pm

Thank You Psychiatrist... I will try and stick it on you tube.

Youtube says the video is uploaded... but (Processing Please Wait)... is this right and does it take long? It is the first video I have uploaded to youtube!

fixuplooksharp · Post by **fixuplooksharp** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:46 pm

Sinclair wrote:
Bongo wrote: ...actully one of my first thoughts was that it could have been leaked from someone involved with the "Conspiracy Files" whitewash. Maybe an insider saw more information in the filming of that production than ultimately ended up in the final cut... and just maybe their conscience acted?
That's what I thought, the footage was leaked by a BBC insider....

Im thinking the same. Its just that they cannot make it obvious. I think by even running that little editorial they have done us a favor and it is important that we dont go making ranting lunatic sounding comments as some of the ones on that BBC link are.

Also in the video notice how when the interview starts with the woman that wtc7 is not immediately identifiable. So to the people who think the BBC were totally in on it then this is what would have had to have happened:

Woman knows whats going down and is just a pawn. She is sent memo saying to report the collapse of wtc7 editor checks her on the monitor - no sign of wtc7 in the background - good 2 go live...interview starts and wtc7 appears when she moves her head. Editor panics thinks he cannot just cut the lead but decides to act normal and hope nobody notices. Interview keeps on going and editor gets restless and cuts the lead OR NWO HQ does TV scramble interceptor(this is all theoretical!!!heh)

One other thing. I remember reading somewhere that all of the other videos in the list of footage from various news stations were not working anymore? Has anyone else downloaded any of the other videos? Because if not how do we know it is not a fake? Like a really good one to screw us over at some future point? I dont actually believe this but i think about all options.

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom

BBC World reported WTC7 collapse before it happened

BBC was complicit