Has anybody seen the new B.B.C. blunder released today? Forewarned about WTC7?

[unclepops07]

A blunder has been leaked from the BBC, showing the BBC news on the afternoon of 9/11. Where the reporter is talking "live" to the BBC newsroom about the apparent collapse of building 7......................
TWENTY MINUTES BEFORE WTC7 ACTUALLY COLLAPSED!!!!
You can even see the building behind the female reporter! Obviously she got given the news feed prematurely (by FOX probably)
She doesn't even know what building she is talking about! Then the BBC live news feed abruptly cuts off...... cuz the building collapse they've been talking about for twenty minutes actually collapses behind her!!!
Google have been shutting the footage down on video google today but if your lucky it might still be available.


It's all over www.video.google.com, you tube, prisonplanet.com etc!!
PEOPLE IN THE KNOW, SKEPTICS, NON-BELIEVERS..... PLEASE CHECK THIS ONE OUT. THANKS.

[who897]

So, the BBC has never used green screens? I mean, even the daily show uses them every once in a while. Or do you think they are really in North Korea?

[unclepops07]

Do your homework Who! Or watch it for yourself.

[England Expects]

Notice that the female reporter never actually refers to WTC7 specifically. That could easily have been doctored or edited to look suspicious.

Where is the clock on the BBC world screen? Its not there for the duration of the video.

Looks like a hoax to me.

[unclepops07]

......because the name of that particular tower is salamon tower, and only really developed the abbreviated name of "wtc7" after 9/11.

[England Expects]

She still doen't mention it collapsing. The guy in the studio does that.

[hitekredneck]

with today's technology, a talented, knowing person can make just about any kind of proof they need to support any kind of conspiracy...call me a skeptic, but unless i see it with mine own eyes, it ain't proof

[something]

with today's technology, a talented, knowing person can make just about any kind of proof they need to support any kind of conspiracy...call me a skeptic, but unless i see it with mine own eyes, it ain't proof

Agreed. But I don't see how crashing the WTC would been good for anyone? Waht's the conspiracy in that?

[unclepops07]

Out of the seven buildings that were demolished/hit by planes/collasped/completely destroyed that day (whatever you what to call it) were all owned by Larry Silverstein. WTC7 was the furthest away from the towers.... yet it collasped.
The Hilton Millenium was right beside the north twin tower and suffered direct damage as the tower north tower collasped, yet it didn't collapsed.
WTC7 was the command centre in new york, containing offices belonging to the FBI, CIA, SECRET SERVICE, GUILLIANI'S OFFICE, the list goes on.
Larry Silverstein took out a massive 7 billion insurance on all of HIS seven world trade centre buildings. (same ones that fell) The same seven buildings that George W. Bush's first cousin MARVIN BUSH was in charge of security until Marvins contract ended on the 10 of september, 2001.

[unclepops07]

Nothing makes a building fall at freefall velocity other than controlled demolition. Not even an earthquake can make a building fall at freefall. You can clearly see the telltale "crimping" of the main support pillars as the (WTC7) building fall perfectly downwards leaning slightly inwards as not to unneccesarily spread debris. Just like controlled demolition (just like the twin towers) All three towers collasped at freefall velocity.

The official government story is that fire damaged it, if this true then WTC7 IS THE FIRST SKYSCAPER IN HISTORY TO COLLAPSE FROM FIRE DAMAGE!

The proof is out there folks. Some of the most highly respected people specialising in demolition, construction, fire investigation, insurance investigation, and physists have come out the (fear of government) closet and "on the record" through books, reports, signed testimonies, and interviews clearly said the government explainations are not only false, they completely ludicrous.
Feeding the general public lies that defy the laws of physics in such away through the media (propaganda) that, like sheep, we nod our head and continue to eat the grass. Hitler would be so proud of this false flag, fear control agenda.
As long as we keep beliving what they tell us..... while slowly but very obviously they strip away our freedom.

[something]

Sounds like lies and couincidenses to me. And our freedom isn't indangered. We're just a bit of chocked now because of the terrorism. But they will go away, Usama Bin Ladin is probably dead by now, and we're moving on.

Atleast I am.

[unclepops07]

oh something!

Who exactly created the terrorism that everybody's so chocked over?

Please i urge you, there is so much real, factual information detailing the lies.

You think Osama's the one to be scared of?

Start reseaching some 9/11 truth stuff.

Ignorance is Bliss however Evil will succeed if the Good do nothing.

[hitekredneck]

oh something!

Who exactly created the terrorism that everybody's so chocked over?

Please i urge you, there is so much real, factual information detailing the lies.

You think Osama's the one to be scared of?

Start reseaching some 9/11 truth stuff.

Ignorance is Bliss however Evil will succeed if the Good do nothing.

ya know...conspiracy nuts like you are a dime a dozen...there's people attempting to assign all sorts of negative shit to our government...well, i'm a firm believer that most (not all) politicians are nothing more than parasites, but that doesn't mean they're responsible for every little thing that happens...i mean, people like you try to say that our country's responsible for every terrorist act in the world....the horrible thing is, too many of you zealots actually believe every bit of dribble you can find regardless of whether the evidence is credible or not...take the iraq war...if it's about the oil, why the fuck haven't we taken any to finance the regime change?...why haven't we taken any for any reason?....don't get me wrong,i know that there is no altruism in politics, but neither is it completely corrupt....while we don't have a perfect system or society, we're still the best in the world.:cool:

[England Expects]

I can see many reasons to be suspicious, but no actual proof. It's very clear that there have been things that have been covered up since 9/11 but very little concrete evidence that there was any wrong-doing by the US government.

Not that I trust Bush and Co you understand, they are undoubtedly incredibly dodgy, self serving bastards as are most politicians but that doesnt mean there is some kind of conspiracy.

[ajk]

How else would you explain it then?

[unclepops07]

That piece of BBC blunder was obtained directly from the us.archive.org.
Why did Google try their damndest to erase all posts on www.video.google.com that morning? I mean video google has some pretty crazy finger-pointing stuff on it these days but why were they so concerned about erasing that particular post?
If it was a fake, why not put it on the news (including the bbc!) claiming that conspiracy theorists are doctoring video footage? Call a bluff?

OH, AND HAVE ANY OF YOU NON-BELIEVERS ACTUALLY READ THE BBC'S RESPONSE TO THEIR LITTLE BLUNDER THAT DAY? (bbc complaints website)

GO ON, TREAT YOUR NARROW MINDS TO SOME LAME, PETTY, CONVENIENT EXCUSES.
(you know those kinda excuses?.......... Caught-with-your-pants-down excuses?)

[General Septem]

How is it that your thread got more replies than mine? :D

It obviously wasn't a green screen. She was standing in front of a window, and you can also see that there's a door with a handle leading to presumably a balcony. The broadcast was live because she was talking to the reporter, who'd earlier said that the Salomon Tower had collapsed. The ticker in the bottom of the window announced the collapse had taken place. She never made mention of it herself, but the ticker did. After all, why would she say anything about it? She was there, she knew the building was still standing. If they'd even brought it up she probably would've said it hadn't collapsed.

The clock is absent because this is BBC world; the clock would have only been accurate in Greenwich time. The time can be verified because the news from the entire day is archived.

Automatically dismissing any evidence that cannot be incorporated into one's theory is junk science. At least look into the matter.

I am not a "conspiracy theorist". I'm just one who looks at the facts and asks "how the fuck could that have happened?". I don't know who conspired with who, and that would be presumptuous on my part if I did.

How about a lesson in doublespeak? "Conspiracy theory" and "suspicion of foul play". When a team of individuals working for the government think someone has done something wrong, it is called "suspicion of foul play". When a significant minority of citizens (greater in number than a team of crime investigators mind you) suspect the government of foul play, it is called a "conspiracy theory".

[unclepops07]

General sep? You are the man. I thank you for the post. I have read your posts, and respect each and every one. YES!
I get so dug down by "the ignorant" and "the blind"
Have you seen the official BBC response to the www.us.archive.org "leak" yet?
I URGE EVERY(non-believer)BODY TO TAKE A LOOKY A BBC COMPLAINTS?