Is the BBC psychic?

Question

How did they know WTC 7 fell, before it actually did? The reporter is standing in front of a window overlooking downtown, reporting that it fell...but you can still see it standing in the background. She didn't say, it's going to...or it's unstable...she said it fell?! The building fell 23 mins. later. How does that even happen?

And don't call me a conspiracy nutjob...it's just an honest question?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHxOeNXSUcM&NR

Cory--Well, why did they say WTC 7, b/c it actually wasn't hit by a plane, and was less damaged by others...bldgs. 5&6 were damaged much worse...why did they pick 7 and were right about it?

Answer 1

Actually UncleRic, the BBC has said that this footage is completely accurate. So the facade that it could have been manipulated is completely false. Get off your Bush "administration" mantra kick and stop spreading spinning things.

Just me, you can't come to these boards and ask objective questions about 9/11. You can't come here and sway away from the "official" story, people will think you are crazy. People will think you un-American, un-patriotic and an idiot. In fact, if you question the "administration" in any way what so ever here, you get called a fascist, which I am still trying to figure out since fascism is a conservative ideal.

The point is this. The BBC knew something, bottom line. You can't tell me for a minute, that this gal who looks out the window claiming that building 7 has came down, is reporting what had really happened.

Larry Silverstein goes on a PBS special about 9/11, and claims that they "pulled" building 7. What I don't get, is why people still question this when it came straight from the horses mouth.

Answer 2

Supposedly the building had caught fire because some burning debris had fallen into it from the towers that had been hit by the plane. The the fire dept. could not control the fire and had decided to "pull" the bldg. (set explosives to collapse the bldg.) The report that the bldg. was to be "pulled" was interpreted as the bldg. already fallen.
That is feasible in theory. However, the question is how among all the chaos happening that day did fire personal even think to do such a procedure, and how did they rig the bldg. in such a short time. Controlled demolition of such bldgs. takes days of planning.
Bldg. 7 housed Mayor Giuliani's bunker, and was a CIA headquarters

Answer 3

Thor girl
The whole statement from the BBC that you have copied is them saying that they are not part of this conspiracy, no one is saying they are part of the conspiracy what people want to know is what was there source for this information somebody has told them that building 7 had collapsed but why would you even suspect this was going to happen as steel structure skyscrapers do not collapse due to fire, the Windsor Building in Madrid by comparison was a raging inferno and burned for over 24 hours yet did not collapse

Answer 4

Building 7 was never hit with anything, and the BBC reporter said it collapsed 23 minutes before it actually did! It certainly was not hit by a plane or even the falling trades!

I think the BBC responded to that totally incorrect report, but I haven't seen it!

Answer 5

let's ask the BBC which for the most part is Anti American and Very Anti Bush from my stand point but here was the BBC Answer



Until now, I don't think we've been accused of being part of the conspiracy. But now some websites are using news footage from BBC World on September 11th 2001 to suggest we were actively participating in some sort of attempt to manipulate the audience. As a result, we're now getting lots of emails asking us to clarify our position. So here goes:

1. We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. 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.

2. 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.

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 minute-by-minute what she said or did - 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.

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.

5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today "so the guy in the studio didn't quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy... "

Answer 6

look... i presumed i became seeing lifeless human beings when I save on seeing this lady down my highway yet my friends cant see her. A logical explaniation is that your purely fortunate. i'm fortunate too! I win perpetually at raffles or tombola's or bingo. the element is......purely ignore approximately it! in case you think of that your psychic powers are incredible...your no longer the 1st. comparable with me.

Answer 7

i saw this on liveleak and it confused the hell outta me. ive always thought there was something abit dodgey behind the sad events of 9/11. whatever it be i hope maybe on day the truth will come out

Answer 8

I saw Nicholas Cage's head turn into a fiery skull. That must be true also. Everyone knows it's impossible for a piece of video footage and the audio to be manipulated. This really is the smoking gun.

Answer 9

Or, the person made a mistake, and thought that since it was hit it must have fallen.

Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by simple carelessness.