Coincedense, I don't think so!

"Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied." - Otto von Bismarck

The bbc's other news outlet, NEWS24 also reported it had collapsed at 4.57, and this time there is a time stamp:

you can download the orrig vid here: http://www.mega-file.net/video/view.php?video=1b2a2daa4332dd157708a14a69... (link underneath on right to download it)

Thanks to Physcisist :http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=57983#57983

So they are caught then.

Now, what news feed gave them this information, and who was the source?

WHO WAS THE SOURCE?

We are NOT saying that BBC was "in on it", but that they recieved their information from someone who WAS.

Way to go!

And to 911veritas, ya done good kid.

This is just a WONDERFUL story for our movement.

I hope we are sending it to news stations, and papers, both throughout the USA and in the UK.

You have to put this on digg.com!! let´s digg it!

"4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-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."

No, they most certainly do not, except to show that your sister channel was consistent and in line with the BBC World News reporting, about things which had not yet happened...!

"3. 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..."

So she didn't remember the building she was reporting on, going down five minutes after her feed was "lost"..?

"We lost the tapes"

Yeah, right. As if you don't make sure to keep recordings of such an important event as 9/11.

They have a wonderful vantage point from where they are located.

You would think that if a 47 story building had collapsed anytime in the hour prior to broadcast..... that they would have seen it.

Big clouds of dust..... smoke.... chatter all over the police radios.... people pointing and gasping...... one less building on the horizon..... film footage???

She has to know exactly what happened after her broadcast was cut..... because all she had left to do was look out the window..... at the actual collapse of the building.

a building which she didn't report collapsed later.... a building that she found out was building 7 which she had already reported on.

She remembers!
___________________
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Reminds me of Dan Rather, who also claimed that he couldn't remember what he reported that day, when recently asked about whether he thought WTC7 was controlled demolition.

Seems like no one in the press remembers much about 9/11. Anyway, it's not like it's the most important news they have ever covered or anything. :-)

Here's about half of that archive that was found earlier this week.

http://conspiracycentral.net:6969/stats.html?info_hash=2d64409b6f179bc99...

From Youtube:

Over an hour before the WTC 7 demolition at 4:10pm, Aaron Brown reports - "building 7, in the wtc complex, is on fire and has either collapsed, or is collapsing".

Link to the footage:

WTC 7 Foreknowledge

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1LetB0z8_o&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fscrewloosec...

What happened once the BBC had discovered that their report preceded real world events by 20 minutes ? That realisation must have occurred shortly after the footage of the actual collapse of WTC 7 went all over the networks. Did they comment on their apparent mistake at any time during the 9 / 11 coverage ? Such a response might well hold more clues.
As it stands, it looks highly likely that the word was out WTC 7 would be coming down, and this message was somehow misrepresented. That is not really interesting though...the real issue is why the official NIST report is bending over backwards to try to come up with any explanation but the controled demolition one.
The insurance companies by the way are another vital link here : these people have seen every trick in the book and then some, and would be all over anything suspicious : why are they silent ??

google pulled it..

so:

I remember hearing on BBC Radio that 5 planes had been hijacked; this was before the Pentagon was hit.

I might be able to believe they just got it wrong, because of the unprecedented numbers of collapsing buildings and hijacked aircraft, IF they were prepared to produce an objective report focusing on the many remaining questions evaded and ignored by the rigged 911 commission.

As it is the BBC looks guilty if only by association with its blatantly biased and condescending Conspiracy Files hit piece.

I remember at one point 8 planes were reported hijacked.

Best wishes

"But it doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of life. The world is waking up to the truth about 9/11 despite the mainstream media and the current spate of attacks, 'hit pieces' and condemnation of 9/11 investigators prove that point. The familiar sequence is unfolding once again: (1) Ignore them and they will go away; (2) If they don't go away and people start to listen attack them in every way possible; (3) If that doesn't work ... shit! Stage three is within our sights. "...........I think we already are at the "shit" stage........maddog

Yea, "The world is waking up to the truth about 9/11 despite the mainstream media and the current spate of attacks, 'hit pieces' and " David Icke’s Lizard men madness. David Icke has done as much damage to the credibility of 9/11 truth as have all the "debunkers" combined, because he justifies and reinforces the kooky stereotype of "crazy conspiracy theorists" that we’re constantly associated with.

It is only because enough people who are serious about this and have presented credible enough arguments that 9/11 truth has made any headway, no thanks to David Icke.

I wouldn't be too harsh on Icke. At one time I felt the way you did until I started my research on him. He has put everything on the line for what he believes in and to get the truth out. He was talking about what is happening now back in 1993. Watch the Robot's Rebellion sometime. You can find it on Google Videos. It was filmed in 1993. Sure his shape-shifter thing may be wrong but who is to say. At one time people believed the world was flat. There is a possibility he could be right. The way I see it the people in charge of things are sure not human. Look at someone like Bush One. He has more blood on his hands than Gingus Kahn. Same thing with Kissinger and Cheney or how about the Rothschild and Rockefeller crime families. These people are sub-human scum. I could no more do what they do than I could grow wings and fly to the moon. Nor could any other normal human being that I know of. I don't know what these people are but they sure aren't human. Even Meria Heller mentioned Icke when she gave her keynote address at the Chicago convention. Personally I never put any truther down. I don't always agree with everything that is said but I believe in solidarity of the truth movement. If I don't agree with someone I keep my big mouth shut. None of us know the real truth. The only thing we really know is that 9/11 was an inside job and that the Official Story is a fairy tale. All else is speculation. In my opinion the only thing that hurts our movement is the in-fighting that does go on. And like Meria Heller says, we must put our egos aside and stand united. It is the only way we can win this thing.

"He was talking about what is happening now back in 1993."

The only reason why he's able to say, "I told you so" is because he helped destroy the credibility of the information and so the agenda carried on. I don't want to be sitting around in a few years saying "I told you so" like Icke does, I actually want to stop the things that are happening before it gets any worse. Icke and his cuckoo bullshit greatly HELPS the scumbags get away with all this, when the crap he comes out with gets associated with 9/11 truth it's highly detrimental.

Edit: If people like Icke fine, some of the things he says I agree with also, but on the whole he's too much and is used to smear everything by the media. It's always "Oh David Icke believes in this so it's nuts" - when that's in relation to 9/11 truth you've got to appreciate how frustrating it is.

people will always ridicule us for saying it was an inside job - with or without Icke..

I fully understand where you are coming from Bruce, but I think it is unfair to suggest that he has done nothing - he was one of the first people to talk about these things over a decade ago..

the amount of people he has 'turned on' is probably far more than all of us on this site put togther - his books are global.. you can't just right him off - I see it as on the same level as those that do not engage with what we are saying, and just want to laugh and ridicule any information that shatters your world view.

If you only believe in the material world - then what he has to say will just not be acceptable to you. That does not make it invalid discussion though :-)...

but enough of it here IMO.

I agree, Icke has made an impact on people psyches (for better or worse), I have no idea, and no one else does as to whether what he says is 100% right or wrong. Although he did predict the war on ilsam and such an event as 911 - way back in the 90's
So i will not write him off - the fact that he has given up a normal life -and put himself in great danger in pursuit of things that we really should know about: world government, illuminati etc.. In my oppinion he deserves respect - even if you don't accept everything he says.

The Irony - when he first started out he did a presentation in my parents house here in Brighton - that was like 1990 or something.. crazy. Never knew he would go so far..lol

Yes his lizard stuff is way out there - but do a little research and there is a recuring theme throughout ancient societies: that they were governed and manipulated by "gods" half reptilian - the Mayan Priests were in contact with a feathered serpent, Christianity has eve and the serpent, the Emporers of china's claim to the throne was their blood relation to a reptilian god... etc..

I do not make up my mind on anything, unless I have observable evidence: but to just right someone off that can't provide that sort of evidence is premature is in my oppinion limiting your understanding of the universe.

But more important for me, he talks about our true nature of us as beings, and that we are infinite - this is my belief (which i feel i am entitled to), based on many things I have read; carlos castenda books, and other Toltec writings.. Which for me is a positive and empowering slant, on which otherwise would be such a dark world.

This is theorectical, and as such is competely different to the "truth" movement - and as such should be kept very seperate though.

Thank you for your comments Carios. You put it beautifully. I too believe as you do. In my mind we are all God's kids. "Children of the Most High." as the Carpenter once said. Our true nature IS divine. I know that for a fact. Like Icke, I had a spiritual experience 30 years ago that completely changed my life. From a street wino I became a father of 3 beautiful children and a productive citizen of this planet. Thanks to the spiritual experience I had, the 12 steps and the people I met in AA. To leave out the spiritual aspects of what happened on 9/11 I think is a grave mistake.

for a truly wonderful story

to reptiles as being metaphorical. If you strip away the spiritiul mumbojumbo and sci-fi stuff his ideas about "repeaters" and "problem-reaction-solution" are spot on.

I also think his wacko reputation is now a safety mechanism for him because if he concentrated on the purely political side of things he would get into trouble very quickly.

on edit: BTW I'm not a proponent of Icke, I think he exists in his own category outside of politics, 9/11 truth etc. However, a couple of the terms he uses (as mentioned above) seem quite pertinent.

i think thats part of what pisses people off about him so much. the fact that so much of what hes says makes sense and is spot on but then he has to torpedo his own credibility with the reptile stuff. you know what they say about disinfo though, its usually about 90% correct and 10% disinfo.....

is precisely that he tells the truth about 90% of the time in order to hide it behind the insane other 10%. Think about it this way--you know the truth about everything has the potential to come out at any time, you know that people will then come up with analysis that is good or bad. Knowing you can't stop that from happening, you have to cover all your bases by having various unpleasant people become well-known advocates of certain truths and good analyses in order to dissuade others from examining those truths and forms of analyses, since in the wrong (right) hands, such truths and analyses could achieve mass respect and popularity.

____

♠

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

Why isn't media matters.com covering this monumental cock-up by the BBC? Why is it that media matters.com ignores all things related to 9/11 so-called conspiracy theories?

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate."

--Noam "Sequitur" Chomsky

Which reminds me: What's with the 60s rant thing?

Perhaps that also explains why Richard Porter didn't qualify for Keith Olbermann's "worst person in the world" list.

Instead, Keith gave the gold to the Baseball Hall of Fame committee? I can't even remember why?

Keith, failure to place Porter on your list after his pathetic showing today makes you the WORST PERSON IN THE WOOORRLLDDDD!!!!

IMHO!