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: 21
101
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test
You might like to try it again. It's still there with no problems.


I get a 404 from the BBC servers when I click the link or manually enter it...

I am in the US though and it appears neither of you are, maybe we are being censored?

It is the BBC web servers returning the error.


[edit on 27-2-2007 by Pootie]




posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
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.


Plus, they didn't just say it was coming down, they said it had collapsed, past tense, not once, but several times.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pootie
I am in the US though and it appears neither of you are, maybe we are being censored?

It is the BBC web servers returning the error.

Probably because so many of you colonial chaps are being rude about them.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Dissinfo AGENTS ARE HERE ON THIS THREAD.


USE SOUND LOGIC, and you will find the truth.



[edit on 27-2-2007 by Chicagofreedomfighter]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:01 PM
link   
For fellow ATS users that are also on Digg!!! This story has over a 1000 Diggs and yet it is not where to be found in the first 3 pages of Top in 24 Hours!!! What is up with that!! If you have not already found and Dugg this story please do so!! Also lots of interesting comments from people that I'm sure aren't even on or awhere of ATS!!!

That really pissed me off about the story being censored by Digg!!! Talk about a Conspiracy!!!!! LOL



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test

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.



Nope it is taken from BBC News 24 the BBC's sister station.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by timeless test
Probably because so many of you colonial chaps are being rude about them.


Maybe they fear our giant wangs?



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Here is the full verbatim text to Richard Porter's Blog.



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 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


Just in case it gets pulled, which I doubt, or you are having problems connecting.

If anyone has ideas regarding the identification of the building in my previous post, don't be shy in letting me know....


[edit on 27-2-2007 by Koka]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   
This is the comment im putting on teh BBC page, when it actually allows me too! (damn thing won't upload properly)

"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."

--====--

So why then, is the reporter reporting that the Saloman Building (WTC7) has come down when it is clearly visible behind her as she speaks?

"If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error"

An error? That does not explain how someone knew the building was coming down before it actually had done.

WTC7 stood for hours, and for someone to put out information that it would come down within 20 minutes is a little suspicious, don't you think?

Not to mention it is the 3rd building in history to collapse due to fire, the first two being WTC 1 and 2 *rolls eyes*



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Just a simple mistake. The anchor was reading out what he sees on the tv dashboard or whatever.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   
BBC

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. [/eThe 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 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


THe text from BBC for those who can't access it



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by r4758
video.google.ca...

In the middle of this video, the BBC reporter is discussing the collapse of building 7, meanwhile, building 7 can be seen clearly in the background still standing!!!



r4758,
Could you tell us how you found this video originally? I'm wondering who was the first to report on it and perhaps find out who found the video.
Thanks.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator

Originally posted by timeless test

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.



Nope it is taken from BBC News 24 the BBC's sister station.


Definitely BBC World. See the logo in the top left of the screen. News 24 is differently labelled although the style is very similar.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Strange how i could not get that bbc blog page without going through an american proxy. i am in uk, and could not get to the page normally.

www.bbc.co.uk...

has anyone else found this, i do get the page if i go through a proxy. strange.

Can the bbc explain how and why the video is being deleted all over the net. the video does not break any rules on google, but google deleted many times.

[edit on 2/27/2007 by andy1033]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
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?


I believe the only info we have here on that is on p. 10 of this thread.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Just a simple mistake. The anchor was reading out what he sees on the tv dashboard or whatever.


Thats almost as bad as the magic bullet theory.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by mecheng

Originally posted by r4758
video.google.ca...

In the middle of this video, the BBC reporter is discussing the collapse of building 7, meanwhile, building 7 can be seen clearly in the background still standing!!!



r4758,
Could you tell us how you found this video originally? I'm wondering who was the first to report on it and perhaps find out who found the video.
Thanks.



I heard about it on the Alex Jones show when a caller called in and told Alex to go to google video and type in building 7 bbc.

I watched the video and then posted about it here.

Alex should have asked the caller how he found out about this.

IIRC, the caller was from Sudbury, Ontario.

[edit on 27-2-2007 by r4758]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
Strange how i could not get that bbc blog page without going through an american proxy. i am in uk, and could not get to the page normally.

www.bbc.co.uk...

has anyone else found this, i do get the page if i go through a proxy. strange.

Can the bbc explain how and why the video is being deleted all over the net. the video does not break any rules on google, but google deleted many times.[edit on 2/27/2007 by andy1033]


The link you provided goes straight through for me in Cumbria.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I believe the only info we have here on that is on p. 10 of this thread.


Thanks BH, appreciated! Can we get comfirmation that this BBC Archive hasn't been available before now? Is it usual to have 5 1/2 years between Live and Publically Archived? Is it even the norm for anything from BBC News to be available to everyone like this?


Originally posted by tator3
From what I heard from the guy who made the edited video(he was on Alex Jones today), that the bbc just recently released the 9/11 video archives due to public demand, and this video was made. Now the originals seem to have been corrupted, and we NEED the guy who made this edited version to release the UNCUT, UNEDITED version...
[edit on 26-2-2007 by tator3]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

Originally posted by deltaboy
Just a simple mistake. The anchor was reading out what he sees on the tv dashboard or whatever.


Thats almost as bad as the magic bullet theory.


Go look at what he is doing. Its not like he was making it up. He was reading what he sees.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

Originally posted by deltaboy
Just a simple mistake. The anchor was reading out what he sees on the tv dashboard or whatever.


Thats almost as bad as the magic bullet theory.


Go look at what he is doing. Its not like he was making it up. He was reading what he sees.


Then who printed out what she was supposed to read off the teleprompter and why? Dumb arguement!



new topics

top topics



 
101
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join