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

page: 66
101
<< 63  64  65   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 05:31 AM
link   
which leads back to the non-diversionary question of who sent them this information, as someone said before: "Find the entity that issued that press release and you have found someone who was in on the plan. Of course, no one in power or in the corporate content controlled media really wants a legitimate investigation into the 911 atrocity. It would force the question as to what the actual agenda is and reveal how utterly corrupt and conscienceless those is power actually are. "

I hope the media "was in on it" isn't going to be the argument being presented by debunkers whilst ignoring the more pertinent one (above).



Dae

posted on Dec, 14 2007 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by mfsheldon


So the fact that one lame news anchor (glorified actor) clearly got their verb tense wrong in the confusion is somehow a smoking gun?


I would agree with you except for one detail. For me, when I first sat and watched this footage, I was counting down to when we would actually see wtc 7 come down, but lo and behold the sat link went out, about a min or two before we should actually see the building come down behind the news anchor. A rather convenient coincidence.

Unless of course Ive missed some other detail in this thread.



posted on Dec, 29 2007 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by sp00n1
This video is clearly the smoking gun on WTC7 collapse fore-knowledge.

We've heard numerous eyewitnesses claim they were forewarned.

Now we have cold hard proof of BBC reporters knowing it was going to collapse before it collapsed.

No two ways around it. Somebody knew WTC7 was coming down.

This raises a lot of questions and establishes newfound credibility for all the eyewitnesses that have claimed they were warned to get away from the building.

This really puts "PULL IT" in a whole new light.



the guy who bought the wtc buildings knew it was coming down - he said so in an interview ' he said 'he and the fd agreed to 'pull it' '
the whole thing stinks
and this guy made 5 big B$s on the Ins blood money
anyway - cut to the chase
it was a done deal by trusted entities that have all the power they need to smoke and mirror all their lies and continue to foster any emergency for their own corporate ends
anybody seen the pics of the thermite slant cuts on the tower bases?
I think the west has been hi jacked and this is just the tip
God help us all
pogo was right
we have found the enemy and he is us
y



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   
It is amazing that there are still people who do not know that a 3rd World Trade Center skyscraper, 47 story WTC7, collapsed looking just like a planned demolition, and it wasn't even hit by an aircraft.

And there are still people who do not know that the BBC reported WTC7 had collapsed while it was still standing live behind the reporter Jane Standley, and it actually collapsed 23 minutes later; five minutes after somebody pulled Jane Standley's live feed.


Google Video Link


WTC7 is the Saloman Brothers building

BBC Correspondent Phil Hayton

00:09 . . . . talking about the Saloman Brothers building collapsing, and indeed it has.

00:35 . . . . Jane what more can you tell us about the Saloman Brothers building and its collapse?

01:37 Presumably there were very few people in the Saloman building when it collapsed.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


No, what is amazing is that this thread is still alive. The news media makes mistakes on almost every "breaking news" story. This has been explained (with examples) multiple times, and yet people still think that the BBC saying the building had collapsed, when it had not, is some sort of proof of a big bad conspiracy.

While I do not have the BBC on tape, I DO have another network on tape from that day. And they were talking about how it was feared that WTC 7 was going to collapse at some point, and this went on until the building actually collapsed, no loss of link, no static, just one continuous transmission.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 





The news media makes mistakes on almost every "breaking news" story.


except that this "mistake" was repeated by three separate news outlets on the same day.

Nice try though.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Smack
 


How many news outlets used the bad AP report about Flight 93 that day? Heres a hint...it was more than one...

Remember the mining accident, where the dozen or so guys were trapped? EVERY network reported that eleven of them had been found alive....EVERY network.........and yet, the next morning we found out the truth, only one man was found alive.

On a big story, crap like that always happens. One network will report something, and next thing you know, it pops up on a couple others. They get in a hurry to scoop the competitors and run with something before it gets verified.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


I know. Don't you worry, Swampy. I'm sure all those coincidences can be explained away. You've done a masterful job so far in dismissing every single piece of evidence thrown your way.

I guess it was a common occurrence in the world pre 911 for buildings on fire to suddenly implode on themselves. That would explain how they were so sure that it would -- an hour before it actually did.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Smack
 


Except...the buildings didnt implode, they collapsed due to severe damage and fire.

And, I dont dismiss actual evidence...altered youtube video, and ravings about dust residue dont count.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]



posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 02:58 AM
link   
wow really a whole 20 some odd minutes before the collapse of building 7 way to go bbc and the us government for the explosion of the building that had a countdown for the explosions so why try to cover it up with planes or what you wanted us to believe were planes



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
interesting how the original material is all but gone by now.

give it time and the issue will again be debated and denied by debunkers.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   
Amazing how the bbc never explained that video. Not sure myself on it, but i saw a bbc reporter being put on spot about it, and he was stumped.



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
Amazing how the bbc never explained that video. Not sure myself on it, but i saw a bbc reporter being put on spot about it, and he was stumped.


The BBC has explained it, long ago :-

www.bbc.co.uk...

What is the alternative ? that the perps thought it was a good idea to give a foreign news outlet a script as to how it was all going to go down ? Isn't that insane ?

Was this the only error in reporting that day ? Did a car bomb really go off at the State Dept ?



posted on Jul, 8 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
This was the thread that started my time at ATS.
Don't think there has been anything as satisfying on here since.
I remember thinking this is it , something must come of this.

5 years later.............................






top topics



 
101
<< 63  64  65   >>

log in

join