BBC World reported WTC7 collapse before it happened

[Serge]

...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.

You can be certain is it not a fake. The mere fact that the BBC have responded to this video, proves they accept it as theirs.

[physicist]

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

Thanks.

Use this version (deinterlaced and better audio).

[Carlos]

Got that News24 bulletin up on you tube (well give it a couple mins for it to become active)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lWQ5cJ5XYY

[physicist]

Got that News24 bulletin up on you tube (well give it a couple mins for it to become active)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lWQ5cJ5XYY

Good teamwork.

[Westgate]

This has developed into something of a 'feeding frenzy' - please, please, stand back and just let the waters settle a little. I honestly believe it is just a mistake occurring in the heat of what was frenetic reporting activity.
Remember in 2001 there were few UK experts who could immediately identify any particular buildings at the WTC site, other than 1 & 2 of course.

How many of us could have identified WTC 7 on that actual day?

Hindsight is a 20/20 science - we have the benefit of 5 years research behind us remember.

Occams Razor teaches us to look for the most simple explanation.

I do think that the BBC had been warned that WTC7 was in danger of collapsing - somehow this was interpreted as the building having already fallen.

Far better to just back off for a while - take time to think things through a little more perhaps?

Just a thought.

[Bongo]

The link on youtube for...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0iGZPKQaeQ
... should get it... when it finally decides to stop 'processing' ZZZzzzzz

How long does this normally take by the way???

[Carlos]

I understand your hesitation, and those saying this is somehow proof that the beeb was "in on it", are wrong.

But at the least it shows that the news outlets were being 'fed' their info,rather than reporting what was actually happened, and therefore this IS proof that the story of that day was manipulated and crafted by the 'feeders'.

the fact that BBC world editor has made a blog about it, shows how many of us emailed Jane today (myself included.. )

[Carlos]

A search on youtube for...

BBC 'News 24' Report WTC7 Collapse Also

... should get it... when it finally decides to stop 'processing' ZZZzzzzz

How long does this normally take by the way???

dunno.. it's my first you tube upload ... google vid take at least 15mins though

[Bongo]

Oh well Carlos... we both lost our 'Youtube Virginity'... how was it for you!

[Sinclair]

Some feedback from 2 of the best UK Blogs;

Postman Patel

Famous for 15 Megapixels

& a BBC response:
BBC Blog

[Craig W]

This has developed into something of a 'feeding frenzy' - please, please, stand back and just let the waters settle a little. I honestly believe it is just a mistake occurring in the heat of what was frenetic reporting activity.
Remember in 2001 there were few UK experts who could immediately identify any particular buildings at the WTC site, other than 1 & 2 of course.

How many of us could have identified WTC 7 on that actual day?

Hindsight is a 20/20 science - we have the benefit of 5 years research behind us remember.

Occams Razor teaches us to look for the most simple explanation.

I do think that the BBC had been warned that WTC7 was in danger of collapsing - somehow this was interpreted as the building having already fallen.

Far better to just back off for a while - take time to think things through a little more perhaps?

Just a thought.

My feelings too, Westgate.

When I heard the news this morning I thought it could be MASSIVE.

But I quickly realised they could simply have made a mistake. I suggested this several times earlier in this thread.

I think if people make a big thing out of this the movement will end up looking stupid.

It is not a very strong piece of evidence of anything in my view.

We all know firefighters and emergency personnel had word that the building would collapse. Reporters can also pick these things up and mistakes do happen.

I am a freelance journalist and I have been guilty of not checking facts etc.

To my mind THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL and IT PROVES NOTHING

Sorry to shout but I wanted to quell the hysteria.

[Carlos]

Oh well Carlos... we both lost our 'Youtube Virginity'... how was it for you!

lol... well i gave it good, but got nothing back yet

[Graham]

the only important thing at the moment.

where did that information come from?

[physicist]

My feelings too, Westgate.

When I heard the news this morning I thought it could be MASSIVE.

But I quickly realised they could simply have made a mistake. I suggested this several times earlier in this thread.

I think if people make a big thing out of this the movement will end up looking stupid.

It is not a very strong piece of evidence of anything in my view.

We all know firefighters and emergency personnel had word that the building would collapse. Reporters can also pick these things up and mistakes do happen.

I am a freelance journalist and I have been guilty of not checking facts etc.

To my mind THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL and IT PROVES NOTHING

Sorry to shout but I wanted to quell the hysteria.

Yes, it may have been the mistake.

I've got another piece of video footage somewhere where BBC New 24 broadcast at 4:40pm NY time that WTC7 was about to collapse. Now they must have been fed that information and so someone somewhere was giving it out about the collapse, say, approximately an hour before it did.

How could they know that the collapse was going to happen that far in advance?

[fixuplooksharp]

This has developed into something of a 'feeding frenzy' - please, please, stand back and just let the waters settle a little. I honestly believe it is just a mistake occurring in the heat of what was frenetic reporting activity.
Remember in 2001 there were few UK experts who could immediately identify any particular buildings at the WTC site, other than 1 & 2 of course.

How many of us could have identified WTC 7 on that actual day?

Hindsight is a 20/20 science - we have the benefit of 5 years research behind us remember.

Occams Razor teaches us to look for the most simple explanation.

I do think that the BBC had been warned that WTC7 was in danger of collapsing - somehow this was interpreted as the building having already fallen.

Far better to just back off for a while - take time to think things through a little more perhaps?

Just a thought.

My feelings too, Westgate.

When I heard the news this morning I thought it could be MASSIVE.

But I quickly realised they could simply have made a mistake. I suggested this several times earlier in this thread.

I think if people make a big thing out of this the movement will end up looking stupid.

It is not a very strong piece of evidence of anything in my view.

We all know firefighters and emergency personnel had word that the building would collapse. Reporters can also pick these things up and mistakes do happen.

I am a freelance journalist and I have been guilty of not checking facts etc.

To my mind THIS IS NOT A BIG DEAL and IT PROVES NOTHING

Sorry to shout but I wanted to quell the hysteria.

My conclusion: We need to know who the source was. The BBC say in their reply that they always source and yet they fail to reveal who their source was.

This could also be an attempt to attempt to justify some kind of "ah, look the lot of them theyre crazy BS"

[Bongo]

Mine is up (pardon the pun ) Carlos... I am now a fully fledged YouTuber!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0iGZPKQaeQ

[Carlos]

got the news24 bulletin (with time stamp) up on google vid:

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?doc ... 4&hl=en-GB

[Reflecter]

Ive uploaded another copy of the 'News 24' piece aswell.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ndkbzyh5GdA

I will also look into downloading as many of that huge list of news archives aswell. If the links work that is.

[Graham]

I don't suppose anyone was capable of downloading the whole server?

surely someone... (not me btw)

[Carlos]

apparently all live news feeds from that day have been pulled from archive.org

[Headhunter]

They are supposed to be coming back up shortly. Some techie error..though I'm sure there's some censoring going on, and that they won't come back up until they've been fully "combed".

[Carlos]

hey physcisist, could you let us know where you got that news24 clip,

thanks again - it's alraedy buzzing round the net

[Headhunter]

Indeed we are like a SWARM, and it's time now to descend upon the UK media with this story.

C'mon people, what an opportunity this represents, to get WTC7 front and center in the collective consciousness of the people of the United Kingdom, while at the same time totally discrediting the BBC, who's response to this is utter nonsense. What, are they suggesting that they are clairvoyant, ableit accidentially so..? That's absurd!

This story has LEGS. Let's march it out to the UK media, everywhere!!!

This kind of thing is what this website and forum BBS is ALL ABOUT!

You're in the UK. Please do SOMETHING with this?!!!

Thank you.

[Bongo]

Just like a swarm of ants... Ants are useless as individuals, but in nests of millions, they use chemical signals and can operate like one super organism!

Our nest is the Net and we are able to communicate in real time, empowering our freedoms with a view to overcoming our opressors!


Keep fighting guys! Lets not let this one go!

[andrewwatson]

Craig and Westgate , I understand your caution, and I agree this does not prove that the BBC are 'part of the plot' , merely that they are fed information from official sources of news events they want them to cover, even, on occasions like this, before the event has happened.

What this does strengthen is the evidence that the 'collapse' of WTC7 was a stage-managed event . Quite simply, someone sent out the press release too soon. That was the first mistake. The second was the incompetence of the BBC in not checking the story and realising their mistake.

There is a lot of anger being directed on the BBC now but it might be more justified too concentrate on their recent documentary. I am not back-tracking on the WTC7 scam but I am not sure what more we can do except interest the media in covering it.

[marky 54]

i honestly don't think it even proves a staged event. the only thing i find hard to believe is nobody knew which building was in question when reporting it.

the firemen were worried the building was unstable and might collapse (reports of the building swaying back and forth slightly), the firemens concerns were passed on to those who need to know police, fire cheif , mayor etc etc and a reporter got wind of this and passed it on to the newsroom they were working for, but was misqouted or themselves misqouted what they had heard or been told on the ground.

so the report came through or was aired as WTC7 has collapsed rather than might/could/is going to collapse.

we can assume the newsreader and reporter didnt know which building they were refering to whilst the report was being aired and the women reporter hardly even mentions WTC7 if you listen to everything she is saying. she says reports are very sketchy, the only mention of WTC7 from her that i noticed was when she says.

"but this isnt the first building to be effected, a part of the mariot hotel also collapse as a result of those 110 story twintowers collapsing and debris hitting the buildings" (not an exact qoute, it was done of the top of my head from what i remember her saying, but it is the jist of what she says)

so it can be explained away regardless of if i believe this to of been the case.

the thing that glues the story together is the firemen qoutes of WTC7 and only proving they were not geniue qoutes or made up does this clip become a big piece of evidence. while ever there was reason to suspect collapse its obvious they will use that as the source of the report filtering through to newrooms.

the biggest thing in it is that somebody does seemingly notice WTC7 is still standing and the connection is unpluged however they will just say it was a technical error. its annoying but this is the world we live in, unless you catch them redhanded they will always think of an excuse no matter how unlikely and are hardly going to investigate themselves if they are involved or even report themselves to the public on the news.

if all this evidence was in a differant case affecting just an everyday person it would of been investigated again years ago.

its easier to disprove something than to prove it IMO and thats why we are still waiting for a new investigastion. to disprove something you just deny it (innocent untill proven guilty), to prove something you need evidence that is irrefutable. the only way to make any ground is to not get to excited but instead just show it to the jury, ie the public and let them decide and the more that can see there is something dodgy the more likely we are to be listened to by the media etc.

the clip dosnt seem to be a big step forward in getting the truth it just adds to the evidence to show the public IMO.

[Graham]

Justin and Westgate, yes caution is needed, but we need to move fast in downloading everysingle possible piece, and getting it backed up etc etc. I have three of those 1 gig sections (cannot get anymore now), backed up in multiple locations now.

also....

"We did what we always did - sourced our reports... and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving." - Richard Porter, Head of News (BBC World)

[blackcat]

so the report came through or was aired as WTC7 has collapsed rather than might/could/is going to collapse.

Getting the collapse of a 47 storey skyscraper wrong is as ludicrous as getting the collapse of the twin towers wrong. There were cameras everywhere after what happened in the morning. The noise it made when falling would have been heard for miles and certainly the first thing any reporter would have done is checked the site. The BBC had been fed the line that WTC7 had fallen and simply passed it on. Who fed the storey is what matters and who "knew" it was going to come down is the key. WTC7 was hundreds of yards from WTC1 & 2 with other buildings between, which, although damaged still stood. If WTC7 was so damaged that people knew it was about to fall then how did it get so damaged? Who the hell could tell it was going to fall with such confidence in their judgement (NEVER before 9/11 had a steel framed tower fell) that they felt the media should be told of its impending collapse? The people who blew the b* up that's who!!

[Graham]

I'd like to know what the reporter thought, when a few minutes later as they were packing up.... BOOM.

[Craig W]

Craig and Westgate , I understand your caution, and I agree this does not prove that the BBC are 'part of the plot' , merely that they are fed information from official sources of news events they want them to cover, even, on occasions like this, before the event has happened.

It doesn't prove they are fed information before the event has happened. We already know various emergency personnel were forewarned of the collapse. Did they get press releases? Of course not. A reporter could quite easily have picked this up and then somewhere along the line the story has got mixed up.

What this does strengthen is the evidence that the 'collapse' of WTC7 was a stage-managed event . Quite simply, someone sent out the press release too soon. That was the first mistake.

It doesn't add to that idea imo.

The second was the incompetence of the BBC in not checking the story and realising their mistake.

This is true but hardly damning.