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: 59
101
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jessicamsa

Originally posted by pesky george
Why is it that people will swallow everything fed to them by the government and media, yet scream like banshee's when proof of counter claims arise?


Good question. Until I looked at the evidence about this I believed the official version for the most part, but I know things that weren't ever discussed and had questions of my own. I at least went looking with an open mind. I haven't liked what I've found out, but it does make more sense with some of what I had already known. And it explains why the government never wanted to talk with me and why my evidence was destroyed.


I have been following the evidence since the attack. Hard to ignore sceintific studies, government and media reports. I have taken the road less traveled (Thank you Frost), and have concentrated on 'well repected' sources, still I find the evidence overwhelming.

To the doubters, you can never again sit on a jury and convict.




posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   
this one speech by JFK makes me question everything that comes out of the media and the current administration

www.youtube.com...



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Can anyone here read Norwegean?
www.nettavisen.no...

One of a Norwegean newspaper reported on BBC's blunder with WTC7..

Trying this to translate the page now but, its sortoff gibberish and a wrong
order of words will probably twist the story so needs manual translation lol..
www.tranexp.com:2000...


[edit on 2-3-2007 by zren]



posted on Mar, 2 2007 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Those of us who were alive then, know now this is the speech that got him killed.

The death of the Republic.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by tombangelta
Identified, I've only been on this board for a few hours but already it seems to me as though ChicagoFreedomFighter got it right. Your method of "discussion" is remarkably similar to that of those whose only purpose for being here is to muddy the waters and to sap people's energy in pointless discussion...



indeed.

judge if this: www.abovetopsecret.com... is remotely related to my post it was supposedly answering: www.abovetopsecret.com...

i mean it's very obvious that we have an obfuscation effort at hand. the question is what we can realistically do about it or if we even should. if someone is determined to wade through this thread, s/he will undoubtely get a very similar impression, essentialy aggravating the reader's disdain.

no matter if ID'ed is a paid agent or simply doing this for other unknown reasons, i concur that it's a case of attempted manipulation on a grand scale exhibitng an extreme amount of smug insolence to boot and a very low esteem of readers and posters of this forum.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 06:05 AM
link   
Can someone please upload the unedited full video to a normal file site, and with no added crap to like all the ones on youtube.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   
What's with all this fear of paid shills? Even if there were a hive of them somewhere trawling boards and websites, wouln't it be a good thing? I thought everyone wanted as many people as possible to see the evidence. If that's a
government censoring agency then maybe they'll be educated too.

It's only when the debate is lowered to childish insult throwing that it becomes a problem. Identified has done some research, responded to most questions directed at her and made some observations. That she isn't convinced by the controlled demolition theory isn't a reason for censorship, that's the kind of behaviour ats members complain about from the mainstream.

So what if she's a government shill or not, she's reading/watching the same stuff we are, and coming to her own conclusions. Surely thats a good thing.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Long Lance

Originally posted by tombangelta
Identified, I've only been on this board for a few hours but already it seems to me as though ChicagoFreedomFighter got it right. Your method of "discussion" is remarkably similar to that of those whose only purpose for being here is to muddy the waters and to sap people's energy in pointless discussion...



indeed.

judge if this: www.abovetopsecret.com... is remotely related to my post it was supposedly answering: www.abovetopsecret.com...

i mean it's very obvious that we have an obfuscation effort at hand. the question is what we can realistically do about it or if we even should. if someone is determined to wade through this thread, s/he will undoubtely get a very similar impression, essentialy aggravating the reader's disdain.

no matter if ID'ed is a paid agent or simply doing this for other unknown reasons, i concur that it's a case of attempted manipulation on a grand scale exhibitng an extreme amount of smug insolence to boot and a very low esteem of readers and posters of this forum.




at physorg.com's forum, they locked a thread because it discussed the wtc7 bbc screw-up. here's a link...last post is me

i was a threadkiller, lol!

physorg, is a 'legit' science site, just like NIST is a legit institution. in other words, it is controlled by the brain police.

they have been locking threads on 911 since i arrived and started poking sticks into the hornets' nest a year and a half ago.

if anyone reads that thread, do YOU see a reason it should have been locked?

didn't think so.

the randi forum, and the baut forum are the same. they are like CIA information fortresses, determined to keep the truth out, yet let in the gullible and impressionable people who would rather be told the truth than look into it for themselves.

to be fair, it's not easy for ANYONE to look into the murk they've created, and still be able to get a fairly clear picture of a semblance of the truth.

i think the OCT meme started at physorg. nice to have buzzwords, eh? there have been some heavies from the global debate hanging out there, like dr. greening(OCT) and gordon ross(truthseeker).

big brother is real.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I really like that physorg site,
and it would be very very interesting to see what some of the people have to say about 9/11 things there. Theres some great minds at that place.
So it's a shame that they do not allow discussion of that nature there.
Makes me think abit.

Although I have a problem with 'Identified', I would much much prefer her than someone stupid.
I feel alot of her points are more guesswork than ours, and are taking the only non conspiratatorial ( i made a new word ) way out of every single point we may make.
No matter what point we make and how logical it is, she will find a way to roll it up, squeeze it tight, and fit it into the official story box.
No matter HOW small that box is, and how rediculously large the point is that we've made, she'll find a way to messily cram it in that box.

But as someone stated earlier it's not a bad thing and keeps us on our toes. If you don't have other opinions and people like her, topics such as these can turn into tin foil hatted lunacy.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   
check this out.
people who think that the cabal has to be small are not prepared to do battle with this beast.

i just started a thread about this, bush planned 911 in 1976

that site literally made me cry. reading all the reponses from others who are supposedly 'good guys'. "there is no friend anywhere", -sun tzu.

and, yet, a great number of people are beginning to share the opinion at least that our western governing system is horribly disabled.

this wtc7/bbc discussion can't even seem to get off the ground without be diverted into rehashing every other aspect of 9/11. what your saying about the eXtreme rationalisation of OCTs is certainly true.
i swear if they watched a UFO beamed up their house, they'd say it was stolen by hoodlums. if they grew six new arms out of their foreheads, they'd say they have a slight blemish. if the sun turned green, they'd say it was a natural cycle. there is NOTHING they can't spin into unrecognisability.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   
According to Jewish myth, the King of Jews will bring all Gentile nations, cultures and religions to ruins through world wars. The King of Jews, whom the Jews call "Messiah", will then rule the world from Jerusalem.
www.jewishracism.com...

Alex Jones and BBC made this fake news show together, because I exposed Alex as being part of the criminal network on his blog feb 22nd. This video was suddenly uncovered from Alex's archives, more than 5 years after it was broadcasted LIVE? I have been blocked from writing on Alex's blog now, which confirms that my assertions about Jones working for the Zionist Jews were true and undisputable.

To get away with crimes, pretend to be a crime fighter
www.iamthewitness.com...

I wrote this as a comment to one of his blog entries: "Alex Jones, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Loose Change, 911Truth.org and the mainstream media are all working for the Zionists." + links

Email from a subscriber:

bravo
Good job man, I have been suspicious of Alex Jones for a LONG time. Are people really so naive to think that the 9/11 Truth movement wasn't inevitable? I mean look at JFK, they learned a lot from the way the public reacted to that one. I am confident that the magnitude of the lie of 9/11 requires there to be gatekeepers in the truth movement.

Alex Jones is always acting over the top, you'd figure he'd calm the
@#$% down to make conspiracy theorists seem rational, but all he does
is give the believers of the official story more fodder.

THANK YOU for speaking up on Alex's blog, people act like they scrutinize all the info they get, but act like complete sheeple to everything Alex says.
----------

And then I was blocked from commenting on Alex's blog. Alex obviously doesn't support freedom of speech. And this 5-year-old video was uncovered from someone's archives.

"An astounding video uncovered from the archives today..."
www.prisonplanet.com...

Obviously not BBC's archives, because they responded:

"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."
www.bbc.co.uk...

In his article there's a screenshot from Alex's site showing the video he claims he would love to see. The Zionist Jews are scared and make stupid mistakes.

This video is obviously arranged. The breaking news is that WTC 7 has collapsed, and all the time we can see parts of WTC 7 behind the reporter's head. And right before they zoom in on the building the reporter moves her head in the wrong direction, as to reveal WTC 7, which she was partly hiding. And when they zoom in she starts talking about the Twin Towers, although the story is about the collapse of WTC 7. This video was made in a hurry.

An old video suddenly popped out of Jones'/CNN's archives as well:
www.youtube.com...

"We are getting information now that one of the other buildings, building 7 in the world trade center complex, is on fire and... has either collapsed or is collapsing, and I... I... Y..You, to be honest, can see these pictures a little bit more clearly than I."

Just as the reporter says "has either collapsed" we can see a close-up of a fully standing WTC 7. But then again - the reporter honestly admits that he's almost blind. He then turns around to look at the blue screen for quite a while, probably seeing things a bit more clearly, and giving us the opportunity to study the back of his head...

Alex Jones on CNN:
www.iamthewitness.com...

Alex Jones summary:
www.iamthewitness.com...

Morgan Reynolds has a theory:
www.iamthewitness.com...



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 04:59 PM
link   
trondh, you are entitled to your opinion, but as far as i'm concerned, if alex jones is a gatekeeper, he's doing a lousy job.

that said, check out www.cloakanddagger.de for some hot news and uncomfortable truth.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

at physorg.com's forum, they locked a thread because it discussed the wtc7 bbc screw-up. here's a link...last post is me

i was a threadkiller, lol!

physorg, is a 'legit' science site, just like NIST is a legit institution. in other words, it is controlled by the brain police.


Now now, dont jump to conclusions that fast

forum.physorg.com...

I think they closed your topic because there is one about 9/11 already, and
a pretty big one as well and it is not closed.

-off topic:
Also see this musicvid
www.youtube.com... (Don Henley, singer of the Eagles. 9/11 "Inside Job". With dutch subs btw)

[edit on 3-3-2007 by zren]



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by zren
Now now, dont jump to conclusions that fast

forum.physorg.com...

I think they closed your topic because there is one about 9/11 already, and
a pretty big one as well and it is not closed.

-off topic:
Also see this musicvid
www.youtube.com... (Don Henley, singer of the Eagles. 9/11 "Inside Job".)


well, their 'official' 911 thread is pretty highly intolerant of anything 911 related that is NOT related to science.

the bbc/wtc7 is not science, although it is 'offtopic' for a science forum. of course, that's the whole reason they have an 'off topic' section. they have closed 911 threads twice, now. (the threads reached 900 some pages with hundreds of thousands of views, each.)

the first thread was not an official thread, but one started by a fellow who wanted to know how 8 and 10 second fall times(as per the 911 commision) are physically possible. he was very polite. the thread turned into a warzone(no thanks to me, i'm afraid). however, the thread was entitled 'basic physics' and was in the science area, but moved later by moderators into the 'off topic' area. and, then they locked it and started a new thread in 'off topic', and said nothing unrelated to the actual physics of 911 would be allowed.
so, why didn't they put it in a physics area, then? not allowing 'off topic' discussion in the 'off topic' room is very bizarre behaviour.
i just think they cringe whenever someone types the word 'shill'.

believe me, i've got thousands of posts at that site, i'm pretty familiar with it's rules and general vibe.

there was no reason to close that thread, other than the same reason that causes google video, youtube and the bbc to pull the video from public consumption. that reason being, big brother don't like. big brother smash.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Ok, :S fair enough, ignore my reply then.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 06:27 PM
link   
did anyone come up with a reason for those falling tiimes?



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrondH

This video is obviously arranged. The breaking news is that WTC 7 has collapsed, and all the time we can see parts of WTC 7 behind the reporter's head. And right before they zoom in on the building the reporter moves her head in the wrong direction, as to reveal WTC 7, which she was partly hiding. And when they zoom in she starts talking about the Twin Towers, although the story is about the collapse of WTC 7. This video was made in a hurry.




a distinct possibilty, although i wonder if it would not have been easier to orchestrate this on 9/11 then keep it under locks for some time and release it in time to destabilize the US and the West in general.

it's not like people view several channels at the same and if they do and actually manage to listen, they wouldn't get the word out, because they'd be working in the media business or for the gov't, now would they? planting fake video footage is a dangerous business and i distinctly remember that someone from CNN claimed that and i quote For the third time today, we've seen a building demolished on purpose. at that time (the same day) i had not seen the collapses in that much detail and wondered what he was talking about, because, or so i thought, 'even if that third, smaller building was demolished (to stop the fires or ease access, whatever) the others were probably just of shoddy construction'. color me ignorant, but the first collapse was the only one i saw live and it was mostly obscured by the north tower...


imho, all this video really proves is that people do not care, that an awful lot of people know, really understand what 9/11 was but don't care or won't tell. time will show if they are right, because all of thse more open consiracies could very well be used to tag all those who are foolish or bold enough to openly shout their mouths off. weak but persistent arguments from 'disinfo agents' only add fuel to the fire and add further creedence to an organised disinfo effort.

that much is all clear, imho, but their motives are not. if history is an indicator, turmoil and destruction by division will be the result, and tbh, understanding that conveys no advantage because the powers that be undermine everything and will use their ample power to keep pulling the bull's tail until something happens.

PS: your first link is a prime example of a honeypot trap, but you probably know that already



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 08:06 AM
link   
I think this video and the CNN-video was both made in a hurry. Alex is supposed to support freedom of speech and oppose to censorship. Still, I am blocked from writing comments to his blog. Obviously, he couldn't dispute my arguments. My blogcomments that brought up to the blockout are still there. It would be too obvious if he deleted them. So this breaking evidence pops up, probably to draw attention away from my comments.

One entry I commented:
blog.myspace.com...

TWO 5-year-old-videos from TWO different news networks simultaneously pop out of Alex's magic hat. Two videos that implies the same in two different ways. Both videos have totally incompetent reporters who're all blind. Supposedly, these videos were broadcasted LIVE on 9/11, but no one seems to remember it. It's news to everyone. Not even BBC remembers any of it.

An astounding video uncovered from the archives today...

This amazing clip was on Google Video (now back again here), but was removed within hours of the story breaking. However, hundreds of people had already managed to download the clip and it has gone viral on the Internet and the censors won't be able to shut the lid this time. A You Tube upload is available here but we fully expect this to be removed soon. You can watch it for the time being at this link and also here. A WMV link is here (on our server) and a Quicktime here. Bit torrent versions of the file can be found here. An avi version can be found here.
www.prisonplanet.com...

Alex pretends to very scared that this video will jump right back into a black hole inside his archives. He seems paranoid. I put the video up on You Tube as well. I was never scared it would be removed.

It has been proven beyond doubt that the WTCs were deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite, as one CBS-reprter said, a long time ago. We already know that it was an inside job. What difference is this video going to make? Those who still believe that debris brought down WTC 7 will not be convinced of otherwise by this video. On the contrary, to them it will be evidence that debris definitely may bring down buildings. Even BBC thought that that was about to happen.

In the BBC-video the subject is WTC 7. The breaking news is that WTC 7 has collapsed. In a not-so-fake newsreport one would expect them to show footages of a collapsed WTC 7, as they were speaking about it. But this incompetent reporter tries to hide a not-so-collapsed WTC 7 behind her head. As if she's deliberately lying through her teeth and doing her best to hide it. Her best is not very good. This reporter is completely incompetent.

I was also contacted by several people on Myspace who pretended to be very agreeing and good friends, but I realized after a few emails that they were fake assholes working on Alex's behalf, trying to find out what I knew and to convince me I was wrong. Typical Zionist behavior, acting like they're your good friends when they really are not, infiltrate your environment with a fake identity. But they can't convince me I'm wrong. I have seen overwhelming evidence that most of the members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth are fake, and seen evidence that proves beyond doubt that all the other big Truth-organisations are in on it. They're the bad guys.

Another typical Zionist tactic is to make their enemies fight each other.

[edit on 4-3-2007 by TrondH]



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 09:37 AM
link   
zionists blah blah...

So global media institutions, politicians, the military AND every prominent member of the truth movement is in on it?

And Jane Standley was trying to hide it with her head?!?!?!?!

I know the old saying 'just because it seems like everyone is out to get you. doesn't mean they're not', but don't let paranoia cloud your judgement my friend.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Giordano Bruno
And Jane Standley was trying to hide it with her head?!?!?!?!

You didn't see the video yet? If you did, look at it once more. Notice that right before they zoom in, Jane moves her head in the wrong direction, revealing WTC 7, which she was hiding as she was speaking about it. BBC's breaking news is that WTC 7 has collapsed. When they zoom in on a not-so-collapsed WTC 7 they have changed the topic. It's ridiculous.

Immediately after this breaking video pops out BBC responds to it in the "back of their paper", although the video has almost only been shown on You Tube. The story has not been in the news. 60.000 have viewed the video on You Tube now, and that's not even close to 6 billion. The importance of this video has been blown out of proportions within Alex's environment. And in the BBC-respons the author has included a picture that proves that he's lying when he claims he hasn't seen the video. It is so stupid.

The Elite/Globalists/Zionists are making stupid mistakes and are exposing themselves. I obviously gave them an increased production of adrenalin.

[edit on 4-3-2007 by TrondH]




top topics



 
101
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join