It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Giordano Bruno
The reason this story is particularly interesting is that whoever the BBC’s original source of this information was, they knew that WTC7 was going to collapse.
Only 2 possibilities:
1) An expert on the scene diagnosed imminent collapse, the message was put out, the media caught on, BBC misread ‘about to’ as ‘already has’ and the building later collapsed. Who is this expert and how did they know such an unprecedented event was going to take place? If this is the case, naming the source would clear up the confusion.
2) The building was intentionally demolished, whoever (intentionally or otherwise) put the message out knew because they were involved. If this is the case, naming the original source would take you straight to the door of the people who are responsible for 911.
If (2) is the case (and due to the uncertainty principle I’ll never be 100%), then either the BBC/CNN are unaware they are sitting on the story of the century while everybody points it out to them, and are therefore pretty rubbish at their job…
…Or the perps of 911 hold sway over those organisations.
If that really is the case, and there is a group of people who can carry out 911 and get public and private institutions around the world to help them get away with it, then what is the limit of their application of that power?
In my personal life I try and stay out of trouble. If there was a gangster walking down the street who was known to have killed 3000 people, had goons on every corner, and the police would never arrest him because they were in his pocket, I wouldn’t want to be the one to start a fight with him on moral grounds. Call me a wimp, but I think there’s a call for choosing your fights wisely. If (2) is the case, then this entire 911 Truth thing rests on one simple question, does it actually have the power to challenge these people. If the media, the police, the politicians, a significant chunk of the population etc. is told the identity of one of the members of the conspiracy, do they have the power to act against these people? If not, can that power be turned on the 'truthers' in defence of their ‘getting away with it’? Is more being bitten off than can be chewed?
Is the 911Truth movement throwing weak punches at the gangster while he wryly smiles, finger on the trigger, waiting to see if there’s a way out that doesnt involve killing the cute kid trying to be brave? Or is that kid landing brave, stinging blows on a gangster who the neighbourhood is about to turn on?
How deep is this rabbit hole?
Originally posted by shindigger
I'll explain. The BBC are either liars, puppets, fakers or very easily duped.
It does not reflect well on their recent programme in the UK.
Anyone who chooses to explain this anomaly as poor reporting/ bad journalism has no option but to question the validity of the Conspiracy Files programme recently aired in the UK.
Their integrity is damaged by this, whatever your stance.
Originally posted by Nerdling
The BBC Editors blog has a response up: