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: 25
101
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViewFromTheStars
It most certainly is evidence especially if they were reporting off a 'press release'.....


Yet again I have to ask, why are the BBC World Service the only ones reading off this press release? Of course I have to repeat another thing, until all the footage of the day from FOX. Sky News, etc are viewed, then we don't know that they were the only ones.

Here is something I thought of. The anchor is most likely reading something off the wire as he talks, but is it at all possible he was talking about the collapse and reading something new coming through in case it needed to be talked about instead? "We were going to go over to WotsHername, but I am just getting a report of..." kind of thing.

You know what else? If this was Sky News then no-one would have batted an eyelid on people saying they just got it wrong




posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
Why is it just the BBC World Service (that we currently know of) that reported a collapse before the event?


There's something in the corner of my brain trying to get me to remember hearing about a report before the collapse. I'll do some research.

In the meantime, there is a boatload of info on What Really Happened about the collapse.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViewFromTheStars
Thank you but I'll go one step further..

It's not only highly unlikely but I'll venture to say it's IMPOSSIBLE!


I second that!

Buildings don't collapse symetrically and in their own footprint.

Buildings collapse at random under the laws of gravity, momentum etc. The only way for a building to collapse straight down is if the columns are blown out all together (in sequence)..

If it were really damaged, it would have partly collapsed, most likely onto another building next to it.

As with all the WTC buildings, there should have been some remaining...

But nooooooo....they all collapsed to ground level....if thats nto a sign of a demolition, i dont know what is.

Garh! Its so simple i can even picture it in my head, which is how i first unfolded the puzzle! Its all logic!



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
If this has been metioned in the pages of posts,my apologies.
I found this on the BBC website today.
They kinda offer their explanation of what happened,regaurding this video.
An "error" dosent expain it way.


(BBC)-Part of the conspiracy? Richard Porter 27 Feb 07, 05:12 PM
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.

www.bbc.co.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:

www.bbc.co.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:

www.bbc.co.uk...


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.

www.bbc.co.uk...


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.

www.bbc.co.uk...


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.

www.bbc.co.uk...


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.

www.bbc.co.uk...


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... "

www.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

There's something in the corner of my brain trying to get me to remember hearing about a report before the collapse. I'll do some research.

In the meantime, there is a boatload of info on What Really Happened about the collapse.


That would be handy BH and thanks for thr link



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   
This thread is not about how it collapsed, other threads exist for that.

Please keep on topic or start a new thread.

Thanks Blackfox, it was mentioned twice already and quoted from on numerous occasions.

If you have missed out from your last post I recommend reading through them all, there are some good ones, particularly the one concerning which building the recording was made at......




[edit on 27-2-2007 by Koka]



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   
sorry to some members for being harsh in my comments.

my apologies.

just very worked up about this one its not often we get thrown such a large bone



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Koka
This thread is not about how it collapsed, other threads exist for that.

Please keep on topic or start a new thread.


I agree Koka.

I was just trying to point out that an explanation for why 7 collapsed was offered before it collapsed and this ties somewhat into the official collapse explanation, but you're right, there are a million threads on that already.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by tator3
16:54 to 17:36

I downloaded all the videos above...and the part where she is reporting in front of wtc7 has been cut out...deleted....gone.


The timestamp archive is the one where she is talking about WTC 7.

I also downloaded the video last night from this same archive and nothing has been cut out. I will glady upload it somewhere if you would like it.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
Why is it just the BBC World Service (that we currently know of) that reported a collapse before the event?


Here's a CNN clip where Aaron Brown reports - "building 7, in the wtc complex, is on fire and has either collapsed, or is collapsing". This was more than an hour before the building actually collapsed.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
On the BBC response page they FINALLY posted a single comment... the comment was from "DE":

"Hmmm you lost the footage? It was there yesterday".

This comment was up between 2:51-2:56 EST... It has now been removed.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by shrunkensimon

No need to wish. I know it was demolished.

There was no reason to suspect its collapse. It suffered minimal damage from WTC1/2 collapsing, and the fires within it were pathetic at best.

Your either incredabily stupid, or your just another shill.


Do I need to post a video of how pathetic the fire was on in WTC7?



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

Originally posted by Eden
The timestamp archive is the one where she is talking about WTC 7.

I also downloaded the video last night from this same archive and nothing has been cut out. I will glady upload it somewhere if you would like it.



Excellent Eden, save me downloading it, can you tell me/us, if they return to the link with Jane Standley at all, or if they stayed with the studio and made reference to the collapse again, seeing as how that time line would have covered the time of the real collapse.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Ermm, why exactly would they need a press release to tell them that a building that every person on earth could turn on their television and see collapse had collapsed? Keep reaching.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Richard Porter's Blog.

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.



Jane Standley doesn't remember minute-by-minute... But I bet Jane does remember what happened after the reported event.

I wonder what she was thinking after the report in question? I would think after her report they where looking out the window in awe as the Building collapsed shortly afterwards. Surely she remembers it. I would like to hear what she has to say on that.

I don't want to hear some stupid blog speaking on her behalf.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by PartChimp
Ermm, why exactly would they need a press release to tell them that a building that every person on earth could turn on their television and see collapse had collapsed? Keep reaching.


I don't think you grasp the point,just home from school?



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by mister Jones
Here's a CNN clip where Aaron Brown reports - "building 7, in the wtc complex, is on fire and has either collapsed, or is collapsing". This was more than an hour before the building actually collapsed.


That was it! He's speaking to someone in Jerusalem at 11:10 (an hour before bbc's Jane Standley was reporting it) He says it has collapsed or is collapsing. Still an hour and 10 minutes before the collapse.

Sorry for the edits, but Aaron says it's 4:15 Eastern at the end of that clip. A full hour before the collapse.


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



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:12 PM
link   
The download of the 1GB archive.org mpeg is finished here.

I'll be compressing it to all sorts of formats and upload the original and the compressed versions to one of my webservers in case the archive.org location goes down again.

Its strange that BBC world claims that it lost the footage while they themselves just released it to archive.org this week.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by thematrix
The download of the 1GB archive.org mpeg is finished here.

I'll be compressing it to all sorts of formats and upload the original and the compressed versions to one of my webservers in case the archive.org location goes down again.

Its strange that BBC world claims that it lost the footage while they themselves just released it to archive.org this week.


I think they actually said it was the original tapes that had been lost due to cock-up.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViewFromTheStars


r4758

It is highly unlikely that falling debris from the other towers caused damage at the exact points on wtc 7 that would allow for a perfect symmetrical collapse at free-fall speed.



Thank you but I'll go one step further..

It's not only highly unlikely but I'll venture to say it's IMPOSSIBLE!


I'll go on the ad"venture" with you as well. Buildings don't collapse perfectly, THAT IS WHY THEY CALL IN "DEMOLITION EXPERTS"

Put those words in your pipe and let them sink in for awhile



new topics

top topics



 
101
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join