 |
 |
No BBC, WTC 7 Did Not Collapse “Due To Fire” & The Final 9/11 Mystery Is Not Solved
9/11 Blogger
Sunday, July 6, 2008
“The building collapsed due to fire”
I’m still waiting to see a shred of evidence to support this theory. Just “saying” that the building collapsed due to fire is not evidence or proof that it collapsed due to fire. You can bet that NIST won’t bother to explain this away:
When the hit piece comes out, this is a critical piece of evidence that NIST (I am assuming) will ignore in their report:
“Although virtually all of the structural steel from the Twin Towers and Building 7 was removed and destroyed, preventing forensic analysis, FEMA’s volunteer investigators did manage to perform “limited metallurgical examination” of some of the steel before it was recycled. Their observations, including numerous micrographs, are recorded in Appendix C of the WTC Building Performance Study. Prior to the release of FEMA’s report, a fire protection engineer and two science professors published a brief report in JOM disclosing some of this evidence. 1
The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused “intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.” The New York Times described this as “perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.” 2 WPI provides a graphic summary of the phenomenon. A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges–which are curled like a paper scroll–have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes–some larger than a silver dollar–let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending–but not holes.
FEMA’s investigators inferred that a “liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur” formed during a “hot corrosion attack on the steel.” The eutectic mixture (having the elements in such proportion as to have the lowest possible melting point) penetrated the steel down grain boundaries, making it “susceptible to erosion.” …The “deep mystery” of the melted steel may be yielding its secrets to investigators not beholden to the federal government. Professor Steven Jones has pointed out that the severe corrosion, intergranular melting, and abundance of sulfur are consistent with the theory of thermite arson. ”
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/index.html
(Article continues below)
——————————-
Previously on the page of that BBC article they had a response form with the introductory text “Will this news allay conspiracy theories surrounding the third tower? You can send us reaction using the form below.”
Below is my response using said form:
##########
Once again the BBC is doing its job: acting in the role of intellectual bodyguards for the mass-murderers in government who stage terrorism in order to obtain more power and control.
First, everyone with an I.Q. high enough to tie their shoes is a conspiracy theorist. The mendacious and disproven official government theory regarding the 9/11 attacks is that of a conspiracy involving 19 hijackers. The editors at the BBC–presumably being experienced in the use of language–already know this of course, which demonstrates that the BBC is acting dishonestly and as a mouthpiece for government criminals’ propagandistic tactics by using such hypocritical labels which are intended to posion the well and thereby shut down honest inquiry.
The fact that the three World Trade Center towers were brought down with, e.g., thermite, has been apodictically proven based upon the known laws of physics.
From the color of the yellow-hot molten metal seen in a number of videos cascading off the South Tower, it had to be at least over 1000 °C (as the temperature of an incandescent object is exhibited by its color), yet jet fuel burns in open air at 260-315 °C; nor do burning office, building, or plane materials impart temperatures anywhere near that hot to structural members (indeed, it would present quite a hazard if such articles were constructed with such powerful incendiaries, and so designers of such objects go out of their way to make sure that they are not). Thus, if it wasn’t molten iron from thermite that we are seeing come off the South Tower, then by necessity a reaction source with a heat intensity very much like thermite had to be present. Yet there is nothing in the U.S. government’s account that can explain such a heat source; indeed, there’s nothing innocent that could explain it, since it requires some sort of extremely powerful incendiary.
For more on that, see the following three items: “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?,” Dr. Steven E. Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 3 (September 2006); “Experiments to test NIST ‘orange glow’ hypothesis,” Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., August 31, 2006; and “A description of molten aluminum poured onto rusty steel,” Wes Lifferth, Physics Shop, Brigham Young University, Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 9 (March 2007)
Moreover, large quantities of reacted and unreacted thermite have been found in the ruins of the World Trade Center, in different samples collected both before and after clean-up operations began. So we know as a matter of empirical scientific fact that large quantities of thermite were used in order to destroy the World Trade Center.
In the following paper it is conclusively proved via chemical analysis using wavelength dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (WDS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (X-EDS) that large quantities of thermite analogs (such as thermate) were used in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers: “Revisiting 9/11/2001–Applying the Scientific Method,” Dr. Steven E. Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 11 (May 2007).
See also the following video-recorded presentation on physical remains of thermite (in the form of unreacted flakes of thermite) from the demolished World Trade Center, collected even before clean-up operations began: “Dr. Steven E. Jones Boston 911 Conference 12-15-07 Red chips Thermite.mov,” Google Video, December 21, 2007.
So it is simply an irrefragable scientific fact that the U.S. government staged the 9/11 attacks from beginning to end.
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
75 Responses to “No BBC, WTC 7 Did Not Collapse “Due To Fire” & The Final 9/11 Mystery Is Not Solved”
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||||||
| By N2H | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
July 6th, 2008 at 7:21 am
bravo, bravo. once again the bombastic broadcasting corporation (bbc)will demonstrate their true affiliation to the nwo. shame shame shame. i will never again watch anything they produce…they simply can’t be trusted to say anything credible again.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:35 am
The BBC will react if we all phone up and complain.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:51 am
Well, looks like pieces of Israeli filth over at the BBC have done thier Job Covering up for ole Larry Silverstein. 911 was an Israeli Job. End of story. The British and Israelis are responsible for creating this war, the propaganda that has permeated our society and now the Rothschilds court John McCain so that they might control him as well. It has been this way since the revolution. Israel and the Rothschilds have been using the British Government and the United states since the Balfour Declaration was signed in 1917(long befor the Nazis). Hitler who’s mother was Jewish, helped create the Jewish crisis to get Jews to flee Europe for Palistine for the creation of the Jewish state. Why else would regular Jews flee thier comfortable homes to live in the middle east? This is just another chapter in the creation of the Jewish empire and American boy are cannon fodder once again. Fuck you BBC!
July 6th, 2008 at 7:58 am
Fire melts steel at 2700 degrees farenheit- undisputed scientific fact. Free fall speed in less than 6 hours? Angle cut beams consistent with demolitions? Visible squibs? BBC announces “collapse” whoops 20 minutes early? NEVER HIT BY A PLANE? Housed several intelligence agencies? First steel frame building in history to “collapse” due to fire, some having burned for days, frames still intact after gutted by flames?
Only a certified retard or a spinner can’t see the smoking gun of 911 by now. CORPORATE MEDIA ARE PAID TO LIE.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:07 am
9/11 Blogger has produced a well-written and well-reasoned fact-based piece. Mike Rudin and his BBC overlords and underlings and other fellow-travellers in the 9/11 was an al-Qaeda job propaganda war must be feeling the trickle of cold sweat about now.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Remarkable really, it just goes to show the level of contempt they hold for the general public! Not very surprising, as this organisation has been nothing but a propaganda machine for the system since its inception.
The majority of the Global populace have been raised to believe the TOTAL and UTTER integrity of their reporting. Therefore what a sad but nevertheless inevitable moment at which we now arrive. From now on when anyone mentions the three letter logo. BBC
The name that will come to mind is:
BLATENT BULLSHIT CORPORATION
July 6th, 2008 at 8:36 am
The sad part is jordan maxwell is correct when he said it isn’t about basketball so people won’t care. Those who are interested in this have already discovered the truth. Those who watch the BBC version will eat it up with a gravy spoon.When your true enemy is pride,and pride breeds stupidity through selfish interest’s such as watching sports over guarding against treason because it’s funner for the self it becomes a tough fight.Those who planned and carried out the events of 911 are defended by the pride of selfishness that has bred the stupidity which has enveloped our country.Alex Jones stood in the heat to expose bilderberg with a couple dozen people. 200,000 people will watch cars make a 400 mile left hand turn and why? Race car, you can spell it backwards and it still spells race car!
July 6th, 2008 at 8:42 am
Stop paying the BBC the license fee. Either dont watch their channels and land in court if you dont pay the BBC for the TV license. Or take your TV and throw it in the nearest trash. Set your mind free, because for them to even attempt a cover up as big as 911 shows how bad things have got, and that despite an orgy of evidence pointing to them our news outlets suck at the tits of their government masters. BBC has blown this big time. No credibility left. Its spent. Its the bye bye corporation.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:46 am
47-story building 7 fell 1/2 a second slower than free-fall speed. That means had you stood on the roof and thrown a rock off the edge, it would have landed 1/2 second before the roof.
How then did 47 stories of steel columns designed to hold three times its weight plus 4-inch reinforced cement floors offer only 1/2 second of resistance?
Building 7 did not collapse one floor at a time, rather each floor fell at once.
Unlike the output of an automobile crushing machine, the debris of building 7 was not flattened floors. It was 4 stories of pulverized and burned ash. See http://www.ae911truth.net/imag.....debris.jpg
Falling objects take the path of least resistance. If any side or corner of the building resisted the collapse would have tilted, but in building 7’s collapse we see a perfect symmetrical collapse.
Controlled Demolition, Inc., who holds the world’s record for collapsing the NY Hudson building, says it would have taken too many explosives to wire and demolition building 7; therefore the building collapse obviously occurred without explosives. That’s analogous to saying that slave labor could not have constructed the massive Egyptian pyramid stones; therefore, they just formed by themselves.
If the government honestly believed that fire can collapse steel buildings then there would have been a huge revamping of building codes, and most of the buildings in America would be declared unsafe.
I’ll believe building 7 wasn’t a controlled demolition when my barbecue melts from normal use.
I’ll believe building 7 wasn’t a controlled demolition when I can drive a truck up to the side of a building and from a standing still position drive through it.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:46 am
I believe the BBC is presenting this so as to appear the be an independent investigation to OUR main stream public, the sheeple.
I once admired the BBC, course that was many, many years ago.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Great summary of the absurdity behind the BBC hit piece, Gabriel King!
The BBC’s hit piece is based on NIST. My two cents here – NIST is not a valid source **taken alone** as an authority. Its governing board is appointed by Bush, and it is embedded in another federal agency, the Department of Commerce. NIST works for the Bush Administration. This is a massive conflict of interest.
The essence of the NIST argument is conceptually absurd – that minor hydrocarbon fires could bring down such a massively steel-reinforced structure. Other WTC buildings suffered far greater damage from the collapse of the Towers, and those buildings didn’t collapse at all, let alone fall elegantly and symmetrically at free-fall speed as did WTC 7. NIST is asking for special pleading in the case of WTC 7.
The NIST computer models are the very opposite of experiment-based, empirical science. The collapse of WTC 7 was of course known and the model’s parameters were constantly adjusted to arrive at the desired result back “backing into” the formula parameters. What kind of science is that?
July 6th, 2008 at 8:52 am
America had to wait almost seven years for this line of bullshit?
Face it, shown only the first day (9/11) and very limited at that. Most people don’t know about building #7.
This coupled with dragging it out almost seven years trying to shove it down the memory hole will not work this time.
The abundant facts, and justifiable unanswered questions only fuels the quest for the truth.
This time Americans will not offer plea bargains.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Years ago I saw a TV show that had a story of the family that had developed and perfected the demolition method of causing a building to fall on its own footprint. Prior to that you will recall the wrecking ball and that building demolition was a tedious and time consuming undertaking. It took the family 30 years to develop this method of carefully placed and timed explosive charges that would cause a building to fall on itself perfectly, every time. This was before computers. With this in mind, how could a fire cause WTC or the Twin Towers to collapse into its own footprint? The X Files movie shows a WTC-like building that was pulled in a black op to conceal evidence. The Web buzz is that the WTC housed the FBI, which was investigating thousands of cases of insider trading. Was it pulled to destroy this and other evidence?
July 6th, 2008 at 8:58 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt2-E0VyLL0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2ZbC6oWy2I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSsgr5-CRW0
July 6th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Q. Is the BEEB credible?
A. Lets say I report to you about a random event (that has never before happened) has just happened right behind me. Like my friend just started levitating. But you can see my friend, and he’s just standing there on the ground.
Am I credible? No, you’d have to say I’m confused, or I’m joking, or I’m a liar.
Now, lets say 30 minutes later my friend starts levitating! Right out of the blue. Just like I said 30 minutes earlier. Never happened before, but there it is documented on film.
That’s not confusion, or “fog of war”. If I had reported “my friend scratched his nose”, you could argue confusion, because it is a common occurance, but I reported, “my friend levitated”, an entirely singular event that has never occured before.
I am either, a prophet of biblical proportion, (capable of predicting events whose odds of occurance are infinitely low), confused (a dupe who has been fooled into reporting a mis-timed illusion), or a lying conspirator (a participant in the mis-timed illusion).
Now, what if I claim to lose my footage of the occurance, and then re-find it because someone says, “no there it is in your pocket”?
And what if I make documentaries claiming the truth is “my friend just did it, just levitated, but exactly how, we’ll never know”?
And what if, even though witnesses have now come forward saying, “Hey man, we saw wires attached to your friend”, and others who say, “Not only did we see the wires, but we have forensic evidence proving wires were used, and testimony from your friend’s boss saying, ‘…there’s been such terrible loss, so we decided to just pull him with wires’…”, I just ignore them or call them crazy?
Who do I sound like? A prophet? A dupe? A liar?
Is the BEEB credible?
Should the BEEB be investigated?
Should charges of conspiracy be made against key individuals at the BEEB?
July 6th, 2008 at 9:35 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 Ron’s and Dennis’ 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 9:38 am
Dave… nice one!
July 6th, 2008 at 9:46 am
America and Britain are run by racist Zionists.
Israeli Zionism = German Nazism = American KKK
All 3 are race based political ideologies that seek the creation of a pure race state. These racist will do anything to accomplish their racist goals.
In America we faught against a racist 2 state solution the KKK wanted, now we fund and arm a racist 2 state solution for the immoral and unethical Zionist racists in Israel.
Israel is a crime agaisnt humanity.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Quoting from the X Files is not going to help anybody’s credibility.
Why do all you truthers go on and on about the “footprint” thing? If it was a controlled demolition don’t you think the evildoers would have made it look like an uncontrolled demolition so that clever soon-to-be truthers wouldn’t catch on, wouldn’t you?
Destroying an entire building to get rid of files is amazingly crazy…
“…Web buzz” is confusing visits to truther sites with research and is less than worthless because you’re only going where you know you’ll find what you want to find; and using the web for research is a dubious concept even if you’re looking for both positive and negative “proof”. Also there were spook agencies in Building 7 but not the FBI, they live in Federal Plaza a few blocks north.
And since when has “pull” been used to describe destroying a building? Maybe it’s commonplace in the demolition industry but I really suspect that using the term is another feeble attempt to change reality to confirm to your theory and is really intellectually dishonest.
And we
Judge Mental, thank you, I’m behind you 100% on that (although NWO has baggage that I’m now comfortable with…) but yes, we need to look at what’s right in front of our eyes and stop with the theories, it demeans and poisons everything and only serves to hide the truth.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:19 am
I submitted a comment on the BeeB news article also, never saw it and since last night they have removed the feedback form.
The BBC is of course government owned, so the will respond to the interests of its government and the business interests that support it.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:36 am
Judge Mental: The 911 Truth movement has forced the Tower 7 issue back into the public consciousness, thus forcing the NWO to restate their feeble lies regarding its collapse. With inflation, housing, jobs, and the state of the war the way it is, it is my opinion that more and more people will see no security or advantage to keeping their head in the sand about what truly happened on 911. With a certain critical mass of believers, Bush, Cheney, et al can easily be impeached, their coercive, destructive, unconstitutional ways can be openly revealed, and the NWO will implode upon itself without a bloodbath on the streets between the NWO and those against it.
The 911 Truth movement is not a waste of time. However, your argument for fighting on other fronts as well, is well founded.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:40 am
i’m going to be recording this myself and breaking down each of their deceptions then shoving it down their throats. I’ll send a copy to the bbc. and probably post another on the internet.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Judge Mental, I second the need to not focus on 9/11 but the policies that came from it. I see the monetary system as the real smoking gun and 9/11 as a huge distraction from being effective in the world.
Fazookus, What is right in front of our eyes? I think it is what Ron Paul is saying in his new article on the coming economic collapse. 9/11 truth needs to move on to economic truth. Focusing on 9/11 does not bring sobriety in understanding. Understanding the power structures and how the monetary system is the main system that keeps power elite in imbalanced power. So lets say someone studies 9/11 and comes to the conclusion that Government did it, does this lead to a bigger understanding of our world? Maybe just that our Gov is corrupt, and possibly opens the door to see much deeper corruption. People are more interested in money and not some moment that happen in the past that is a quagmire. I know we all want the truth to come out. The focus should be the central banks. Lets say the truth does come out on 9/11. This would lead to more unanswered questions because it would stop at “Our Gov is corrupt”. Study monetary history and 9/11 is just an one event of many such events coming from the power elite.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:05 am
The Mail on Sunday in the UK gave a platform to some piece of vermin who writes for them, dismissing the WTC7 collapse as usual conspiracy nonsense. I was so angry I wanted to get hold of this tool for fascists and smash their head in. How supposedly intelligent so called “journalists” can see the video of the collapse, and accept the official theory is beyond me. They are either in on the deception, in which case they are fascist filth, or they are below average intelligence and have no right using a national platform such as writing for a newspaper to comment on things they clearly know nothing about.
One day we in the truth movement are going to hold all of these people, those who committed this crime and those who continue to cover it up, to account. We owe it to the 3000 murdered on that day and all those who have been murdered since.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Fazookus… Thats the point . They can’t make it not look like a controlled demolition. What the f..k is wrong with you? What kind of idiot are you? Never mind you answered that with that lame ass comment.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:11 am
All the major media network executives will be held accountable for the lies they spread and the truths they buried. The NWO will not succeed. By their very nature they are doomed to fail. Unfortunately, the cost of their failure is going to be rather expensive. The people in the U.S. are going to pay a heavy price for the years they’ve spent grazing on the amber waves of grain our forefathers gave us. We have proven ourselves unworthy of the rights and freedoms they so valiantly fought for. The Tree of Liberty is parched and withering. There is only one thing that will allow it to grow again – the blood of tyrants and patriots. That time is drawing near. Hope you are ready.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Actually, I’ve been curious about this building as well and if you jump on wikipedia, type in building 7, you’ll find a pic of the center of the building being demolished by nearby debris, and subsequent fires in the building with no up to date sprinkler system, did indeed bring the building down. Now whether I believe it or not is another story, but there is a counter claim to the fire story, and that it fell from structural damage.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:27 am
06th July.
There is a documentary on British television this evening, entitled “The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – The Third Tower’ (BBC2)”. It purports to investigate the collapse of building 7 .
Now as you’ll notice, this particular effort emanates from that great bastion of honesty, fairness and integrity..the British Broadcasting Corporation. The program is also broadcast on a weekend for maximum exposure.
Funny isn’t it..not so long ago it was the ‘conspiracy nuts’, ‘cranks’ and ‘psycho’s’ who were talking about building 7, and yet it’s now fashionable to become one and question the official line. To this day, such discontent is often silenced thanks to this corporation.
It is therefore my opinion that the BBC is in fact having a change of heart and questioning the official line in an accurate, balanced manner, or is actually trying to suppress such questioning by using fake documentaries and propaganda tactics.
I’ll let you be the judge.
July 6th, 2008 at 11:38 am
I wonder what Abraham Lincoln would think about all this..the spin, the lies, the erosion of our civil liberties.
I wonder Lincoln would simply slam his fist on that that table and tell this country..it’s allies..the world:
‘You’re better than this’.
Someone damn well needs to.
July 6th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Mr Philip Ridley
Via email: philridley@hotmail.com
23 June 2008
Dear Mr Ridley
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 12:58 pm
I’m surprised they didn’t say that the reporter was psychic. What a bunch of BS.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
I am a Brit and assure you the BBC has long been the mouthpiece of the establishment.
They make the Bilderbergers very happy, and are just as keen to roll over for a Rockefeller or Rothschild too.
To hell with the BBC, you are part of cover up.
July 6th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Well they just showed it on the BBC. And it is a complete crock. It’s amazing how much important stuff they leave out.
July 6th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
The BBC is a big player in the New World Order!
We in the UK are forced to pay the BBC for our own
destruction.
If you don’t pay them you are fined, don’t/can’t pay the
fine you are thrown into prison.
July 6th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
I have just finished watching the hit piece on building 7 and i have never seen so much nonsense all the debunkers happen to have government connections as per usual which wasnt hidden and when they happen to come to their final conclusion there was no 911 truther shown to counter so they could quite happily leave it at that.
but in my opinion i think they have yet again made things worse for themsleves as people will now look into it more and find the truth.
July 6th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Hey BBC! was a new cost effective form of controlled demolition discovered September 11 2001 with the collapse of WTC 7? a few small smokey 7 hour fires, some limited structural damage and… wallop! down it comes with near perfect symmetry/universal collapse CD style!! (a new form of metal smelting in the basements also?)
July 6th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
One more thing, the beeb ‘informed and educated’ us that this was “the final 9/11 mystery” on their 10pm BBC1 TV bulletin Friday last, do they mean ALL the anomolies and questions re. 9/11 have been …explained and answered apart from WTC7??
July 6th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
The PNAC doccument is really all the proof you need to demonstrate a conspiracy. The wishlist of tyranny contained within has been followed almost to the the exact detail since the “catalysing event” of 911.
July 6th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
B-B-C = BIG BRITISH CRAP
July 6th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
This was my response to the BBC article. They have since taken down the comment form. This is absolutely insane, it’s like the webpage is one of those fake websites or it’s something off a comedy website like the onion.
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 6th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
The 911 Truth movement is profoundly dishonest.
I will highlight just a few pieces of BS with this “article”: unfortunately there are so many who buy this hook line and sinker and are now blind to reason, but for the rest of us:
1) The steel was not destroyed by the authorities. The head of the WTC Building Performance Study W Gene Corley (as quoted by this article) stated:
The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that having access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a significant difference to understanding the performance of the structures
2) Quote: “They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused “intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.”
Right, firstly how the hell does this guy know that “eutectic reactions: [the mixing of 2 chemicals to reduce the melting point of both]” has NEVER EVER happened in any building fire. Oh wait he doesn’t know jack shit about metallurgy or chemistry its phony science wrapped up and gulped down by paranoid “truth” seekers.
3) This report actually helps the argument that fire caused the melting because it points at why the steel melted at only 1000 degrees. Sure it suggests that unusual amounts of sulfur were present in the building or (not stated by the article) in the wreckage.
But it does not by any stretch of any sane persons mind suggest Thermite is the cause, its as valid as saying the sulfur must of come from a coal mine in the basement.
4) The report at no time states as quoted by this article:
“intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese” Read it, its not there. The scientists are explaining how sulfur causes corrosive affects when heated at lower than melting point temps. BIG DEAL it means there was sulfur in the building, so now truth seekers draw the conclusion that Thermite must have been the reason, its actually hilarious to read this crap and with such conviction of belief, it reminds me of religion, the only other field where you can be completely convinced of something with NO DIRECT EVIDENCE.
Pure BS, I really wish the rebellious youth and paranoid & twisted leaders of the movement would take a long hard look at themselves. Disgruntled spotty teens need to stick to shit they know like BMX’ing, skate boarding and being a Goth. Scientific reasoning and logical thinking is not their forte.
As for the older believers sure we all hate authorities, but a conspiracy on this scale is impossible: remember Watergate:
The president couldn’t even order a couple of break ins! If you believe its Thermite, build a Hypothesis and challenge it to scientific reasoning, it just doesn’t hold firm. The chief of the fire brigade must have been in on it, have you checked who this guy is and what that would mean, he would have had direct knowledge of the deaths of hundreds of his men. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR BACKSIDE AND GROW UP.
Please.
July 6th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
there is evidence to suggest it was supposed to fall much earlier,if it did it would not have been such a loose end for the criminals to explain away.
now back to this tom deloford guy mate you really dont know your history,the reason why nixon was caught was because the media was doing its job.Thats it ok today you have a media now owned by corporations that simply ignore the facts and savage anyone even asking a question.
i am stunned that anyone can actually look at the collapse and say it was fires when there is video evidence to prove it was demolished by explosive.Every support beam in the building had to give at exactly the same time,impossible!I am a math teacher and have a good understanding of engineering tolerances.
i guess there were people who once clung to the fact the earth was flat,who believe the sun revolved around the earth,and the pope is the living word of god.
July 6th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Having just watched the documentary I was struck by the interview with Barry Jennings – the man who the documentary claims was the only person in WTC7 prior to it’s collapse. Throughout the interview (and in the brief interview he gave after his escape) he keeps saying “WE didn’t think WE were going to get out”, “WE thought WE were dead”, “WE were going down the stairwell”.
Is this guy royalty?
Either he is lying and someone else was with him, he’s Schizophrenic/ has multiple personality disorder or he always refers to himself as WE. Something smells here.
July 6th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Great soap box speach there Deloford. “Your conspiracy theory” simply confirms that are you a certified, True, Idiot.
July 6th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Great soap box speach there Deloford. “Your conspiracy theory” simply confirms that you are a certified, true, Idiot.
July 6th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Hey Tom,
The only way a [b]huge[/b] building falls the way it did is if the most basic infrastructure (i.e. the base of the building, the core, whatever) is compromised.
It’s the reason why we have controlled demolition in the first place. Because if it was as simple as placing a few random (not well-placed) fires throughout a building, what’s the point of hiring highly qualified, educated, coordinate teams of controlled demolition experts?
Just go to Home Depot: buy some charcoal fluid, 50 bags of Kingsford, maybe a few logs for good measure, a Bic lighter, and you’re good to go.
I think when the time comes for the Sears Tower to be replaced, the owner should just go to Home Depot… he can even open a Home Depot card–I believe he can get 30% off his first purchase!
Same with the next Vegas casino set for implosion. Don’t hire no crew of experts. Just set a couple fires, sit back, and watch it come straight down!
July 6th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
hey Tom Deloford,
so does that mean when we all get old and ‘wise’ like you we too will start ignoring the laws of physics and accept improbabilities such as 3 high rise steel skyscrapers all collapsing in one day from fire for the first time in history? So if i am to understand correctly
old = believes official story hook line and sinker, does mental gymnastics to overcome statistical probabilities, likes to turn brain off to relax
young = skeptical, does not blindly follow authority, follows the laws of physics over the word of the government
black is white! wow it must be really psychedelic to get old huh?
-Robbie
July 6th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Tom, I fear that you can watch the towers collapsing and, anyone with their head not in their backside can witness a pulled demolition. Did Silverstein just “by chance” have building 7 rigged?
July 6th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
Get this torrent going…
http://conspiracycentral.net:6.....680766bac3
July 6th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
the video that are shown of wtc7 falling are mostly from the front. If you look at the other videos that dont seem to get shown on these sites, you will see that the building fell backwards. There were fires in that building. They burned all day. Most of the firefighter effort was getting people out, not putting out a fire. There is a video of a fireman saying that they put a laser marking device aiming at wtc7 and within an hour it had moved a noticable amount. People are going to believe what they want to. If you dare to look, check out http://www.debunking911.com
July 6th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
The BBC have lied before and they probably are misleading us again,
Does anyone here remember the Miners strike of 1984 where the BBC showed miners attacking police, it was the other way around and a High Court case proved it.
Socialism has had negative articles and videos and comments not sure why that is, when interviews with other famous socialist politicians have taken place and were praised to high heaven when they hit the limelight (George Galloway).
July 6th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Hey Tom Deloford. No offence m8. I dont need any one elses evaluation of building 7 other than my own eyes. What do my eyes tell me. Every floor gives up the ghost at pretty much the same time. Want me to believe fire did that???
You know the most ridiculous theory Ive heard, 19 Arabs did it. Yeah its a fucking belter. The only thing missing is hard evidence, making it a hard and fast……theory. The only thing the official government conspiracy theory is missing is an appearance by Satan himself, or the eye of Sauron. Keep trying to prop up horseshit, with more horseshit, I wish you all the best with that endeavour.
Forgetting 7, even the twin towers, you only have to look closely (and not all that close) to know that what you are seeing is the floors being blown to kingdom come. You believe its a collapse, and you live with that.
If your neighbours told you the window cleaner is often seen climbing in your wifes bedroom window, and then you saw it with your own eyes, would you rip out your eyes for offending you?? No offence but you sound like a right prick!! Do you work for the BBC. Just a guess. Not that you’d admit it. I suggest getting the cleaners in to get the cobwebs removed from your brain. You’ve been getting your news force fed to you for too long.
July 6th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Aidan, its called bullshit. And it always smells. Its your instinct picking up on a blatant liar.
When your wifes breath smells like penis, thats infidelity.
I didnt watch it myself. The BBC can whistle if they think Im paying them £130 or whatever it is per year for the privelege of watching their drivel. Nope havent paid for license since 2002. And have no intention of ever paying again. They can suck a fart out of my ass.
July 6th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Tom Deloford: “….. its actually hilarious to read this crap and with such conviction of belief, it reminds me of religion, the only other field where you can be completely convinced of something with NO DIRECT EVIDENCE.” I must presume Tom belongs to the Church of the State, since he obviously not only believes the ‘official story’ but cannot open up his mind even a tiny bit beyond the sanctioned dogma.
Most ‘Truthers’ were once like Tom, not able or willing to entertain a ‘truth’ that is more terrifying than the official ‘lie.’ It is only by being a critical thinker that allows one to step back from years of programming, propaganda and the trust we NEED to feel in our government, authority figures, and ultimately in ourselves to live a peaceful life. Once the leap is made (or can no longer be fought) that the good nature of OUR people could not possibly allow such a horror as 9-11 to be self-inflicted, the the perspective changes, and a vision is possible without all that conditioned filtering which causes emotions to trump rationality.
Church of State believers like Tom are so easily manipulated to think all such horrors can only be perpetrated by THOSE people in THOSE countries, but surely not here, not by us. Evil people are a world-wide phenomenon, Tom, including right here in the good old USA. Does that make America and Americans bad? Hardly. Does that make “Truthers” a bunch of crazies. Hardly. The real truth is that when people like Tom finally do wake up, if they do, and see objectively and consider ALL the evidence, they, too, will understand the official Government mantra: “Who are you going to believe? The Government or your lying eyes?”
Any unbiased observation of WTC 7 coming down simply defies explanation other than controlled demolition. Therefore, Truthers expect the Church of State believers such as Tom to cling to their beliefs by any means possible lest they be forced to accept reality for what it is. And once you understand the reality of WTC7’s demolition, you have little choice but to see the rest of that horrific day and all of its preplanned consequences for what it was and is: The subversion and overthrow of the government of the United States of America.
Amen, Tom. Amen.
July 6th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Amen to that once a tom. People like TD talk with authority, like they know something no one else does, but ultimately all they’ve got is words. Words like “absurd”, “ridiculous”, for even suggesting another theory. Clintons “how dare you” takes some beating for fake indignation though.
They show their institutionalised mindset, their weakness. Like the college smartass, who has no opinions, he just remembers things well, and parrots what others have said. Quotes authors, you all know the type. Everyones had to deal with these pricks. The government killing its own is “absurd”, and thats that. They truy are a dying breed.
I have a vision, its the future. There is one nutcase shouting 911 was a Bin Laden attack. He’s a lone voice. His name is Humphrey.
7 years now and they still can’t get their story straight. So pathetically sad. But we should give them some leeway here. After all building 7 was never meant to be explained, it was meant to be self evident. Thats probably the reason it stood so long, they probably had to go back in and sex up the fires a bit. Of course whats important is what didn’t happen. I can piece what I think happened without worrying as I’m not trying to sell it, so it doesnt matter, I’ll speculate till the cows come home.
7 was primed with explosives and it, like 1 and 2, had an incoming plane to look like it brought it down. Unfortunately that plane was shot down. So friggin obvious it beggars belief. They never thought they would have to explain this. Or……… they meant to crash a plane into a field, which I highly doubt.
I say they, because they don’t represent me. I’ve never voted, not through apathy, but disgust, as a personal protest. The political landscape has always been to me (like the southpark episode) voting for a douche or a turd. You have the option of not playing a retarded game. So I never have. I’m quite proud of that, but also disappointed none were worthy of it. LOL. It also allows me the moral high ground without feeling conceited.
Another annoying aspect of the state sponsored brainwashed muppets, is the way they imply that you want to find holes. As if you look at all the evidence, and WANT to come to the conclusion it was an inside job. Sorry, Id much, much rather believe it was pissed off Arabs, I really, really would. I mean I really would. Im begging for someone to convince me, in fact. Or point me to something better than a yellow journalism article.
I really am open to the evidence, thats why I discard the government theory as hogwash, because I’ve looked objectively at the evidence. I’ve really tried to make it fit. I CANT!!! And to just taking the government at their word and leave it at that is beyond self deception, its downright cowardly.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
DO THEY THINK THAT IF THEY USE BIGGER WORDS THAT WE BELIEVE THE NEW STORY ? IT’S LIKE A SOAP OPERA ACTOR TRYING TO SAY MEDICAL TERMS. THE BUILDINGS IMPLODED IN A PERSCISE DEMOLITION, THAT’S IT. THEY CAN COME UP WITH WHATEVER NEW WORDS THEY LIKE, IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THEY BROUGHT THOSE BUILDINGS DOWN.
July 6th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Brad,
You are full of shit. The website http://www.debunking911.com is an obvious propaganda/disinfo site. Try to follow the logic of any of the articles that they post. The rational that they maintain is pure bullshit. Any thinking person will immediately recognize this site as disinformation and an attempt to muddy the waters. The truth movement is not made up of morons. The fucking retards in the administration are not going to be able to put the genie back into the bottle. Treason is the only federal crime punishable by death.
See you at the Hague.
July 6th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
Hey you know what’s really sad
I just realized this, it’s true:
If the crims just came out and said we did it, they could put it right out on FOX news: YUP we blew those buildings down, you bet, absolutely! They could just do that tomorrow and the sheeple would shake their heads, get a little miffed, turn off their ipods for a sec, or two, but then they’d pop a Tom Cruise DVD in, rev up the new cappucino maker, sit back and foggit a bowt it. Folks out there are dead in the water. what happened.
not me, not you guys, but so many, DOA on the couch and in the Prius.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
I guess they want us to believe that 9/11 was the ONLY thing they didn’t lie about! I only hope to live long enough to see them all on the stand.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Once again the BBC has shown its blatant complicity in the attacks of September 11, 2001. Many members of the BBC are just like many members of other organisations that have also sown their complicitity. These people are in a state of great denial; in that they can’t or simply won’t believe the truth. Even without WTC7 it is so obvious that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job. Just have a quick look at what happened to the twin towers. Each floor on each building was simply blown up from top down. Floor by floor, both buildings simply dissappeared into a sickening pool of twisted metal and dust. It’s really that simple.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
You folks need 2 read the following article. If this is true then piss on what happened on 911. Drink up, smoke up, kiss the kids and get ready to die. Sorry 2 sound so bleak however read this and I believe that you will understand.
http://www.rense.com/general82/perf.htm
July 6th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
This is very worrisome. Right around the time the second tower was collapsing, the F.B.I. was already reporting on the radio how they miraculously “found” the hijackers’ car in what I thought they said was Newark Airport’s parking lot(s), in New Jersey. In that report, which the information “found” would have had to have been sooner before it got to the news room within two hours, it said that a pilot training book was “found” on the car seat helping to identify it, of course. Then the clincher. They said that the training book was in ARABIC. I took notice of that and remember that quite well. It never again was said after that day. What is wrong with that picture?
For some reason even Alex Jones never mentioned that, that I am aware of. That told me along with how the towers fell that we all were able to see live, that it was an inside job. That was the first. Since then of course many many other facts have been brought to the surface, except for one other thing that was happening that day in New York City that no one, not even Alex Jones, has ever mentioned and then used his fantastic mental capability to tie it into everything. THINK. REMEMBER. Then use that with all the aftermath information that has come out right on up to this presidential election and you will see another quite not so questionable or concernable tie. Amazing!
Rhonda
July 7th, 2008 at 12:29 am
The BBC are massive propagandists as people are saying. The radio in particular is full of pro war propaganda these days, with for instance radio phone ins specifically asking for service personnel to ring in to voice their opinion about the latest atrocity from our illegal war supporting government. Not surprisingly servicemen usually support the government unthinkingly in everything it does. If they do a phone in about CCTV cameras, the overwhelming opinion they portray is that people like them, and those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear, which I hear time and again.
I see serious journalists on their now spouting the official gov line time and again and I have to laugh.
It is encouraging though that they feel it necessary to produce these prime time debunking efforts. They must be worried by what we are doing. Everyone I speak to these days is open to the idea that 911 was an inside job. People aren’t dumb, just complacent. When the UK economy hits the floor and life gets more difficult, people will start to ask questions, and then we can all be ready to give them some answers.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:05 am
Steven July 6th
I read the Rense web site article and can see no references or proof of anything written by this guy. It is unsupported by ANY facts and makes for good science fiction. It also is the kind of article some of the NeoCons might applaud showing how a strike on Iran is justified.
No one knowing the danger would attack Iran. And the reason GHWB did NOT take out Saddam in Gulf War One is because he (unlike his son) knew the history of Iraq and knew that it was an artificial construct which would only be able to function under the tough leadership of someone such as Saddam. His son, oblivious of history and Islam and its variour sects and schisms, went in typically with all guns blazing and has wrecked the American economy and that of the rest of the world as a result.
The article is full of such muddle headed thinking but then the question “Who is Jeff Rense” remains unanswered. Alex has some degree of factual proof and is right to attack the BBC which is an Organ for the State full of sloppy non journalists and run by a dozen select “friends of the Elite” who possess editorial authority. It would help if Alex would PUT THE URL IN so people could comment to the BBC directly.
HERE – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7488159.stm
The article seems fairly balanced. The comments are interesting. Unless Alex posted to another site his comment is not on at this time.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:03 am
I’ve recorded the show but I’m not sure I could sit through such shit now I know the truth.
July 7th, 2008 at 9:30 am
What a relief that ones cleard up. Now all we need is a bunch of scientist to explain how BBC reported its collapse 20 minuits before it happened !!!!!!!
July 7th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
I have been watching the doc and it come to a point where i have a question. I LOVE this site but if people are refuting comments from this documentary they must refute all of them.
My question is that an “expert” says that the explosions can only cause broken glass from the driection it came from and not from the other site of the building!
July 7th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
THE BBC SHOULD BE APPLAUDED. They have done it! They have achieved their aim, we are all talking about their “documentary.” We are not discussing 7th July 2005 here are we?
And all day long here in the UK the MSM have been full of Ringo’s birthday. Hurrah, he’s 68 today – happy birthday Ringo, I love you dearly, but honestly hardly a word has been said about 7/7/05. It really is quite disgraceful!
http://theangrycheese.blogspot.....ve-on.html
and scroll down,
“forget, forget, forget, forget……”
July 7th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
To anyone interested in making up their own mind,may i suggest
for starters. ae911truth.org.Richard Gage spells it out in a way that touches even the simplist minds.
July 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Mister Spock to Captain Kirk:
“Since we know that the Federation lied about the Klingons possessing Weapons of Galactic Destruction, it is illogical to believe that the Federation wouldn’t blow up one of their own planets and blame it on the Klingons, Jim.”
July 7th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
Aidan, you blame this misreporting on Jennings? Does HE HIMSELF say he was the only person in WTC7? Or do your TV folks say it. You’re right; something does smell.
“Aidan
July 6,2008
Having just watched the documentary I was struck by the interview with Barry Jennings – the man who the documentary claims was the only person in WTC7 prior to it’s collapse. Throughout the interview (and in the brief interview he gave after his escape) he keeps saying “WE didn’t think WE were going to get out”, “WE thought WE were dead”, “WE were going down the stairwell”.
Is this guy royalty?
Either he is lying and someone else was with him, he’s Schizophrenic/ has multiple personality disorder or he always refers to himself as WE. Something smells here.”
July 7th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
The so-called pancake collapse of WTC can not happen at free-fall speed.
If they had been genuine pancake collapse, it would have taken at least several minutes for each of the WTC buildings to fall down.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Also the so called “Pancake Theory” would have left a massive pile of debris stacked up over 15+ stories, not a neat little pile of rubble less than two stories high all in its own footprint…They use the “Pancake Theory” cause its easy to understand, but offers little to no scientific evidence to back it up.
That’s what people want to hear, they want a simple explanation, they care little for the science based facts that really explain what happened to that building. People want fantasy, something they can tell all their friends and family, most people don’t even understand the extremely simple physics of the collapse, like the free fall speed fall and the collapse into its own footprint are explained by simple physics and science, and that, NO ONE CAN ARGUE THAT!(If they do then you are just wasting your breath educating them, they wont learn.) Thanks.
January 3rd, 2009 at 11:01 pm
To #73,
The person barry was with is shown you just haven’t looked into it. The we is really we, not I. He is not skitzo. I think it’s some other Black guy, I think like a janitor or some shit.
February 10th, 2009 at 8:00 am
xqSxyO hi! hooli?