BBC World reported WTC7 collapse before it happened

[phoenix]

most of the world's media get their news either through Reuters or Associated Press

...and who is it that supposedly owns those two?... and who was it that supposedly moved into there new apartment with a ring side seat over looking Manhattan a week or so before 9-11?... and who really runs the World?

[jomper]

- usually unchecked. Even Reuters send out news unchecked.

Oh, I think they check it pretty carefully...

You may think so, but that is not in fact the case. Perhaps I am missing your irony here. At any rate, to be clear: Flat Earth News is a good book in which Davies makes it quite clear that agencies like Reuters and AP generally check the accuracy of their quotes but not the truth of what they are saying.

In other words, the press agencies will quote liars and present unsubstantiated claims without checking them. All that is required is that the lies were actually said or the claims, however false, have a genuine source.

Clearly this is not good or responsible journalism. But it is a situation that has come about because, in a modern newsroom, most journalists are forced to work incredibly quickly and are given almost no time to investigate anything.

[outsider]

- usually unchecked. Even Reuters send out news unchecked.

Oh, I think they check it pretty carefully...

You may think so, but that is not in fact the case. Perhaps I am missing your irony here. At any rate, to be clear: Flat Earth News is a good book in which Davies makes it quite clear that agencies like Reuters and AP generally check the accuracy of their quotes but not the truth of what they are saying.

In other words, the press agencies will quote liars and present unsubstantiated claims without checking them. All that is required is that the lies were actually said or the claims, however false, have a genuine source.

Clearly this is not good or responsible journalism. But it is a situation that has come about because, in a modern newsroom, most journalists are forced to work incredibly quickly and are given almost no time to investigate anything.

I think simplesimon's point was : Try slipping something past their 'slipshod checks' with some truth about 9/11.

[Disco_Destroyer]

One thing that has always struck me as "odd" is where the energy required to propel the structural parts of WTC1/2 horizontally was supposed to have come from.

The best I've seen on the physics of this is 9/11 eyewitness, I prefer the short form Hoboken TV as it is short and to the point

[TonyGosling]

It's simple Disco, every gravity loading vertical steel beam failed simultaneously. Quite a coincidence I grant you, but once every trillion years... it could happen.

One thing that has always struck me as "odd" is where the energy required to propel the structural parts of WTC1/2 horizontally was supposed to have come from.

The best I've seen on the physics of this is 9/11 eyewitness, I prefer the short form Hoboken TV as it is short and to the point

[Stuart]

on the point made earlier about Flat Earth news - I have also been reading this and noted that something like 88% of breaking news comes from 2 agencies - Reuters and Associated press.

I would need to check my facts for exact dates but Reuters was acquired sometime between 1860 and 1900 by the Rothchild family and Associated Press was acquired by Reuters later in the 20th Century.

So there we have 88% of major breaking news coming from 2 sources owned by the same people.

Its not difficult to see how the MSM can be manipulated into repeating the same lies until they become accepted fact. This becomes even more prevalent when considering journalists are under such tight deadlines tht they do not have the time to check facts and those who do have a greater understanding of whats going know that there are stories which they just cannot go near.....


One thing that did strike me about the Conspiracy files programme is the pre-wiring of WTC7 - i have not seen any valid debunking of this point in the aftermath of the programme as yet............how about anyone else?

[TonyGosling]

Have the press become PR patsies?

DAVIES SAYS THAT over the last 20 years newspaper profits have doubled and pagination has trebled, across the industry, while the number of jobs is about the same and productivity, in terms of the number of stories produced by journalists, has trebled.

Journalists are desk-bound, feeding a 24-hour news cycle, with little or no time to leave the office, find real stories, or check. Few stories are properly or independently verified, one in five, according to the research. A few news agencies, one in the UK and (to a lesser extent) Ireland, the Press Association, and mainly two worldwide, Reuters and Associated Press (AP), control a huge amount of the news agenda, but the real power over the news agenda is the public relations industry.

Journalists, he says, simply balance one statement against another, without any attempt to see if what is being said is true. The result might be called objective, or at least balanced. The statement must be made by an authoritative source. This means, of course, that establishment and powerful figures have greater access to the media. In the relentless pursuit of scoops, reporters use the so called "dark arts", the use of illegal means and subterfuge to get private information on people, whether by hiring private investigators to hack into computers to access private data or by simply paying people who go through the garbage outside celebrities' homes, now common in what was Fleet Street...........
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/wee ... 86032.html

[simplesimon]

TonyGosling wrote:

Have the press become PR patsies?

If only that was the worst of it. I have some sympathy with and understanding of your defending the MSM/BBC having worked for it, but really - "Have the press become PR patsies?" Come on - they lie about everything. The more important the issue, the more they lie.

but the real power over the news agenda is the public relations industry.

No, can't agree - my simple mind tells me the real power is wielded by, er... those who own and run the news media.

You're probably familiar with this:

There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.

There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?

We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.

There is some debate about the source and veracity of the quote, but how can anyone here doubt the essential truth of it?

This isn't to say, as the shills will, that I'm suggesting they "get together each day in the production office and decide what lies to tell", or to ignore the mechanisms by which hacks can come to internalise, "believe" the lies they write, as described by Orwell, Chomsky and others, but IMHO, it's a reasonable working approximation to say "every word a lie, including "and", "the", and "but". At least on the issues that matter.

Stuart wrote:

Its not difficult to see how the MSM can be manipulated into repeating the same lies until they become accepted fact.

Indeed. I think the only thing preventing anyone from seeing that is a lack of imagination, and fear of the implications if one accepts it. Of course the shills will say "what evidence do you have for this?" - a ridiculous question in the circumstances.

One thing that did strike me about the Conspiracy files programme is the pre-wiring of WTC7 - i have not seen any valid debunking of this point in the aftermath of the programme as yet.

Do you mean you haven't seen de-bunking of the possibility of pre-wiring, or a feasible theory of pre-wiring? I think I could come up with the latter pretty easily.

jomper wrote:

In other words, the press agencies will quote liars and present unsubstantiated claims without checking them. All that is required is that the lies were actually said or the claims, however false, have a genuine source.

I think that might be a reasonable characterisation of how the News of the World deals with meaningless distraction type content, but totally unrelated to the serious mind bending, opinion forming, geo-political stuff that matters. Good on you for editing the original version of your post btw, appreciate it.

outsider wrote:

I think simplesimon's point was : Try slipping something past their 'slipshod checks' with some truth about 9/11.

Exactly... but obviously I think it's much worse than just spiking stuff they don't want out there.

Disco_Destroyer - thanks for the tip, will watch when I can.

Tony - I will reply to your PM regarding related matters shortly.

[TonyGosling]

SS you've diverted us off here

and yes much more is spent on PR than on actual Journalism so many more man hours etc etc etc.

The problem - returning to the headline

Is that we still have no reference whatsoever (not a headline, the name of a local paper or agency, not a time, not a reporter's name, no editor, not anything at all - Zero in fact) to this local news piece which is supposed to have prompted Reuters to tell the world that building 7 had fallen 25 minutes before it actually did.

The conclusion will obviously be that no such report exists.

I suggest we demand that basic bit of information from Reuters

And the next step is discovering who the producer of the BBC World programme in question was - have we got a name?

Nobody at the BBC seems to want to really deal with this story - to get to the bottom of it.


Richard Porter - a man who tries just a bit too hard to ooze confidence

Afraid of how high the rot might go?
How deep the rot might go?

http://www.zero911movie.com/

[fish5133]

King David Hotel Bombing- Jerusalem 22/7/1946-- released to press before it was blown up according to this

Shortly after noon Palestine time, the London UPI bureau received a short message stating that 'Jewish terrorists have just blown up the King David Hotel!'. The UPI stringer who had sent it, an Irgun member, had wanted to scoop his colleagues. Not knowing that the operation had been postponed by an hour, he sent the message before the operation had been completed. The bureau chief decided against running the story until more details and further confirmation had been obtained. There were other leaks.[4

]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing

[TonyGosling]

Reopening this thread
Lots of heated debate
All off the back of weasel Mike Rudin's traitorous Conspiracy Files on 9/11, his hideous attempt to excuse mass murder and, ultimately, genocide around the globe.
http://www.911forum.org.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=7111 (and others)
This Jane Standley clip was 'noticed', highlighted and discussed just after Rudin's public payrolled propaganda broadcast.
Quite a lesson in who the disinfo shills were innit!?

http://bcfm.org.uk/wp-content/Podcasts/ ... 180001.mp3

[Whitehall_Bin_Men]

This is 20 minutes long - sorry!
Controlled demolition: jaw dropping video of WTC Building 7's 9/11 'collapse' you won't see on tonight's #FakeNews [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFoarqaNjL8[/youtube]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFoarqaNjL8