It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BBC News Reports Building 7 collapse 23 Minutes before it collapses.

page: 20
101
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   
here are my google vids. the top 2 do not show up in the search function and the bottom one has been rejected. (rejected clip is the full length version)






posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by mustbebc
Does this remind anyone of when Dubya admitted he's seen the first plane fly into the first tower before he went in to read to the school kids. Nothing ever came of that even though he literally admitted he had prior knowledge. The fact that something like that happened and he didn't even call of his appearance and go see what was going on makes him look terrible. He even joked by saying that's one terrible pilot. My point is if that didn't get mainstream attention then do we really think this will??


Or when Rumsfeld said flight 93 was "shot down" and then said he mispoke.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Two very important things that I was thinking about as I was sleeping last night. I reskimmed the thread for them, but I AM still half-asleep so please direct me to the info if it's been in the thread.

1) where is the proof of the timestamp being correct? I've seen it mentioned but I can see no physical evidence from the video and I don't see anything anywhere else

2) can anyone affirm that this was the EXACT footage that was being played on bbc that day?

Instead of arguing whether or not it was green-screened (as I did last night) or talking about it being a smoking gun, perhaps we should answer these questions about it's authenticity.

Because I think it's indeed something big (last thought before bed last night was "the markets will crash if this is true") ... but why not take the time to nail every last detail before we say definitively that we are seeing what we see.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by tombangelta
its a good point.


It's a GREAT point! One made several times in this thread.



Originally posted by Agit8dChop
I tell you what needs to happen, is we need to contact that news anchor women and ask how she came to state wtc collapsed


Most likely, her boss told her. Since the news was reported even before her piece (before the news program started), this was released to whomever receives news at bbc and trickled down to the reporters.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:31 AM
link   
And what do the Truth people (honest or money-grabbing) do all day if they are not collecting every scrap of audio and video footage from that day? How is this the first time someone has come to this conclusion after watching this video?



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz
1) where is the proof of the timestamp being correct? I've seen it mentioned but I can see no physical evidence from the video and I don't see anything anywhere else


I haven't seen proof of that either. However, the news anchor says, "it's been some 8 hours since the attack". So that would put the time AROUND 5 PM (Eastern). And he announces shortly (about 7 minutes) after the start of the program that the building has collapsed.

Can anyone in the UK verify that the news program with this particular anchor is (or was) on at 10 PM in the UK?



2) can anyone affirm that this was the EXACT footage that was being played on bbc that day?


Unless someone taped it and kept the tape, that's a loooong shot. But it would be great.


However, regardless of the timestamp, Standley is standing in front of a building, reporting that it has collapsed.

[edit on 27-2-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   
well iam not paying my tv licence thats for sure.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimboman
This footage gives ammunition to the idea of wtc7 being 'pulled', but that doesn't mean that the initial attacks weren't carried out by terrorists.

Seems like more is going on than is known, and it's things like this that are going to convince people like me who aren't CTers. I've worked on a project interviewing 911 survivors and I'm no doubt that planes really were flown into the towers.

fseg2.gre.ac.uk...

It's when people talk about 'the planes were holograms' and 'nukes were used to bring down the towers' that turns us non-Cters off the story. Are those theories deliberately put out there to cause dis-info and get the public laughing at the Cters?

Edit to add link.

[edit on 27/2/07 by jimboman]


If WTC7 was "pulled" it begs the question of who, when, and how the building was rigged with explosives. It's my understanding that the process takes a lot of time and expertise. It also begs the question if it was deliberately brought down, why wasn't that explained in teh official report? It's a simple enough explainiation so why would they keep it out?

Then to me however, the main question would be why? Why was it rigged to come down some time prior to 9/11. Of course the answer might open pandora's box.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
And what do the Truth people (honest or money-grabbing) do all day if they are not collecting every scrap of audio and video footage from that day? How is this the first time someone has come to this conclusion after watching this video?


As I understand it, it was just released yesterday.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Ok they are starting to talk....

Part of the conspiracy? Richard Porter 27 Feb 07, 05:12 PM

4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-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
www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   
I found the BBC timeline of events from OCT 2001 which includes a couple of video links to reports from that day. It appears that they had at least one additional reporter in the area, Steven Evans and another report which shows the skyline of the towers, I wonder if this shot is from the same vantage point as Ms. Standley's report later in the day.

here's the link to the page: America's day of terror: Timeline


Strangely absent is the Jane Standley WTC7 collapse segment being discussed here...


[edit on 2007/2/27 by JacKatMtn]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
And what do the Truth people (honest or money-grabbing) do all day if they are not collecting every scrap of audio and video footage from that day? How is this the first time someone has come to this conclusion after watching this video?


As I understand it, it was just released yesterday.



Just tell me to go read the first few pages again if you like
But, released by the Truther, or released onto the BBC archives?



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
[Can anyone in the UK verify that the news program with this particular anchor is (or was) on at 10 PM in the UK?


Actually, you're probably asking the wrong people as this is taken from BBC World which is targeted at overseas markets and to be honest I've only ever watched in hotels abroad - I'm not even certain that it is on the normal UK distribution unless it was a co-broadcast with the BBC rolling news channel on that day.

One of the very few doubts I have about the video is that Philip Hayton, the anchor, never gives the time which is normal BBC pratice on a news bulletin but, of course, if this was an international broadcast then it would be being watched in almost every time zone on the planet. I can't remember if it's normally announced as GMT or just not mentioned.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator
Ok they are starting to talk....

...

Richard Porter is head of news, BBC World
www.bbc.co.uk...



They pulled it already... 404 File not found.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by theBman
Here's what i assume must be the female reporters contact information.

BBC - New York
1995 Broadway
New York, NY 10023

Jane Standley, Chief Correspondent : Phone: 212-501-1556; Email: jane.standley@bbc.co.uk




Link to source
[edit on 27/2/07 by theBman]


I sent an email to that address and got an email back from postmaster@bbc.co.uk, Delivery Status Notification (Failure).

[edit on 27-2-2007 by r4758]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   
They expect us to believe they lost footage due to a cockup, when its in regards to one of the most important days in the last 20 years!!!! Absolutely bs!

An "error"...

That does NOT explain how they knew the building was going to come down. You dont just say its going to come down if you have no idea. Obviously they were informed from somewhere/someone that it was coming down before it did.

Worst response i've ever seen to a conspiracy. BBC, you have sold your soul.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pootie

Originally posted by Rotator
Ok they are starting to talk....

...

Richard Porter is head of news, BBC World
www.bbc.co.uk...



They pulled it already... 404 File not found.


Works fine for me mate.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:51 AM
link   
It's funny, because I will forward this video to a few friends today, and I will get repsonses like "hoax, fraud, fake, mistake" etc. The power of the spin machine is truly incredible.

Even IF this video is a complete fake, you still have several videos of WTC 7 appearing to be professionally demolished. Look at the bombing of Oklahoma City as a comparison. I've never seen any disaster pics or footage that takes down the whole building instantly.

As far as a time code on the tape, I can't see it having any importance here at all. Unless you have the original master tape time code is useless in a court of law. What you have is a copy of a live broadcast accidentally jumping the gun without knowing. Obviously, if this is the real deal, there was a critical mistake in how the press releases were issued. There was so much going on that day that even the people "in control" found themselves a little "out of control" in my opinion. The BBC or the reporters had NOTHING to do with the report, they were simply repeating the information they were given.

Great posts, great comments for the most part. I've read the whole thread, and I encourage anyone getting ready to ask something already covered here to take the time and read the whole thread.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pootie
They pulled it already... 404 File not found.


You might like to try it again. It's still there with no problems.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

Works fine for me mate.


Are you in the US? I am.

"Page not found

Unfortunately the following page was not available:
www.bbc.co.uk..."



new topics

top topics



 
101
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join