BBC WTC7 Conspiracy Files: 'Pull the other one Lizard Man'

[ishaar]

original title
Italian TV network claims building 7 was demolished

Also mentions the bbc reporting the collapse too early and Jowenko confirming CD


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0[/youtube]



In April 2007, Italian TV broadcasted a definite proof that Building 7 was demolished by explosives. For the rest of the series, go to luogocomune.net

[TonyGosling]

A reminder from a couple of months ago

This shows what a Stalinist country we are now living in - most of the opinion formers, as they are now known by the technocrats, know all about WTC7, 9/11 and the rest - but are they allowed to write about it here in the UK? No.

Along with the of Princess Diana and the unbelievably suppressed facts about the crooks running the CCTV on the London Underground 9/11 is the most heavily suppressed story in the UK.

Richard Porter, pull the other one lizard man

God bless the web's truth seekers
By Axegrinder
Monday, 19 March 2007
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/article/1 ... der_160307

Axegrinder is not one to indulge in idle conspiracy theory speculation, but could it be possible that the BBC is run by shape-shifting lizard people who are in league with Al Qaeda?

I only ask because of a much-watched piece of BBC World footage on Google Video which shows reporter Jane Standley reporting the collapse of the Salomon Brothers building (also known as WTC 7) on 11 September, 2001 - 20 minutes before it actually fell.

You can see the building clearly still standing behind her.

As cattleprods911 says in the Google Video comments section: "Now that 9/11 is unravelling, as is Waco, the anti-conspiracy theorists are quickly becoming the 'NUTS', and my guess is they are sucking on one kind of government tit or another! God bless you truth seekers!"

Here, here.

Richard Porter, head of news for BBC World, has issued a response on The Editors, the BBC editors' blog. But does he protest too much? He says:

- We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on 11 September. We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.

- In the chaos and confusion of the day, I'm quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate - but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did - sourced our reports, used qualifying words like "apparently" or "it's reported" or "we're hearing" and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

- Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks and, like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I've spoken to her today and, unsurprisingly, she doesn't remember minute-by-minute what she said or did ¡ª like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing, what she was being told, and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

- We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of -up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I'd love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don't help clear up the issue one way or another.

- If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that.

Pull the other one lizard man.

[truthseeker john]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... cleId=5550

9/11: Major Italian TV network: conclusive evidence that WTC Building 7 was demolished with explosives

by Massimo Mazzucco

Global Research, May 3, 2007
911 Blog

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

"Seven is exploding"

Welcome to all foreign readers. Luogocomune is a news commentary site (all in Italian, thus far) featuring a large, separate section on 9/11. In a way, the whole website revolves around the idea that unless that paramount, unacceptable lie called "the 9/11 terrorist attacks" is removed and put into right perspective, the downward spiral towards this new "dark age" of humanity will never stop.

To us "9/11 victims" are not only the 3,000 people that perished on that day, but also some 650,000 civilians killed in Iraq since the invasion began, 100,000 plus Afghans who've met the same fate in their country, more than 3,000 US soldiers sent by "Dick & Rummy" to die under false pretense, and --sadly but truly -- the ever increasing number of first responders who were knowingly sent to their death by an administration that could be defined "criminal" for this one action alone.

It's for them all that we fight.

Now for some interesting news we wish to share with anyone interested in 9/11 worldwide.

On April 16, 2007, a major Italian network (Canale 5) has aired some conclusive evidence that Building 7 did not collapse on its own, but was deliberately taken down with the use of explosives.

The piece was part of a larger presentation we provided to the network as an update on the ongoing research on 9/11. In particular, we included a clip we had all seen many times before, but possibly never listened to with the full attention it deserved. Here is the 6 min. segment (please ignore yellow subtitles):

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0[/youtube]
[More videos inside]. Yes, we all saw that last clip more than once, but each time we must have stopped at the powerful evidence the blast itself represents, while disregarding the ensuing exchange, which in our opinion represents the final nail in the coffin of the official version on WTC7. Without even the need to discuss Larry's intentionally ambiguous "pull it" statement.

More at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... cleId=5550

[Emmanuel]

Que bene!

Thanks for finding that. It was a very well put together report there.
Notice the Manager fireman says "Dont worry about it' as if this was the training or instruction he got to keep the firemen into order, while building 7 is obviously demolished.

[TonyGosling]

Brill quote
Changing headline of this thread

A reminder from a couple of months ago

This shows what a Stalinist country we are now living in - most of the opinion formers, as they are now known by the technocrats, know all about WTC7, 9/11 and the rest - but are they allowed to write about it here in the UK? No.

Along with the of Princess Diana and the unbelievably suppressed facts about the crooks running the CCTV on the London Underground 9/11 is the most heavily suppressed story in the UK.

Richard Porter, pull the other one lizard man

God bless the web's truth seekers
By Axegrinder
Monday, 19 March 2007
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/article/1 ... der_160307

Axegrinder is not one to indulge in idle conspiracy theory speculation, but could it be possible that the BBC is run by shape-shifting lizard people who are in league with Al Qaeda?

I only ask because of a much-watched piece of BBC World footage on Google Video which shows reporter Jane Standley reporting the collapse of the Salomon Brothers building (also known as WTC 7) on 11 September, 2001 - 20 minutes before it actually fell.

You can see the building clearly still standing behind her.

As cattleprods911 says in the Google Video comments section: "Now that 9/11 is unravelling, as is Waco, the anti-conspiracy theorists are quickly becoming the 'NUTS', and my guess is they are sucking on one kind of government tit or another! God bless you truth seekers!"

Here, here.

Richard Porter, head of news for BBC World, has issued a response on The Editors, the BBC editors' blog. But does he protest too much? He says:

- We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on 11 September. We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.

- In the chaos and confusion of the day, I'm quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate - but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did - sourced our reports, used qualifying words like "apparently" or "it's reported" or "we're hearing" and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

- Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks and, like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I've spoken to her today and, unsurprisingly, she doesn't remember minute-by-minute what she said or did ¡ª like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing, what she was being told, and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

- We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of -up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I'd love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don't help clear up the issue one way or another.

- If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that.

Pull the other one lizard man.

[outsider]

'Meet Jerome Hauer, 9/11 Suspect Awaiting Indictment':
http://winterpatriot.blogspot.co.uk/200 ... iting.html

'Ladies and Gentlemen, meet Jerome Hauer, director of the Office of Public Health Preparedness.

On September 11, 2001, Jerome Hauer was a national security advisor with the National Institute of Health, a managing director with Kroll Associates, and a guest on national television.

His background in counter-terror and his specialized knowledge of biological warfare served him well on that day.

Perhaps a little too well.

Anthrax Attacks
On September 11, 2001, Jerome Hauer advised the White House to begin taking Cipro, an antibiotic which is effective against anthrax.

Mr. Hauer's advice was not made public. Its value may have been underestimated at the time, but it was clearly demonstrated a week later, when the first anthrax letters appeared, and again three weeks after that, when anthrax appeared in letters to Democratic Senators Daschle and Leahy.

The obvious question is: Did Jerome Hauer know about the anthrax attacks in advance?

Prior Knowledge?
Strangely, perhaps, this is not the first time questions of prior knowledge have surfaced in Jerome Hauer's wake.

Jerome Hauer joined New York City's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) in 1998 and quickly obtained funding from the office of then-mayor Rudy Giuliani for the study of West Nile virus. The following year the virus appeared in the city, and Jerome Hauer led the fumigation effort.

Did Jerome Hauer know this was going to happen? Or did he just get "lucky"?

And how could anyone know such a thing was going to happen? Unless ... unless ...

The Sound Of Two Feet Dragging
Strangely, perhaps, Jerome Hauer managed the NIH response to the anthrax attacks. The anthrax used in the attacks was identified as an Ames strain, which means it had to have come from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

Jerome Hauer received relatively good information for tracking down the origin of the anthrax. He even got a list of people from various institutes, including USAMRIID at Fort Detrick. But his response was slow and hidden behind a public relations campaign spreading Orwellian claims like "Suspects are Osama bin Laden and his Al-Q'aeda network and sympathizers to US right wing extremists".

Why would he act so slowly, and in such an inappropriate fashion? Perhaps because Jerome Hauer knew someone whose name was on that list?

Stephen Hatfill, at one time considered a prime suspect in this still-unsolved case, had worked for USAMRIID at Fort Detrick. Strangely, perhaps, he had also worked with Jerome Hauer, for Scientific Applications International Corporation, at the Center for Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis.

The World Trade Center
Jerome Hauer's connections with terror and counter-terror started with and concentrated on biological warfare, but they don't stop there.

On September 11, 2001, in addition to his job with the NIH, Jerome Hauer was also Managing Director of Kroll Associates, a well-established security firm serving clients in the military and the US government. In the 1980s, Kroll was known as the "CIA of Wall Street" because of the sorts of the people it hired, and the sorts of tasks they were assigned.

Strangely, perhaps, on 9/11, Kroll was in charge of security for the entire World Trade Center complex.

The head of security at the WTC on September 11, 2001, was former FBI counter-terror specialist John P. O'Neill.

O'Neill, considered the world's leading expert on Osama bin Laden, had resigned his post as Deputy Director of the FBI during the summer, very unhappy with the Bush administration's head-in-sand "approach" to terror, after investigations into Osama bin Laden and al-Q'aeda had been blocked.

Who Killed John O'Neill?
John O'Neill started his new job at the WTC shortly before he was killed there. His having landed that particular job at that particular time raises some very interesting questions.

Among them: Why does this matter?

If, as many people believe, 9/11 was a false-flag operation designed to implicate Osama bin Laden, then a legend, or a cover story, involving bin Laden would have to be fabricated, disseminated very quickly, and swallowed whole -- not just by the American people but by the people of the world.

And John O'Neill was a most -- if not the most -- formidable obstacle in the way of such a cover story.

He was not only the world's leading expert on bin Laden, but he was also regarded as a "loose cannon", because of his record of working outside normal channels when normal channels were "blocked". He knew FBI investigations into bin Laden and al-Q'aeda had been shut down in the summer of 2001 and it is extremely unlikely that he would have remained quiet about it. He also knew whether or not Osama bin Laden was capable of inflicting the amount of damage the US suffered on 9/11.

In other words, if the conspirators were hoping to spread a Big Lie about Osama bin Laden, they would have had a short list of things they absolutely had to do.

Surely, one of the items on that list would be to silence John O'Neill.

And what better way than to entomb him at the scene of the crime?

So many questions!

Who got John O'Neill the WTC job?

Strangely, perhaps, John O'Neill was lured to the WTC position by his old friend Jerome Hauer, Managing Director of Kroll.

Very strange indeed, don't you think?

National Television
Which employer -- if any -- was Jerome Hauer representing on the morning of September 11, 2001, when he slipped the seeds of the official conspiracy theory to Dan Rather and his viewers on CBS?

A few weeks ago I blogged about a video which was hosted at Google at the time but which has now been taken down. Fortunately I was able to obtain transcripts from the video while it was available.

One segment of the video [starting at 2:30] documents the following exchange, from the morning of September 11, 2001:

Dan Rather: Based on what you know, and I recognize we’re dealing with so few facts, is it possible that just a plane crash could have collapsed these buildings, or would it have required the, sort of, prior positioning of other explosives in the, uh, in the buildings? I mean, what do you think?

Jerome Hauer: No, I, uh, my sense is just the velocity of the plane and the fact that you have a plane filled with fuel hitting that building, uh, that burned, uh, the velocity of that plane, uh, certainly, uh, uh, had an impact on the structure itself, and then the fact that it burned and you had that intense heat, uh, probably weakened the structure as well, uh, and I think it, uh, was, uh, simply the, uh, the planes hitting the buildings, and, and causing the collapse.
Jerome Hauer is certainly a remarkable guest, isn't he? On the very morning of the event, he had the whole thing figured out.

The collapse was simply due to the planes hitting the buildings, just the velocity of the plane and of course the fact that it was filled with fuel, and the fact that it burned and of course you had that intense heat which must have weakened the structure ... It's incredible, of course. It's also half of the official story!

But let's get back to the attack itself. Who did it? Who could have done it? If you were watching CBS that morning, you would have heard this:

Dan Rather: What perspective can you give us? I mean, there have been these repeated reports that, well, yes, Osama Bin Laden, but some think he’s been over-emphasized as, as responsible for these kinds of events. I know many intelligence, uh, people at very high levels who say, listen, you can’t have these kinds of attacks without having some state, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, somebody involved. Put that into perspective for us.

Jerome Hauer: Yeah, well I’m not sure I agree that, umm, this is necessarily state-sponsored. Umm, it, as I mentioned earlier, certainly has, umm, the, uh, fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden.
And that, of course, is the other half of the official story.

How did Dan Rather happen to have a guest with him on the morning of 9/11 who knew the entire official story before it became public knowledge?

Jerome Hauer was introduced to CBS's viewers as a former director of NYC's OEM. Strangely, perhaps, CBS News audiences were not told he was also a managing director of the security company responsible for the twin towers. And of course no one was told to start taking Cipro -- except the White House.

Planting The Seeds
The twin disintegrations of the twin towers certainly looked like explosives-driven demolitions to many reporters who covered them live -- but Jerome Hauer assured Dan Rather and his viewers that it was just caused by the intense heat that weakened the structure!

The attack of 9/11 was of such scope and ferocity that it was virtually unimaginable -- except to the people who planned it -- just a day before it happened. But when it did happen, Jerome Hauer was able to contradict the intelligence experts and claim it bore the fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden!

Jerome Hauer knew the entire official story before it became public knowledge.

Jerome Hauer helped the official story become public knowledge!

Watering The Seeds
In November of 2001, Jerome Hauer participated in the Council on Foreign Relations' "Independent Task Force on America's Response to Terrorism", along with Henry A. Kissinger and others; their task included the following items:

Release a White Paper explaining our goals and rationale for the war in Afghanistan, and outlining the evidence that the al-Qa'eda network was responsible for the 9/11 attacks

Disseminate stories of particular victims to convey the range of people killed in the 9/11 attacks -- stress range of religions, races, income levels, etc.

Counteract [the] myth that Mossad was behind the attacks by showing Jews killed, etc.

Routinely monitor the regional press in real time to enable prompt responses


Routinely Monitor This!!

You have a plane filled with fuel hitting that building, the velocity of that plane certainly had an impact on the structure itself, and then the fact that it burned and you had that intense heat, probably weakened the structure as well, and I think it was simply the planes hitting the buildings and causing the collapse.
...
I’m not sure I agree that this is necessarily state-sponsored. It certainly has the fingerprints of somebody like Bin Laden.
Yeah, sure it does! Really, Jerome -- we believe you!

No, we don't!

Book 'em, Danno!

~~~

[SEE ALSO]

CRUCIAL VIDEO: Who Killed John O'Neill?:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSyFD51vN_4

9/11 Encyclopedia: Hauer, Jerome
9/11 Encyclopedia: Kroll Associates
Demopedia: Jerome Hauer
Demopedia: Who Killed John O'Neill
Here In Reality: Who Killed 9-11 Hero John O'Neill?
Whistleblower Andrew Grove blames Kroll for 9/11
Wikipedia: Jerome Hauer
Wikipedia: John P. O'Neill
Wikipedia: Kroll Associates

[thanks to 99 for research assistance]


Also, because '7 is now exploding' video is 'unavailable' and 'doesn't exist', here's a longer film from Italy (unfortunately in Italian!):
'Inganno Globale 11 settembre 2001' (versione completa):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e9T7JMQ8Fw

It was reported to be the best Italian documentary of 9/11; if 'Zero' is anything to go on, it must be pretty good. Pity no English subtitles.

[outsider]

Yipee! I think this is the documentary originally linked to in this thread:

"September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor":
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules ... &artid=167

It's in 3 parts - I've never seen it before.
And it's in English!