 |
 |
BBC Article: “9/11 Third Tower Mystery ‘Solved’”
9/11 Blogger
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Here’s a new article by Mike Rudin, that’s been posted on the BBC News website. It mentions that NIST says “fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn’t have enough water and focused on saving lives.” However, NIST’s claim is incorrect. There were in fact fireboats that had been moored near the WTC the morning of 9/11, to provide water to the site. See:
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/17_Pharvey.html
One of the boats, the John J. Harvey, could reportedly “pump 16,000 to 20,000 gallons of water a minute. ‘That’s the equivalent of 15 [fire] engines drafting water,’ explained 65-year-old FDNY retiree Bob Lenney, who spent 25 years piloting Harvey.” See:
http://www.fireboat.org/press/time_out_092701.asp
In fact, one of NIST’s earlier reports stated, “According to the FDNY first-person interviews, water was never an issue at WTC 7 since firefighting was never started in the building.” See:
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-8.pdf (p. 110).
(Article continues below)
9/11 third tower mystery ’solved’
By Mike Rudin
BBC, Conspiracy Files
The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center.
The 47-storey third tower, known as Tower Seven, collapsed seven hours after the twin towers.
Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse.
Conspiracy theorists have argued that the third tower was brought down in a controlled demolition.
Unlike the twin towers, Tower Seven was not hit by a plane.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology, based near Washington DC, is expected to conclude in its long-awaited report this month that ordinary fires caused the building to collapse.
That would make it the first and only steel skyscraper in the world to collapse because of fire.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology’s lead investigator, Dr Shyam Sunder, spoke to BBC Two’s “The Conspiracy Files”:
“Our working hypothesis now actually suggests that it was normal building fires that were growing and spreading throughout the multiple floors that may have caused the ultimate collapse of the buildings.”
‘Smoking gun’
However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.
The founder of the group, Richard Gage, says the collapse of the third tower is an obvious example of a controlled demolition using explosives.
“Building Seven is the smoking gun of 9/11… A sixth grader can look at this building falling at virtually freefall speed, symmetrically and smoothly, and see that it is not a natural process.
“Buildings that fall in natural processes fall to the path of least resistance”, says Gage, “they don’t go straight down through themselves.”
Conspiracy theories
There are a number of facts that have encouraged conspiracy theories about Tower Seven.
- Although its collapse potentially made architectural history, all of the thousands of tonnes of steel from the skyscraper were taken away to be melted down.
- The third tower was occupied by the Secret Service, the CIA, the Department of Defence and the Office of Emergency Management, which would co-ordinate any response to a disaster or a terrorist attack.
- The destruction of the third tower was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. The first official inquiry into Tower Seven by the Federal Emergency Management Agency was unable to be definitive about what caused its collapse.
- In May 2002 FEMA concluded that the building collapsed because intense fires had burned for hours, fed by thousands of gallons of diesel stored in the building. But it said this had “only a low probability of occurrence” and more work was needed.
But now nearly seven years after 9/11 the definitive official explanation of what happened to Tower Seven is finally about to be published in America.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology has spent more than two years investigating Tower Seven but lead investigator Dr Shyam Sunder rejects criticism that it has been slow.
“We’ve been at this for a little over two years and doing a two or two and a half year investigation is not at all unusual. That’s the same kind of time frame that takes place when we do aeroplane crash investigations, it takes a few years.”
With no steel from Tower 7 to study, investigators have instead made four extremely complex computer models worked out to the finest detail. They’re confident their approach can now provide the answers. Dr Sunder says the investigation is moving as fast as possible.
“It’s a very complex problem. It requires a level of fidelity in the modelling and rigour in the analysis that has never been done before.”
Other skyscrapers haven’t fully collapsed before because of fire. But NIST argues that what happened on 9/11 was unique.
Steel structure weakened
It says Tower Seven had an unusual design, built over an electricity substation and a subway; there were many fires that burnt for hours; and crucially, fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn’t have enough water and focused on saving lives.
Investigators have focused on the east side where the long floor spans were under most stress.
They think fires burnt long enough to weaken and break many of the connections that held the steel structure together.
Most susceptible were the thinner floor beams which required less fireproofing, and the connections between the beams and the columns. As they heated up the connections failed and the beams sagged and failed, investigators say.
The collapse of the first of the Twin Towers does not seem to have caused any serious damage to Tower Seven, but the second collapse of the 1,368ft (417m) North Tower threw debris at Tower Seven, just 350ft (106m) away.
Tower Seven came down at 5.21pm. Until now most of the photographs have been of the three sides of the building that did not show much obvious physical damage. Now new photos of the south side of the building, which crucially faced the North Tower, show that whole side damaged and engulfed in smoke.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7485331.stm
Also see BBC video report here.
Prison
Planet.tv Members Can Watch
Fall Of The Republic
Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get
Your Subscription Today!
CANCER CONSPIRACY? Are
"they" suppressing the cure? Will YOU
be the next victim? Learn
the Secret Truth! - READ FULL STORY
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
96 Responses to “BBC Article: “9/11 Third Tower Mystery ‘Solved’””
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||||||
| By N2H | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
July 5th, 2008 at 7:12 am
C’mon fellow truthers, let’s blanket this site with evidence about what really happened to building #7.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:16 am
I suppose there is a good reason for the fire sprinkler system to have failed .. or was building7 uniquely without them .maybe they turned the water off whilst they dealt with the towers.
Its what they hide from us, rather than tell us,that is suspicious. The fact they hide information tells every body that they had Involvement .
Unity is possible when the hearts and minds of the people are open . Only together through peace can we end the tyranny.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:23 am
What a load of pure pap….do these evil baztards really think we are that stupid? Amazing…just amazing.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:26 am
It will make no difference, the truth is already out. A list of theese people such as Mike Rudin should be kept that we may bring them to justice.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:37 am
They think they can debunk anything with a few computer modles and pics from north side,fire caused it to fall at freefall speed into its own footprint.
I believe that when my shit turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbert.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:44 am
First global warming and now cover up in 911. We’ve begun the age of tyranny… by computer models!!!
July 5th, 2008 at 7:47 am
I already sent my response to them. I told them that their time is coming sooner than they think, because at the current rate of growing awareness, 911 truth will hit critical mass in the next 1-2 years.
I stated that We’re going to have own Nuremberg trials and prosecute all the accessories after the fact who were involved in the coverup.
I specifically mentioned the producers of the 911 hit pieces and the BBC execs involved.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:05 am
It makes no diffrence the truth is already out.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:16 am
Not only was it the only steel building to implode because of fire, but it did it on command !
experts, my ass !
can’t even get their lies straight !
July 5th, 2008 at 8:35 am
“With no steel from Tower 7 to study,” Mike Rudin blandly states, as if tampering with evidence at the scene of a crime was altogether normal and a total non-starter for debate. Anyone who can write such a statement and then move on from there, without commenting further, has to be outrageously incurious and disinterested in learning the truth about what caused WTC-7 to fall at free-fall speed into its own footprint with what
can only be described as balletic grace at 5:20 pm on 9/11.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:36 am
The BBC is just doing its jobs. It is, and always has been the official propaganda arm of the UK establishment, and its journalists operate under MI5/MI6 oversight. It was the BBC that official stated the idiotic lie about steel melting in the towers on the immediate occasion of the towers being attacked (the ‘expert’ they quoted was the idiot Blair gave the immensely profitable ‘millenium bridge’ contract to- a design so flawed in engineering that millions had to be wasted afterwards to stop it wobbling in use).
It was the BBC, via its pseudo-science flagship ‘Horizon’ (known as ‘Nova’ in the US) that ‘proved’ the idiotic concept of the towers falling by progressive ‘pancake’ impacts. So successful was this program (with its CSI style CGI reconstructions) that years after even the US government had to admit that such a concept was moronic garbage that ignored every rule of physics (given the observed free-fall events), it is still the theory most likely to be mentioned by ‘debunkers’ as the reason the twin towers collapsed.
It should also be noted that ‘Horizon’/'Nova’ had a show ‘proving’
US airliner TWA 800 exploded by ‘accident’ and was not shot down by a rogue US navy missile. The BBC makes the nazi propaganda machine at the height of Goebbel’s power seem as efficient as Hillary Clinton’s PR machine.
And once again, note that while Americans are told that ‘Al Jazeera’ is some kind of extremist muslim news organisation, actually it was created out of the Arab-arm of the BBC World Service, an MI6 propaganda department similar in nature to ‘Voice of America’.
The BBC tells bald-faced lies in furtherance of genocidal racist wars because that is its remit. However, understanding the psychological weaknesses of UK liberals, they always produce a few ‘preaching to the choir’ productions (like ‘Power of Nightmares’) so that these liberal idiots will then defend the BBC.
The most powerful weapons produced by the most murderous nations are never things like aircraft-carriers or rockets, but machines composed entirely of words, ideas, and the means to place these in the minds of as many Humans as possible. The BBC considers itself more important to the monsters it serves than all the nuclear weapons their masters possess.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:48 am
i left the country 5 years ago, and after being inspired by Mr. Jones, became more aware and more effective in waking people up when i moved across the ocean than i was in person.
dont worry, September 11 Truth is common knowledge over here. when the revolution comes (corruption always becomes bloated and fails), all of the citizenry of Europe will support us completely.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Indict Mike Rudin for obstructing a lawful investigation into the collapse of WTC7!
July 5th, 2008 at 8:59 am
I knew something was fishy the instant the first tower fell…let alone building seven. I’m really quite shocked that something this obvious is so difficult for people to see. The sad thing is that means a lot of sheep won’t even do the TWO MINUTE REASEARCH it takes to grill the official story. For those of you who are still on the fence, the research takes shorter that taking a piss.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:59 am
I was 14 or 15 when I stayed home from school to hear Dwight Eisenhower warn us against the military industrial complex. Nobody listened! They’re on us like a cheap suit! Come on Americans, lets be worthy of the promise of our great country!
July 5th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Indicy Bush and Cheney for muder and war crimes!
July 5th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Look, anybody who has studied the ‘Facts’ of 911, i.e., the only facts available to the public: (THE VIDEO TAPES OF THE TOWERS THEMSELVES) are the only proof one needs… to see that the official story is pure fiction. So, how much PROOF do we have in the existence of God… O…. So….. would you rather believe in Santa Claus or Dick(THE-DEVIL)Chaney? Fairey Tales will always trump common sense and in this case YOUR VERY OWN EYES……
July 5th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Well as least these fine folks are consistent.
Lie begets Lie.
The reality is simply this which we know: A standard conflagration does not reach a high enough temperature to cause structural failure within steel structures. Period.
Let the BBC and their ilk continue their disinformation.
Those of us that know the truth must prepare for the final battle, which will not be fought with keyboards and an internet connection.
We must gird ourselves against the inevitable; the tightening of the grip of the Governmental Police State.
“Society in every state is a blessing, but GOVERNMENT even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
Thomas Paine, “Common Sense” ]
Available from Dover Publications Inc.
Get your copy NOW…It will change your life.
God Bless…
July 5th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Top secret US military plans to test deadly nerve gas by dropping it on soldiers in a remote Queensland rainforest during the Cold War have been uncovered in Australian Government archives.
The Americans are testing there nerve gas on australian soldiers.
during the cold war…
Newly declassified Australian Defence Department and Prime Minister’s office files show that the United States was strongly pushing the Government for tests on Australian soil of two of the most deadly chemical weapons ever developed, VX and GB — better known as Sarin — nerve gas
July 5th, 2008 at 9:21 am
It takes longer to dicide who is going to be voted off American Idol than it does to grill the official story of 911. It takes more research to drink a beer than it takes to watch building seven fall. I have a relative who flies F-16s for the Air Force….he didn’t even know what building seven was. What is wrong with this picture? Seek and you will find (rather quickly). Knock, and the door will be opened unto you (or demolished by planted explosives). LOL
July 5th, 2008 at 9:40 am
I wonder if their “model” includes gasoline tanks (found intact), real fire temps from fires so weak they couldn’t make it to the other side of the building and were burning black (less than 450 Degrees C), the FACT that structural steel assemblies require hours and hours of INTENSE temps (over 1500 Degrees C) to fail? I wonder if their “model” will explain the squibs we all see or the KINK in the building as it is demolished? I wonder if their “model” will explain the building COUNTDOWN that eyewitnesses reported taking place before it was demolished? We all know that buildings damaged on their side… FALL on their sides, but not WTC7. My guess is that the answer from NIST about their “model” will be “no.” Hang traitors from the trees and NOW! Arrest NIST for obstructing justice.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Building 7 was the primary target, but they couldn’t just fly planes into it… 1. too hard to hit, 2. too obvious 3. by knocking down 1 and 2, made it look more like a terrorist job. Look up the occupants of buildings 1 and 2; Ratheon, Showtime. Just these 2 companies alone could provide everything needed to pull it off.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:14 am
I wonder How they will explain BBC reporting on the collapse of tower7 with tower7 in the video as they report it!
July 5th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Richard Gage says “a sixth grader can watch the building come down and see it was controlled demolition” I say a kindergartner would be able to understand that explosives brought it down after watching the video..not to mention the countdown by some of the NYPD 10..9..8….2..1 boom boom boom..the squibs..the perfect crimp under the penthouse..an absolute classic controlled demolition collapse..6.5 seconds later the building is laying nice and neat in its own footprint..the odds of all the main support columns failing at precisely the same time for WTC #7 to collapse as it did? 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1..so if was really a couple of trash can fires that brought down WTC # 7?..how do you now explain Larry Silversteins statement on 9-11..”there has been such terrible loss of life..we decided to pull it”"the decision was made to pull it”.????.I could go on, but the case for controlled demolition used to bring down # 7 is simply to overwhelming..the BBC still trying to come up with a believeable explanation for the collapse of WTC # 7 OTHER THAN CONTROLLED DEMOLITION IS completely outrageous,ridiculous,absurd and totally unbelieveable by anyone who has watched the video of the collapse of WTC # 7! there is simply no other explanation..overwhelming positive proof of controlled demolition on every level..every angle.. everything points to it..sorry BBC..case closed..
July 5th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Definitive. “Fie” lick my asshole
July 5th, 2008 at 10:30 am
hi everyone, just to confirm what “the devil inside” said above, i am european, or irish as i prefer to put it and we in europe WILL fight against the nwo and the corrupt elite, but what we are saying in critisism is that there are so many americans asleep . i don´t know any person that thinks the official story is true here in europe. waking up involves more that just realisation, you have to get involved in numbers and protest against your government and police state, contact alex jones or “we are change” and get involved guys, this is a global fight,not just your problem, we are with you all the way, you´ll see. the hatred towards americans is diminishing, i used to until i realised that it was your administration is what i hated. you are good people but are loosing you freedom daily, respect, dave
July 5th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Orwell said it best:
“In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.”
Its sad the excuses people use to convince themselves that “al Qaeda” did 9/11. The best — imagine the shear number of people and coordination it would have taken for the government to pull off an enormous job like 9/11, someone would have talked, etc — no way they could’ve have kept it a secret.
First of all, they don’t even notice — IT HASN’T BEEN KEPT A SECRET. They label all the whistleblowers, “kooks”. They’d consider the “conspiracy theory” if only someone credible would come forward — when someone credible comes forward, they’re considered no longer credible because they don’t believe the “official story”.
Since they define credibility by whether or not the person believes the “official story”, in their mind, no credible people have yet come forward.
No, in their mind the only thing that makes any sense, was that an operation TOO HUGE and coordinated for the government, could have only been pulled off by 19 dingbats with box cutters who couldn’t even fly single engine Cessnas (the job was too big for a backhoe so they had to use a shovel, theory)
TWO planes reduced THREE steel-framed and reinforced concrete skyscrapers to dust. Yeah, “mystery solved”….. “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
July 5th, 2008 at 10:36 am
The more the BBC push this 9/11 yellow journalism the more they are destroying their reputation for honest factual journalism. It makes you wonder what the agenda of the BBC is now. In one sense i fell sorry for Mike Rudin. He is only doing what he has been told to do by his bosses, but he could make an effort to allow the honest terrible facts about the controlled explosion to be presented without prejudice.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:51 am
David: Thanks so much for your realization that our problems are with the politicians in government and not the citizens. Americans were so proud of the Irish for not accepting the Lisbon Treaty.
This non acceptance forced the EU to disclose it’s agenda under the cold hard light of day:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new.....nored.html
There needs to be a global awaking, the US is beginning to catch up with the Europeans about this world government cabal. The people unite.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:56 am
We all know that NIST tweaks its computer models to get the results they want. They did this with tower 1 and 2 when their simulations didn’t result in any collapses. I’m sure they did the same thing with their building 7 simulation.
I’d like to have some of the firemen comment on the idea that there was no water available. If it’s not true, this could be a very obvious lie to catch them in. (Like the time Popular Mechanics claimed “PULL” wasn’t a demolition term. I love when they put lies out there that are so easily debunked. It discredits everything else they say.)
July 5th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Damn shame flight 93 didn’t hit its target (WTC 7 ?) …they wouldn’t have had all this “explaining” to do…
July 5th, 2008 at 11:44 am
not sure if this will post; alex jones company doesnt like being reminded they are a corporation) but any moron who lacks the ability to do Correct math or has not read anything Newton ever wrote; is probably working fo NIST or the BBC. buidlings DO NOT COLLAPSE INTO THEIR OWN FOOTPRINT. if you doubt, cool, just google building collapes and then check out controlled demo… be the judge yourself.
July 5th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Just wondering if anyone else noticed that the Alfred P. Murrah (sp.) building in Ok City, Ok had a ‘whole side damaged’ and it didn’t collapse in its own footprint. Until it was intentional leveled with explosives later, that is.
July 5th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
What they are selling here is that 2 + 2 = 5. The BBC makes me laugh because all these supposed “journalists” and “editors” and “anchors” who report this garbage think that they have great intellect. lol
July 5th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Its official. Only the severely mentally challenged and people on the governments pay roll are left spouting the official horseshit. I just have to look at that building, shortly after the roof starts going the lot goes. Every floor all at the same time just gives up the ghost. If planes flew into the WTC and I believe it because I saw it on TV, then by that yardstick of evaluating evidence (seeing as we have no plane wreckage and vaporised bodies) what I see is every floor support, being systematically compromised all at the same time. I see controlled demolition. PERIOD!! Just like i see fingers on my hand. PERIOD!!
July 5th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
And you dont have to be a brain surgeon to figure out that when you are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was a psy-op, that like joe plummer said, they wouldnt crash a plane into a field. Also if the plane had passengers, dead passengers “would” have been found. Its that simple. So if they wouldnt have crashed it into a field it obviously crashed itself (malfunctioned) or one rogue pilot actually did his job and shot it down. So where was it headed. Its safe to assume a building……..but then there would have been a building pre-primed ready for the show, just sitting there, all wired up with explosives. And they probably really wanted that building to come down as it was housing so many investigative documents about government officials. Therefore the target would still have to be brought down. So it was!!! The evidence is all out there, to be found. Its not even that hard of a jigsaw to put together, if your brain can absorb the facts and discard the fluff.
I also think something either in place or in conjunction with regular demo charges was used. Looking at the collapses of the 1st 2 towers the actual floors are being blown to kingdom come, not just inner columns. That coupled with the inexplicable lack of any sizeable debris, the pulverising of everything to dust, and a visual display of the 2nd towers last falling piece, turning to iron dust in mid air, implies a microwave technology. My physics education is rudimentary, but I know the temperatures needed to vaporize steel into iron filings is phenomenal, my brain also refuses to accept fire weakening steel construction to the point of collapse. Look for wtc spire to see this weird vaporizing in action. You can find it on webfairy website, if its still up. Theres a lot of no planes theory on that site. I dont think the no plane theory has enough hard evidence to stand up. I do a bit of 3D modelling and animating and the fact some of these people lining up buildings on the skyline from footage to footage never once mention parallax bothers the hell out of me. Parallax is like what you see in a movie when the background and foreground speed of movement in relation to each other and the camera are vastly different. Like when you get a zoom on the person which is slow, and the background is flying/zooming really fast.
Anyway the spire.mov clip is worth looking at. What are your eyes telling you?? Use quicktime, download the spire.mov file and scrub through the timeline. My limited physics knowledge cant explain it, but my brain can compute the likelihood of certain theories, and as yet I havent seen many truthers address this anomoly. Strange on both counts.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Other buildings on the site recieved enormous damage and did not collapse.
i find it difficult to see how fire can cause a collapse like that of 7.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
So how do you explain the video of Silverman (the owner) saying a decision to pull the building (#7) was made, and we pulled it.
This will never be anything but an inside job. If you haven’t heard, a Massachusetts College is putting together a case for prosecuters to try the Bush administration once they’re out of office. My only hope is that once they’ve had their “fair” trial, they’ll all get a bullet in their heads.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
This was my response to the BBC. I doubt it will go public.
It’s this simple period and end of story. The building was exploded intentionally. The laws of the universe and physics alone prove this.
If you expect people to believe that fires on multiple floors caused a building to collapse in on itself I seriously question your grasp of your immediate reality. I mean where exactly is your thought process now? Do you exist? This is bordering on absolutely lunacy.
You cannot in any way shape or form support this argument that you are explaining that this building came down by layers of fires? It’s like you are saying that math doesn’t exist. It’s like saying that we do not have the laws of physics. It’s like saying I’m not hitting you in the face when I’m bleeding all over at the same time.
People are NOT THAT STUPID. I know you would like to think they are but they are not.
— We have on video explosions going off and people being warned the building is going to “blow up”. So don’t even try it. It’s nuts.
What you are doing is like telling a math professor that basic addition does not exist, or telling a musician that a certain note doesn’t exist even though hes playing it at the same time on his instrument.
Truth doesn’t Lie.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
The only reason that the BBC feel that they must bring this video out about building seven, is because they have had an unreal amount of emails asking them why they had reported the Soloman Brother’s Building collapsing some twenty minutes before it actually collapsed. Keep up the good work people. We have the evidence.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
you gotta give it to our British Brainwashing Criminals to come up with some rubbish.. almost as unreal as the ‘official’ version.. suppose ‘pull it’ never entered the editors head when deciding to air this.
July 5th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
I am a police detective in jersey city, nj which is right across the hudson river from lower manhattan. I was on the westside highway near the atrium in front of the american express building bringing supplies from jersey at around 5 o’clock pm on 9/11 and we were ordered back because we had been told plaza 7, although the exact building name wasn’t given at the time , was going to come down. At the time I thought to myself.. who brought the “building is comming down gage machine” to the site??? I still do!!!!
July 5th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
I wonder if the BBC and the NIST will include Jane Standley’s and Aaron Brown’s psychic premonitions of the event in their reports?
July 5th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
If the BBC told me it was going too be a sunny day i would take an umberella out with me. And that goes with all media in britain.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
the fires in the building were nowhere near hot enough to even have begun melting the steel..small fires melting through all of the buildings many reinforced steel support columns at precisely the same time AND at the exact same height on every single one of them is a scientific impossibility…plus,kerosene/diesel fuel fires did not and never could have caused the collapse..again scientifically impossible..it boils down to the temperature that different liquids burn at..simple as that..and the heat needed to melt steel inside WTC # 7 simply did not exist..it wasn’t even close..PERIOD..AT LEAST another 1,000 degrees of heat would have been needed in all 3 buildings in fact,for it to have been hot enough to have begun melting the buildings reinforced steel support columns..it wasn’t even close to the 2,300 degrees needed to begin melting the steel..its preposterous and laughable to even consider any explanations other than controlled demolition at WTC #7..in fact,any explanation given for the collapses of WTC I,II,and VII other than controlled demolition,is a contrived fairytale that will never be believed by anyone that pulls their heads out of the sand,and realizes our government is corrupt,and simply looks at the overwhelming amount of evidence available, proving the official 9-11 commission report is a complete fraud and sham,and the perpetrators of this horrendous crime will be revealed and punished in due time
July 5th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
The quality of the journalism emanating from the Bilderberger Broadcasting Corporation is a national disgrace- rarely impartial, rarely fair. To add insult, as TV ‘consumers’ we are forced to pay about £130 per year, per household for this garbage.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
This report comes from the same people who reported the building had fallen 20 minuites before it did. Well that says it all.
July 5th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
The BBC are obviously involved in the coverup process of what really happened on 9/11. You dont have to be a genuis to work that out. Anyone involved in the coverup of any asepct of 9/11 is somewhat involved in the attacks, whether direct ir indirect. Mike Rudin is indirectly connected to the 9/11 through his ignorance and denial.
July 5th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSsgr5-CRW0
July 5th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Great questions Jon!
July 5th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
If we are going to debunk the conspiracy theory about controlled demolition taking down building 7, we should debunk it properly.
Obviously, what happened to building 7 was the result of a perfect storm of swamp gas, meteors, and the planet Venus, coupled with a temperature inversion and the radar reflectors from a weather balloon. Clearly, when you add those factors into a form of mass hysteria/mass hypnosis that was going on that day, it is easy to see that fire alone brought that building straight down. Don’t listen to those nut cases screaming about Larry Silverstein and his alleged admission on the PBS documentary about pulling the building, or the premature BBC reports.
Pete
July 5th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
“We’ve been at this for a little over two years and doing a two or two and a half year investigation is not at all unusual. That’s the same kind of time frame that takes place when we do aeroplane crash investigations, it takes a few years.”
The damn thing collapsed 6 (six)…can you say 6 years ago? This ass is so stupid to make this statement. Since when do they wait 6 or more years to investigate a plane crash…let alone the most earth shattering event in American history. If they’d spent less time to disprove the ‘theories’, and more time investigating what really happened, they would have come up with the same conclusion as the 6th (sixth) grader would. What IDIOTS!
July 5th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
And why did it collapse symmetrical at nearly free fall speed???
This new investigation is simply trying to come up with a fire based theory that they can sell to enough people to discredit the truth movement. They are not being objective and seriously considering the demolition hypothesis.
No Chance of Truth in WTC-7 Investigation
http://muckrakerreport.com/id243.html
WTC 7 Data Page
http://www.truthawaits.com/wtc7_data_page1.html
“The whole time you’re hearing boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. I think I know an explosion when I hear it.”-Former NYPD officer and first responder Craig Bartmer
July 5th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Another classic move to use entertainment and fantasy based facts instead of scientific facts!!
The building was hardly on fire and I can already guess they are going to be using words like “uncontrollable” or “intense” to spin the public opinion about fires in buildings. They of course won’t mention the astronomical probability of this specific collapse taking place.
If tower 7 was built weak enough for a few fires to take it down, it would have collapsed long ago, simply under its own weight.
July 5th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
No way. That’s it. No stinking way.
I would not have told you I questioned the official BS just 6 months ago. But when I decided to treat the issue with an objective eye and to test the claims, I was BLOWN AWAY.
And every person I have share the factual information with responds with a completely different attitude after our conversation.
Get the DVD’s, copy those that we have permission to copy and invite friends and family over to watch with you or let them borrow it. By election time, the truth will have mushroomed.
Then, between election and inagural time, be prepared. Bolton and others are predicting Iran will be attacked.
In the meantime, NORAD, FEMA, FBI, CIA, etc., are all running drills in preparation for dirty nukes going off in major cities all over America. The last time this happened, they were running drills for planes crashing into skyscrapers and buildings.
We have six months.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
They’re so desperate. I love how they melt down ALL the WTC7 steel, and then take nearly 7 years to tweak up four computer simulations. That’s evidence? We are truly living in the age of simulation and hypereality (i.e. Jean Baudrillard). Anyone can eventually manipulate a computer simulation into demonstrating a theoretical and hugely unlikely event, but so what? That’s no proof of anything! Time travel is possible according to Einstein’s theory of relativity, but I don’t expect to witness any such thing because the circumstances needed are only possible in theory and not in the physical “real” world.
Their logic seems to have been, if we can show it could be possible that fire alone is responsible (no matter how astronomically unlikely) then it must have been just that. Conveniently, there is no wtc7 steel left to examine that could derail their preordained solution.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
So they have Mark Loizeaux from controlled demolition inc. telling us that the planting of thermite in WTC 7 was impossible?
Hardly reassuring since it was his company that was mainly responsible for the destruction of the crime scene that was ground Zero by transporting all the steel away as quick as possible.
July 5th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
This is truly amazing and very heartening! The 911 Truth movement is succeeding! It has forced the Tower 7 issue back into the public mind, and forced the retelling of this feeble lie. With the war, inflation, more and more people losing their homes and jobs, all added to the utter, moronic weakness of this lie, people will see that there is no more security, no advantage at all in believing this nonsense.
“The truth will set you free…, but first it pisses you off!” (my ex-wife).
July 5th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Forget the manipulated computer simulations… why not build a 1/10th scale model and duplicate the collapse? Why not? Perhaps you already know.
July 5th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
BBC = Collateral Damage
July 5th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
The 3d map on the report shows buiding 7 directly next too building 1. Building 6 is not there! A bit misleading to try to make you think it was so close to building 1 that it could have sustained the damage… BBC they got some cheek thats for sure.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
Diesel melting steel? We heat our orchards with 100’s of steel pot burners called salimanders that are made of thin metal (Steel) using diesel as fuel and not a one has ever melted down….I hope they never make them out of high grade structural steel I beams, molten steel is hard on the trees..Hey BBC. How did your “reporter” know the building behind her was going to collapse? OH, that’s right it was still standing when she said “Building 7 has collapsed”, you are just too dumb to figure out the time zone thing… Lots of luck selling your latest load of tripe…
July 5th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
i remember the bought and paid for media news lady standing a few blocks in plane view of world trade center 7 “still standing it hadnt fallin yet but she reported that WTC7 had just collapsed but she should’ve looked behind her dumb ass first too see that it was still standing, government controlled puppet news they had too bring it down too get rid of the evidince that it WAS an inside JOB pulled off by the bush inc, and the pentagon why not show us all the video’s that the FBI took from all those motel’s close 2 the pentagon” because more of there lie’s would be brought out”COLIN POWELL SAID IN HIS OWN WORDS AFTER 9-11 THAT THIS COUNTRY HAS BEEN TAKIN OVER AND HIS CAPTORS ARE TREATING HIM WELL” if that isnt a clue then i dont know what is bush,dick,rice,rumsfield,and the rest of the bush inc need too be HUNG from a tree in public for the MURDER of 1000’s of americans on 9-11 and the million plus over in iraq.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
More dis-info. I swear these apologists for the official story are like little kids that have been caught red-handed. Isn’t there anyone connected to the Bush cabinet that can just tell the truth?
Yeah a big part of building 7 was “scooped out”, whatever that means. I’m sure that would cause complete and utter collapse into its own footprint. It was the diesel generators, yeah that’s it!
Come on, the other buildings such as 2-5 got their ASS kicked and they didn’t symmetrically collapse. Can you say improbable?
July 5th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Check the feedback question:
Will this news allay conspiracy theories surrounding the third tower? You can send us reaction using the form below:
Hahahahahahahaha
July 6th, 2008 at 12:24 am
Fire alone won’t make any COMPLETE building like WTC7 fall symmetrically (horizontally) down, at free fall speed, period, end of story.
Bush and his dual citizen whitehouse handlers – Go to jail.
July 6th, 2008 at 12:58 am
People who propogate the lies and spread disinformation are accessories to murder. Fire can’t destroy buildings but TRUTH will destroy the Ivory Towers along with all of the accomplices of 911.
The cracks are showing.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:04 am
After re-reading the BBC tripe it’s obvious from this one statement that the whole investigation by NIST will be a sham:
“Now new photos of the south side of the building”
NOW NEW PHOTOS?
Say what? They NOW HAVE NEW PHOTOS? NEW PHOTOS? NOW?
Excuse me while I roll on the floor laughing.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:14 am
It is impossible to PROVE a lie which is why all the so called oficial reports never add and they are always easy to disprove.
Bush, Blair, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld and co are the biggest tyrants in the world today and I pray for the day that they are all held accountable for their actions.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:41 am
A Freedom of Disinformation requests:
I am hereby making a formal freedom of information request to demand the documentation between the BBC and its sources that led to it reporting the fall of World Trade Centre 7, more than 20mins before it actually fell. This is in the public interest, given that the official story is that the building fell as a result of fire, and given the foreign policy implications regarding the illegal war in Iraq. I include a link below to confirm the news segment I refer to. Note that, World Trade Centre Building 7 is seen clearly standing behind the reporter.
Please see the following link for the clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkFpmZxyWEI
Response, copied from pdf:
Mr ?!?!
Via email: ?!?!@?!?!.com
23 June 2008
Dear Mr ?!?!
Freedom of Information request – RFI20080672
Thank you for your email of 21 June requesting:
documentation between the BBC and its sources that led to it reporting the fall of World Trade
Centre 7, more than 20mins before it actually fell.
The reference number for your request is RFI20080672.
The information you requested is not covered by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the
Act”).
Your request falls outside the scope of the Act because the BBC and the other public service
broadcasters are covered by the Act only in respect of information held for purposes “other than
those of journalism, art or literature” (see Schedule I, Part VI of the Act). We are not therefore
obliged to supply information held for the purposes of creating the BBC’s output or information
that supports and is closely associated with these creative activities. Information which is not
subject to disclosure under the Act because of Schedule I might otherwise be exempt from
disclosure because of the application of other provisions of the Act.
We have received several similar requests relating to this and the notion that the BBC has been
part of any conspiracy is patently ludicrous. We reported the situation as accurately as we could,
based on the best information available. We cannot be categorical about the exact timing of
events that day – this is the first time it has been brought to our attention and it was more than six
years ago. If in the chaos and confusion of that day our correspondent reported that the building
had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been a genuine error. We have published an
editor’s blog, written by Richard Porter (Head of News, BBC World) which is available at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/the.....rd_porter/
For more information about how the Act applies to the BBC please see http://www.bbc.co.uk/foi.
Please note that this guidance is not intended to be a comprehensive legal interpretation of how
the Act applies to the BBC.
The BBC makes a huge range of information available about our programmes and content on
bbc.co.uk. We also proactively publish information covered by the Act on our publication scheme
and regularly handle requests for information under the Act.
The BBC does not offer an internal review when the information requested is not covered by the
Act. If you disagree with our decision you can appeal to the Information Commissioner. Contact
details are: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire,
SK9 5AF telephone 01625 545 700. http://www.ico.gov.uk
Yours sincerely,
Fern Kersey
Adviser, Information Policy & Compliance
July 6th, 2008 at 2:02 am
How does Larry Silverstein fit in the “new” picture now? What were they “pulling” – someone’s leg? Or were they pulling down someone’s pants – “the modest thing to do” you know – after which that someone had to bend over…
July 6th, 2008 at 3:38 am
Well at least I’ll have 20 more minutes to live when the BBC predicts my death. Wow hey they could have saved alot of lives if they would have reported the first impact!!! Who needs NORAD we have the BBC.
July 6th, 2008 at 3:53 am
Mark Loiseaux: Isn’t that the same guy on behalf of Controlled Demolition Inc. who sent the WTC-steel to China in order to melt it as quickly as possible ?
Unfortunately I do not find the quote anymore on internet, but in a documentary-video he once spoke about the art of destruction or demolishing buildings. Maybe you are able to find it ?
As a result, at least I am convinced that Mark Loiseaux is a critically hyperpotential mass-murder-psychopath who in fact always dreamt of working in Hollywood or for the Secret Services within the special-effects-division instead of having to safely and thus boringly destruct again and again old buildings…
And the best of it: The BBC presents that potential mass-killer as an honorable and sincerely sophisticated expert who blames the 9-11-Truth-movement (of indeed his potential weakness) to be too much affected by Hollywood-screenplays… Psychopaths always tend to blame their own weaknesses on the enemies which they created themselves…
P.S.: Shame on BBC etc. for continuously defending the NIST-exceptional-fire-mirically-melted-steel-explanation…
P.P.S: And what about an official explanation from the BBC about who told them 26 Min. in advance of WTC7 ?!?
July 6th, 2008 at 6:16 am
It’s obvious for anyone who critically thinks about the official?? story from any leading governmental investigation about the hows and whys of 9/11.
The obvious is looking from the very start of questionings they immediately all had {Prof positive answers}and explanations before any actual investigation ever took place. with in hours of the collapses of all trade centers they were telling what happened.
It takes month even years most of the time to analyze most jet liners crashes.
So ask your self why would you try so hard and so fast to convince everyone that 9/11 is as they see it. with no real data.
simply they were worried some on might form a tried scientific explanation, One that has physical data that is analyzed and proves with repeated testing to obey the laws of physics and gravity.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:07 am
Sometimes I think if this continues the perpetrators will just admit they did it and say, “OK, we did it. Now what are you going to do about it?”
Isn’t about to that point already?
July 6th, 2008 at 7:07 am
Isn’t it…
July 6th, 2008 at 7:18 am
Regardless of what the truth is about the method by which the towers fell, one undeniable truth remains: We have let this NWO give our government the power to take drastic steps to take away our liberties, destroy our economy, and turn our country into the most hated nation in the world. We are seen as warmongers. That is the real truth. Beating around the bush about the details of a towers collapse to me is a useless endeavor. Look at the Patriot Act, look at the Military Commissions Act, look at all of the many systems being put into place to enslave us. That is what we need to focus on.
We are trying to make 9/11 into a smoking gun. The real smoking gun is all the above mentioned systems being put into place that should be held side-by-side and then compared to the rule of law, the Consitution. The difference is stark and immensely contrast to the set of rules put forth by the Founders.
I am pleading with those who are constantly living day by day spending their time and money trying to expose the truth about 9/11 to use their talents and time to combat the NWO in other areas. There is so much to be done and so little time. No one will listen to you who can do anything about exposing 9/11.
We need to engage in dis-info to trick the public into seeing the truth. The NWO is doing this to enslave us and it is working. We need to infiltrate their ranks as they have infiltrated our government’s. We need to elect congressmen (and women) who can move our adgenda along to take back our hijacked government. Our army of elected officials must work under a guise that is appealing to the NWO, then systematically take out their powerbase one system at a time. The revolution is now at a stage where only actions will speak louder than words, where only cunning and trickery will take out the infidels, and only revolt and retailiation will save us from a future of tyranny and enslavement.
I applaud Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich for their efforts. They are the light that showed us the way, but they are two lone officials up against almost 500 governmental legislators who are NWO power brokers. We need to elect more of them who are willing to lie and cheat their way into exposing the NWO.
Freedom is not ours to be given away, but ours to be taken back. We must take back our freedom.
Fight Fire With Fire!
July 6th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Is the BBC also going to provide an explanation as to why the evidence was allowed to be disposed of. How convenient that there is none of the building left to test for explosives residue. How can anyone believe the BBC or the U.S. politicians? The BBC is loathe to acknowledge the fact that the Truth Movement has raised completely legitimate questions regarding the collapse of building 7. Also it has been almost seven years since 9/11 and NIST has only been working for the last 2 years for an answer to why building 7 fell at all. Why have all of the government sponsored investigations taken so long to begin regarding 9/11? Why is it that most Americans are unaware of the health problems of 9/11 rescue workers? Why is most, if not all, of the information provided by the White House heavily skewed and/or completely false?
July 6th, 2008 at 7:40 am
The BBC does NOT use computer simulations… it uses computer ANIMATIONS, and there is all the difference in the world in this fact. Computer animations can be used to show anything a person can imagine(hence their popularity in Hollywood movies).
However, the BBC, as with all broadcasters linked to Israel, or their friends, carefully lays down the meme for the sheep that if a computer animation shows something in a supposed serious program, that animation actually represents some kind of truth.
This is a technique not of logic, but of religion. A faith mechanism programmed into large sections of the public. The masses have never thought with logic when it comes down to bigger issues, but have always been brainwashed with articles of faith.
A BBC so-called documentary with CGI is the modern equivalent of a preacher at a pulpit ranting on about concepts designed to benefit the rulers of the state. People mock scientology, but what its founder, pulp sci-fi author Hubbard realised was that effective religion must reflect the times.
On this Sunday, the BBC will preach to its flock. While to those of us with the ability to think, the BBC ranting will hold as much water as screaming tales of brimstone and hell, large sections of the flock will be effectively re-inforced. The BBC requires the 911 truth be perceived as heresy in the true meaning of the word, and that those that reveal the truth be put at the same risk as that born by the heretics of the past. Be in no doubt. The BBC actively works to create a world in which the heretics will be exterminated.
It is common in the UK for even the most severe critics of the state to defend the BBC. The BBC is genius in this regard, ensuring a constant output of ‘cuddly’ programming (especially on the radio- a concept probably not comprehended in the US). The BBC actively works to ensure otherwise rational people have a list of BBC output that acts like a much loved uncle or grandfather in their life. A psychological dependency that creates a knee-jerk defense of the BBC, whenever the informed attempt to explain the actually reason the BBC was created.
A better way to understand the BBC is as the most skilled child rapist, an abuser loaded with the latest toys, and a convincing line of charm, to sweet-talk the abuser into any school or home.
WTC7 isn’t the real smoking gun. No, for that we have the extreme underground temperatures underground at the WTC site for months afterwards. The BBC at the time reported this fact daily, to keep the propaganda of 911 public for as long as possible. Only later did it become apparent that this fact alone denies the official lies about 911, and the memory-hole was bought into play.
Anyway, the sheep will carry on learning at the teat of organisations like the BBC, until old-school broadcasters go the way of the dinosaur. By then, of course, the indoctrination will have to be fully placed within the education process at school. When this day comes, the penalty for any child that proves to be impervious to state propaganda will be death (for the good of the community, of course).
If you think things are horrible now, you really cannot conceive of the living hell that Cheney and Blair, and their neo-con and fabian teams are working to build for our future. Humans breed and control every aspect of the lives of those species forced to serve us. Cheney and Blair and co intend to apply the same principle to the Human race, by splitting us into ‘master’ and ’slave’ sub-species, with the slave part processed just like real cattle.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:51 am
If one of the towers collapsed do to fire and plane damage I just may believe it. But 2? Anything is possible yes, yet I tend to lean towards NO when it comes to ,that.
Then comes Tower 7. The fires in tower 7 would have gutted the building perhaps parts of tower 7 could have collapsed, but the entire building collapsing at the speed it did? we can’t afford to buy that. No amount of stupidity can pay for that lie.
If the NWO wants to send me a 100 kilos of pure 24k gold bars then yes, 9/11 was carried out by Osama Bin Laden and the terrorists. Course I’d probably hire some really tough dudes and then tell everyone the NWO paid me off.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:14 am
Lets see the photos of the damaged side of the building. Surely they are going to show what the firefighters were talking about when they mention severe damage, warping and bowing. WTC 7 certainly fell so cleanly that it really appears from a distance to be controlled demolition. However if it was controlled demolition the sound of the charges going off would be so damn obviouse that we would all know about it thats for sure. Check out demo vids on Youtube. It’s totally different.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Where are these “So-Called” South-Side Photos that show such dramatic and immense damage? Probably the same ones that Popular Mechanics had access to but nobody else was allowed to see due to National Security? Give me a break. The NIST also needs to be held accountable to report on their findings on the possibility of Demolition even though that has already been solidified as a FACT with the discovery of molten lava, thermite and thermate in the structural steel, so in all actuality it’s irrevelant what they say to the contrary.
If they expect somebody to believe them based solely on their word these people are nuts. However, if they have the photos and are willing to show them I’d be more than happy to examine them and compare them to other photos of the south side. I’d encourage anybody who has photos or knows of any photos of the South Side to post them, this way comparisons can be made with these NEW South Side Photos that haven’t even surfaced yet. (unbelievably after 7 years) I would imagine if the photographs are doctored or photoshopped they could easily be compared to other photos or stills. There is almost no doubt that their final report will be just as shakey as all previous attempts to explain the Mystery of Building #7.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:36 am
“The collapse of the first of the Twin Towers does not seem to have caused any serious damage to Tower Seven, but the second collapse of the 1,368ft (417m) North Tower threw debris at Tower Seven, just 350ft (106m) away.”
Could you imagine a comical scene where a collapsing tower is aiming all its debris in only one direction (WTC7) and no others?
HILARIOUS!
July 6th, 2008 at 11:23 am
I don’t need evidence. Every time i see that building go zip straight down like that i know for sure that a few small fires wouldn’t make it do that. There’s no way fire would do that. Firemen heard bombs going off and there’s a piece of film footage that shows firemen and suddenly you can hear two huge explosions go off in rapid succession, you can hear them and they’re so loud that they’d have to be some sort of charge or explosives. I don’t know who did it or why but when a building goes straight down like that, it’s because someone wanted it to. I had to be a demolition, there’s no other explanation for it. I’ve seen loads of demolitions before, that was a demolition, just look at it for god’s sake.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Mike Rudin and his BBC chums don’t know how much trouble they are in. There must be tens of millions of people out here that know that something isn’t right, if not hundreds!That’s why the ruling class are trying to get their Police State in place before all of us wake up. They know they don’t have much time to do it. Keep spreading info and doing whatever you can to wake people up.
July 6th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
The BBC is a terrorist organization because the promote the coverup of the real terrorists.
July 6th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
1 MILLION iRAQUI DEAD:-
750,000 AFGHANI DEAD:-
SOON ?…..MILLIONS OF iRANI DEAD:-?
THEN THE WIDOWS AND THE MOTHERS WILL WANT REVENGE….Mike Rudin and his BBC chums don’t know how much trouble they are in…A SMALL TRIP TO ANYWHERE AND THEY WILL BE HACKED TO DEATH IN A SUNLIT STREET FOR AIDING AND ABETTING THE BUSH/BLAIR CRIMINALS!
BETTER STAY AT HOME FROM NOW ON MIKE!…KISS THAT TRIP TO MARBELLA GOODBYE YOU SAD AND LONELY LITTLE ARSE-LICKER!
July 6th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
I think the BBC did a really good job. I hope now we can put all this rubbish about 911 Conspiracy theories to rest. Lets now concentrate on the Conspiracy of 911 not the theories, I do think people at the BBC have just done a very good job convincing the UK public that there is something really wrong with what them at the BBC are telling us. In the UK we call this “you’ve just shot your self in the foot MATE!” And this is what they have just done. This program will convince people as much as the chocolate fireguard really does work! I really do think people whom did not believe the Conspiracy “theories” may have reached the turning point that the theories may not actually not be that much of a theory anymore! This program can only serve to be a good thing and the “theory” way out weighs the so called official version of events, and that will get people thinking. People inherently don’t think they just “DO” but being curious is a very strong emotion as long as its looked at within a very short time after that “something” to be looked at. So lets not sit here and slag the BBC off all night (although you can if you want) Because the fact of the matter is that the weight was definitely in our favor!
July 6th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Gesh…wow took almost 7 years to fabricate. Imagine if the protests didnt rise…
Come on..I have seen pictures of all sides…EXPLAIN HOW THE PENTHOUSE MOVED DOWNWARD FIRST.. THE CENTER KRIMPS!! There was plenty of water being pumped in.
I encourage all the sheeple buyin this rubbish to do their own research on their own with no one elses opinion.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Oh…and lets take their quote
“The collapse of the first of the Twin Towers does not seem to have caused any serious damage to Tower Seven, but the second collapse of the 1,368ft (417m) North Tower threw debris at Tower Seven, just 350ft (106m) away.”
AND EXACTLY HOW DID MASSIVE AMOUNT OF DEBRIS ACCELERATE ENOUGH TO MOVE 106 METER!!! Thats almost 25% of the high of the building..come on guys, check your math so it fits the lies…
July 7th, 2008 at 4:30 am
Yet another pathetic attempt by the BBC to cover their guilty butts.
Most people have already seen the BBC News 24 coverage (Live at the scene) with a news reporter reporting that WTC7 has collasped 26 minutes before it did. Not only that but the still standing WTC7 building was clearly visible out of the window AS SHE SPOKE!
So somebody got the deception out of sync.
It reminds me of the Jewish joke. “Hey Abe, I heard you had a warehouse fire!”Ssshh! It’s not till next week!”
What I see is probably the biggest act of insurance fraud in History. All of these buildings were sheduled for demolition by 2007 although controlled demolition had been forbidden due to the large amount of aspestos and other toxic materials in these early seventies steel framed buildings.
Because of this the cost of manaul demolition and disposal of toxic materials would be at least a Billion Dollars. The free hold for these buildings was purchased just five weeks before the events for 150 million Dollars and they were then insured specifically against a terorist attack.
The insurance pay out to the free holder came in at 3.7 billion Dollars. Not a bad return.
The problem the BBC have with WTC7 is their “early reporting” of the WTC7 collaspe. As no steel framed building had ever collasped due to fire, then no one should have expected it to collaspe for this reason.
They were caught out by this as it is now clear that they were orchestrating the news. They have even buried the archive and it’s been pulled several times from youtube and Google for “Unexplained reasons”.
Forget the other towers and the Pentagon. The BBC have literally proved that it was an inside job and that they were involved in covering it up
The reason it’s being denied now is because they are getting increasingly worried about be pulled up for it as the truth movement can no longer be buried by the mainstream media.
Speak to mainstream journos. Newpaper circulation is dropping like a stone. People are clearly not finding anything worth reading there. We are getting to the point where a signiificant percentage of people no longer trust MSM as an impartial and accurate source of information.
The Elephant in the room question for the BBC is, “As you admit that no steel frame building has ever collasped due to fire, how could anyone predict or forsee the collaspe before it happened?”
The anwser is that they couldn’t have done. Unfortunately for the BBC their time-line error was recorded and broadcast live complete with time and date ticker, reporter breaking the news and incredibly, the WTC7 building still standing in the same frame!
The only way anyone could have known it was going to collaspe would be the people responsible for the collaspe and I’m afraid that rules out Osama with his donkey parked outside his cave in Torra borra.
July 7th, 2008 at 5:31 am
Does anyone else find it strange this story come out on the aneversary of the London bombings, 7/7/2005?
Also, why didn’t they fight the fires? There was only 1 fire at that point really! 1 and 2 had come down, 6 was destroyed from falling towers? Why not try and save 7?
The way it falls is just amazing if that is fires, fire in all four corners and collasping at the same time in order to fall directly into it’s footprint!
All high rise buildings should now see there insurance go through the room as a fire could cause the whole building to collasp!
Bare in mind that build 7 was built very different to towers 1 and 2.
July 7th, 2008 at 6:20 am
They really expect us to believe that every load bearing beam in the entire building failed simultaneously. I’m talking down to the thousandth of a second, to fall symmetrically into its own footprint, at freefall speed. Fires do NOT burn symmetrically. We haven’t ingested THAT much fluoride YET! 911 Truth is Rising! They are getting desperate, we had better look out.
July 7th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Short article. This man was Deputy Director, Emergency Services Department, NYC Housing Authority and went in the Office of Emergency Management inside WTC building 7. There is video too but I can’t hear it as I have no speakers:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ar.....bodies.htm
‘”Upon arriving into the OEM EOC, we noticed that everybody was gone,” said Jennings. “I saw coffee that was on the desk, the smoke was still coming off the coffee, I saw half-eaten sandwiches,” he stated, adding that he and Hess were told to leave the building right away.’
‘The firefighters kept saying to Jennings “do not look down” because, according to Jennings, “we were stepping over people and you can tell when you’re stepping over people.”‘
‘”I’m an old boiler guy, if it was a fuel oil tank it would have been one side of the building,” he stated.’
What he heard were explosions and he got caught in one of them while leaving.
He saw “dead bodies inside the building.”
My guess is that they had to take the building down to cover up whomever they murdered, and maybe they murdered everyone so there would be no witnesses.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
You don’t even have to argue against the BBC’s theory on WTC7 – it’s so ludicrous that all you have to do is to encapsulate it and repeat it
See the comments #255 and #261 on Mike Rubins blog page at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/the.....s_iii.html
February 12th, 2009 at 3:35 am
i’m not sure i’d rely on the bbc to get the day and date right to be frank.
“ministry of truth”