BBC World reported WTC7 collapse before it happened

Twenty minutes after Reuters and the BBC announced WTC7 had collapsed - it finally obliged - a controlled demolition at free fall speed despite only some minor fires and not having been hit by any plane - no wonder so many talk about Building 7 as 9/11's 'smoking gun'.
Post Reply
EmptyBee
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:30 pm

Post by EmptyBee »

Mr-Bridger wrote:The building infront of WTC 7 in the BBC footage is the Verizon building, which was located on the side of WTC 7


No that's a low angle shot from the (edit correction)WEST side of WTC7. The Verizon building looms large in the foreground of that image due to the low angle.

Jane's pov is way to the north.

Image

The red arrow is my rough approximation of her point of view.
Last edited by EmptyBee on Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
Eckyboy
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 2:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Post by Eckyboy »

If people really cannot recognize that the building behind the reporter is WTC7 then we really are in trouble. The exact timing of the report for me is irrelevant also as we can clearly see Building 7 still standing behind her and showing no visible signs that the building is compromised and about to collapse and therefore there is no reason to suspect it was about to. You ask anyone where they were on 911 and they can tell you instantly. Yet it seems that the BBC and others somehow forget things that they are told that day when the whole days events should be burned into their brains(if they have any!) forever.
User avatar
Mr-Bridger
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:30 am

Post by Mr-Bridger »

For one the white building with the sloping roof is to the Left of WTC 7 in the BBC footage

Image


Image

Image

The footage was shot from the area of Merchantile Credit and Merrell Lynch buildings
EmptyBee
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:30 pm

Post by EmptyBee »

Mr-Bridger wrote: The footage was shot from the area of Merchantile Credit and Merrell Lynch buildings
No it wasn't. Are you blind? Look again.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
Serge
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:02 am

Post by Serge »

AJ wrote:
physicist wrote:Jane Standley also did a long interview on BBC News 24 at around 9:30pm (UK time) in front of that very same window with WTC7 behind her.

So that puts her in the right time and place.

The building hadn't collapsed at that time. Even in "BBC World".
That's useful to know. Do you have a link?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: And you have been spouting off about 'evidence' and 'investigate'? Yet YOU have not even come across the Standley interview?.

Dear oh dear, that is good forensic investigative duty eh? you simple idiot! :lol: :lol: :lol:
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.
User avatar
Mr-Bridger
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:30 am

Post by Mr-Bridger »

IF it was shot from the angle you suggest how isnt the white building with the sloping roof to the right of WTC 7 in the BBC footage, from your angle you would also see 75 Park Place which you can`t in the BBC footage because its BEHIND the white sloped roof building .

Also if you look at the still from Google earth you can see the spires on the left in the BBC footage are in the right place
Serge
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:02 am

Post by Serge »

EmptyBee wrote:
Mr-Bridger wrote: The footage was shot from the area of Merchantile Credit and Merrell Lynch buildings
No it wasn't. Are you blind? Look again.
:lol: He might be one of those 'mirror people'.

Bridger, I will help you out with a clue. Footage was shot from an area, which in the colour coded area pic you posted, is YELLOW, and has the number 72 stamped over it.

edit, you now say 75 Park, which is different to what you previously describe.
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.
EmptyBee
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:30 pm

Post by EmptyBee »

Mr-Bridger wrote:IF it was shot from the angle you suggest how isnt the white building with the sloping roof to the right of WTC 7 in the BBC footage, from your angle you would also see 75 Park Place which you can`t in the BBC footage because its BEHIND the white sloped roof building .

Also if you look at the still from Google earth you can see the spires on the left in the BBC footage are in the right place
You can't see the building with the sloping roof because it's not a very tall building relative to WTC7 - we only see the top of WTC7 from Jane's POV, which is not that elevated either. Look at the widest angle view we get in the video, you can clearly make out the pyramidal topped skyscraper to the east of WTC7 before the camera zooms in.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
TheSea
New Poster
New Poster
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:20 pm

here we go again

Post by TheSea »

So we delay getting to the front line by Each infantryman arguing about how sharp the swords are.

key thing as stated by an earlier poster is the BBC have responded on the basis that the film is authentic so as Tony suggests lets just run with it gracefully its the best sword we've got.
User avatar
Mr-Bridger
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:30 am

Post by Mr-Bridger »

Ive clearly marked the White sloped roof building on the still from the BBC footage.

`edit, you now say 75 Park, which is different to what you previously describe.`

What i said was if it was shot from the angle Emptybee suggested, the white sloped roof would be on the right of WTC 7 in the BBC footage when its clearly on the left and you would be able to see 75 park place from Emptybees suggested angle which you cant in the BBC footage as its BEHIND the white sloped building

So we delay getting to the front line by Each infantryman arguing about how sharp the swords are. haha yes i agree
Eckyboy
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 2:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh

This is what we do unless we forget of course

Post by Eckyboy »

well said TheSea. We need to establish who informed the BBC that the building was about to collapse and based on what evidence. As I stated before everyone remembers 911 and it is not plausible that the BBC do not remember who supplied them with this information.
EmptyBee
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:30 pm

Post by EmptyBee »

Just to clarify, in the wide shots there are two skyscrapers flanking WTC7 to the far east and to the far west - both are quite distinctive in shape. The one to the east is the Woolworth building, with it's spire/pyramid top, and to the west is the American Express building WFC3, with it's squat pyramid top. The Verizon building (lower than WTC7) is also to the west (not east sorry).

(edit - corrected buiding - Merrill Lynch is WFC2)
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
Serge
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:02 am

Post by Serge »

Mr-Bridger wrote:Ive clearly marked the White sloped roof building on the still from the BBC footage.

`edit, you now say 75 Park, which is different to what you previously describe.`

What i said was if it was shot from the angle Emptybee suggested, the white sloped roof would be on the right of WTC 7 in the BBC footage when its clearly on the left and you would be able to see 75 park place from Emptybees suggested angle which you cant in the BBC footage as its BEHIND the white sloped building

So we delay getting to the front line by Each infantryman arguing about how sharp the swords are. haha yes i agree
You said the footage was taken from Mercantile. Everyone else is saying it was not, look at the images again.
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.
User avatar
Mr-Bridger
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:30 am

Post by Mr-Bridger »

Serge, Emptybee : I apologise i was incorrect, I looked again at the footage and noticed what emptybee pointed out.

The snap i used didnt help either :oops:

( books new eyetest at specsavers) 8)
Serge
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:02 am

Post by Serge »

Mr-Bridger wrote:
( books new eyetest at specsavers) 8)
They wont help, I am still blind :wink:
The most transparent of all materials on this Earth is a politician.
TheSea
New Poster
New Poster
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:20 pm

Sample News Story

Post by TheSea »

right your own or be my guest at emailing this to news organisations linked below.If you can get NUJ rates for this as Tony suggests ( lol ) great!
I have attempted to to word this in a way that is more favourable to main stream press , attempting to avoid it being dismissed as a 911truth CTnut plant and making it more of a "BBC are rubbish" story..


*********************************************************
The BBC has a reputation as being one of the most trusted news outlets in the world. A BBC c*** up means ,unbelievabley, they have lost some of the recordings of the horrendous events of 911, the most horrific terrorist event of modern times. In particular recordings related to the sudden unexpected collapse of WTC7. If you search the web you find some are claiming BBC World preemptively announced WTC7s 6 second collapse a half an hour BEFORE it occurred.

In his blog on the BBC website Richard Porter Head of News, says

“We had several streams of news output running simultaneously on the day…… we have kept all the tapes from BBC News 24 and Radio Five Live, as well as all the BBC One bulletins. Obviously I wish we'd kept hold of the World tapes alongside all the others, but we didn't... and I don't know whether they were destroyed or mislaid.”
Source http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/richard_porter/

Now like most people you may take the view its of no importance. You may have decided that given the BBC's well-known ability to loose old episodes of sci-fi drama Doctor Who together with the fact that there is hours of 911 film from other news organisations signifies only a minor glitch in the archiving of 911.
You might be wrong. Independent sources have posted the original material on the internet. Why bother??? Because incredibly the BBC World coverage appears to show BBCWorld reported the collapse of WTC7 (The Salomon Brothers building) half an hour before it happened. The building suffered a catastrophic collapse that took all of 6 seconds yet the good old BBC transmitted foreknowledge of the event some 30 minutes previously!.
Those that have seen the footage claim they even broadcast a relevant location piece reporting that the Salomon brothers building had collapsed even though the building appears to be pictured still standing behind BBC reporter Jane Standley. Ooops with capital letters. Indeed Porter himself says, “ with hindsight we now know that our live shot showed the building still standing in the background.” The 911 truth movement has been all over this, researching and verifying time zones to prove the BBC did seem to have uncanny forecasting powers. The BBC’s response remains vague, they seem intriguingly ambivalent about letting the outstanding questions remain undebated. A key point is that the BBC has not denounced the film as fake. Porter, Head of News, has provided the BBC’s only response, suggesting the BBC have “mislaid” the recordings. These recordings could have categorically shown this as an internet hoax but without these tapes the big question remains. Are the BBC fortunetellers or did someone give them a press release that forewarned The Salomon Brothers building would collapse? The official version is the building suffered an unexpected catastrophic 6 second collapse due to fire. So who told the BBC in advance of its actual collapse that The Salomon brothers building had already collapsed?
As one of the most trusted news outlets in the world the BBC has lost their own tapes. They surely have a responsibility to answer questions related to the coverage of 911. In the light of Porter’s response and the incredible apparent discrepancy in the fact that news was reported before it had happened, it is quite reasonable to doubt the BBC’s ability to be a credible news gatherer. News coverage has a vital role in shaping world events it cannot be left to those incapable of providing accurate information.
************************************************************

News Orgs

http://inkpot.com/news/majint.html

I'd suggest go for the big latin countries and english speaking student papers etc first. I'd also suggest emailing junior reporters because they will gossip about it and many will enjoy that the BBC screwed up. Anyone too high up knows the deal so leave them till later.
I can't do much more today I'll get busted for being on the PC too long (am at work!)
Ta
EmptyBee
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:30 pm

Post by EmptyBee »

I wouldn't say the collapse of WTC7 was unexpected. There's ample evidence that the media were told to expect it to collapse, so that when it did finally come down, there was very little media reaction. The question is, how come they were told what to expect, seeing as the collapse was not a slow progressive collapse, but a sudden catastrophic implosion?

That leads back to FDNY testimony that someone in the OEM (FEMA in NY) told them that the building was 'in serious danger of collapse' while they were still attempting to fight the fires before midday. There is some independent FDNY testimony to the effect that there was a 'bulge', indicating structural damage. It's not clear at what time this 'bulge' appeared, or precisely where it was on the building.

There's a lot of suspicious information that came out of the OEM on 9/11. The OEM somehow predicted the collapse of the North tower moments before it collapsed - warning Mayor Giuiliani, and the firefighters, but not in enough time to evacuate.

Jerome Hauer of the OEM was then on CBS very early on in the day propagating the myth that it was simply fires and impact damage that brought down the twin towers.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
EmptyBee
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:30 pm

Post by EmptyBee »

Other fun facts about Jerome Hauer:

Jerome Hauer was an MD of Kroll Inc, who amongst other things, were responsible for security at the WTC.

Jerome Hauer was good friends with John O'Neill, and they apparently spent September 10th drinking together.

John O'Neill apparently knew more about UBL than anyone in the FBI, and according to legend had relentlessly pursued him for years. He left the NY FBI some time in the summer and on August 23rd went to work for Kroll Inc, as chief of security for the WTC, a job he got through Jerome Hauer.

Jerome Hauer apparently identified the body of John O'Neill, a week or so after the attacks, after it was pulled from the rubble of the south tower.

FEMA arrived in New York on September the 10th for bio-warfare drill Tripod II. One of Jerome Hauer's areas of expertise is bio-warfare, and he had a long history of association with FEMA and the OEM.
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
User avatar
locsen
Minor Poster
Minor Poster
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:03 pm
Location: scotland/holland

Post by locsen »

good god



my internet goes off for 4 days and i come back to chaos in the ranks!


have we all stopped arguing?


FYI of all the emails i have sent to MSPs/MPs, still only one reply from donald gorrie MSP. and he is next ti useless.


anyone have any joy with press/news agencies carrying the story?
One day it's going to dawn on the human race that war is as barbaric a means of resolving conflict as cannibalism is as a means of coping with diet deficiencies.

Bruce Kent
James C
Major Poster
Major Poster
Posts: 1046
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:42 pm

Post by James C »

I posted this on Saturday (below). I believe this is the building which is in front of WTC7. Just to clarify, the view behind Jane Standley is looking south west. The sunlight is coming from the right which at 5.00pm would put it in the west which is correct. We are looking therefore at the north (north east) elevation of wtc7 with its distinctive black rectangular area on the facade below the penthouse suites. The Woolworth building stands to the east (and to the north slightly) of the wtc site which is correct also.



Just for everyone's information I have been looking at the placement of the buildings from the BBC footage of Jane Standley. WTC7 is clearly visible albeit obscured slightly by a tall red brick building. This is the Western Union Building which stands about 8-9 blocks north east of the WTC site and was the only building of substantial size between Ms Standley and the WTC on 9/11.

Image

Image
johndoe
Wrecker
Wrecker
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:53 am

Post by johndoe »

can anyone get a map showing the western union building and wtc 7 on it so we can draw a line of sight?
User avatar
telecasterisation
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1873
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:18 pm
Location: Upstairs

Post by telecasterisation »

johndoe wrote:can anyone get a map showing the western union building and wtc 7 on it so we can draw a line of sight?
http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewt ... &start=120
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
johndoe
Wrecker
Wrecker
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:53 am

Post by johndoe »

wouldn't that angle leave you looking at that side of wtc7?
Winston Smith 101
New Poster
New Poster
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:58 pm

Post by Winston Smith 101 »

The view from the BBC
Image

Similar line of view but from a greater elevation. Note the red brick building in front.
Image

and to prove it is the same building that collapsed...

Image
User avatar
telecasterisation
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1873
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:18 pm
Location: Upstairs

Post by telecasterisation »

johndoe wrote:wouldn't that angle leave you looking at that side of wtc7?
Can you elaborate even just a little?
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
johndoe
Wrecker
Wrecker
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:53 am

Post by johndoe »

well if one was looking from the western union building onto the world trade centre 7 you would be looking at it side on ie. it's narrower point. but in the image it appears to be wider than this.
User avatar
telecasterisation
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1873
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:18 pm
Location: Upstairs

Post by telecasterisation »

johndoe wrote:well if one was looking from the western union building onto the world trade centre 7 you would be looking at it side on ie. it's narrower point. but in the image it appears to be wider than this.
I see what you mean now, however I do not agree, WTC7 looks as I would expect given the dimensions and angle of view. This is all down to opinion though so unless there is anything more concrete, embarking on further discussion will serve no purpose.
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC
johndoe
Wrecker
Wrecker
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:53 am

Post by johndoe »

meh maybe wtc 7 is wider than i thought and when i've been looking at stuff such as your third give i had always presumed that was the front and not the side.
James C
Major Poster
Major Poster
Posts: 1046
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:42 pm

Post by James C »

johndoe wrote:meh maybe wtc 7 is wider than i thought and when i've been looking at stuff such as your third give i had always presumed that was the front and not the side.
Hi johndoe,

We are looking at one of the long faces of wtc7 in the BBC report. It is the facade which faces north/north east. If you were to have drawn a line perpendicular to this side of the building it would have passed very close to the Western Union Building which lies to the north/north east of the wtc site.

This satellite image shows the Western Union building at 60 Hudson Street. If you imagine a line travelling south west from this point you arrive at the former site of wtc7. The site of the twin towers is the block after that.

The picture below shows wtc7 looking from the twin towers, i.e. looking north east. The long facade (the one we cannot see) is the one in the BBC footage. 75 Park Place is on the left and the Western Union Building is out of shot but would be at the top of the picture if we could see it.

Image
Anthony Lawson
Validated Poster
Validated Poster
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:38 am
Location: Phuket, Thailand

Great Post

Post by Anthony Lawson »

Great Post, Winston Smith 101

At last, proof positive that the building behind Jane Standley was the yet-to-collapse WTC7.

Whether it is now of any importance, from my experience with video, I don't think that this was a composite image. If it had been a matte, the area where the hair touches Ms Standley’s shoulders would have been a give away, showing a splash of the matte colour being used on the screen, filtering through the blond strands. This is quite difficult to overcome, particularly when the show must go on, a.s.a.p. There are other factors which suggest that this was not blue or green screen, but, of course, I can't be 100% certain.

Maybe the BBC will set us straight.

One thing I am certain of is that the newscaster's question about the people on the street: “...are they talking, yet, about revenge...? didn't seem to be the most natural one, under the circumstances. I've mentioned this before, but it's either been lost in the clutter, or thought to be unimportant.

My point is that questions about how the hijacked planes could have so easily pierced the nations not inconsiderable air defences without any warnings being given, even by air traffic controllers, would have been far more appropriate, rather than a question about revenge. Revenge against whom? No one had claimed responsibility (which is still the case), and, as far as I can recall, Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda had yet to be publicly blamed.

It would be interesting to know who was in the news control room, feeding questions into the newsreader's earpiece, or putting them up on the teleprompter. Could the ‘revenge’ factor have been a surreptitious part of the press release, which led to the early announcement of the collapse? Knowing what we know now, I don’t think that this is too fanciful.

In any event, thank you for clearing up the questions regarding which building it was behind Jane Standley, Winston.

Anthony
The truth won't set you free, but identifying the liars could help make the world a better place.
Post Reply