• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

BBC and WTC 7 on 9/11: confusion or NWO-blunder?

Transit readings don't translate into a forecast of high speed, symmetrical, complete building collapses. For all the firefighters knew, a section of WTC7 was possibly going to collapse. It's not unusual for damaged buildings to drop large debris from severely damaged areas of the structure.
When you read their accounts, you'll see that the firefighters, controlled demolitions experts, and engineers believed that WTC 7 would collapse, due to the severity of the fires and damage. The collapse of two huge skyscrapers from fire and damage, earlier in the day, across the street, no doubt weighed heavily on their minds.

WTC7 was hit by debris from WTC1, a 110 storey building. I recall no report of a shower of heavy flaming debris.
The debris was certainly heavy. Much debris from WTC 1 was flaming, but I don't think it's known if actual flaming debris hit WTC 7.

Klingon cruisers are fantasy but if you feel that's required to support your comments than be my guest.
No, facts will do just fine.
 
The Bad Guys Always Confess

Conspiracy people have a few strange ideas stuck in their brains. One of them is that the bad guys always confess.

In the Bizarro World of conspiracy theorists, the perps are forever spilling the beans and blurting out the truth.

But no one can perceive it except the conspiracy guys.

We've seen this mental glitch too many times to ignore it. The CTs think Silverstein admitted that he blew WTC7. They think Cheney confessed to shooting down one of the planes (or something). They think the bad guys had a TV movie made to give away the plot. It's all right there. It's all terribly obvious.

But only the conspiracy guys see it!

And here we go again. Once again, the bad guys have slipped up and given the game away. It's just so obvious...

...but only the conspiracy guys are smart enough to get it, natch. Do Truthers ever perceive this pattern in their own thinking?

Silly question.
 
Last edited:
Other reports from the day

The Capitol Building had been attacked, and a truck bomb had exploded outside the Congressional Library.

At the Pentagon, an LPG Tank had exploded. Then a helicopter had crashed on take off

Secret NWO agenda proof. Or a bunch of reporters scrambling to cover the biggest new story since Kennedy's death while trying to deal with their own emotions as events unfolded
 
Those pesky kids! They discovered our plot to take over the world! Now, for all twoofers, we have to build those spaceships quickly and send them all to Jupiter, where the aliens will take care of them!







*waits patiently for Alex Jones to stumble on this and use it on his radio show!*
 
OK. I've just watched the video twice. The BBC says nothing at all about a press release. The liars who put this little propaganda gem together have injected talk of a "press release" into the discussion.

They also say EST time when it's EDT time in New York. However, the live shot of the reporter doesn't look greenscreened, and that's WTC 7 behind her. That's apparently a red herring.

Finally, video ends with links to 911blogger.com (which has removed this video from their pages), pilotsfortruth.com, and thepentacon.com. More lies and misleading information from that gang of incompetents.
 
"We’ve been watching number seven World Trade, which was part of the ancillary damage of the explosion and collapse of the other two.”

Aaaaahaaaa!!! Damage from an explosion.

So there were explosives planted in the two towers.... You can't deny the evidence, even Gravy's championing the controlled demoltion theory now!

(Sometimes I wish I was a troofer. It's great fun!) :boxedin:
 
Here's an example of how inaccurate the live reporting of a confusing event can be. I was at home on October 11, 2006, when Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle's small plane crashed into the 30th floor of a residential building in Manhattan. I took notes on some of the early TV and internet reports.

Four witnesses said it was a helicopter...WRONG

“Conflicting reports whether it’s a fixed-wing or helicopter. Probably helicopter based on witness reports."

"Believes it was a seaplane"...WRONG

City and the FDNY have confirmed that a helicopter crashed into the building....WRONG

UPDATE: NYC police and firemen now agree it was a helicopter instead of a small aircraft...WRONG

WABC 7 reports that the helicopter was flying in "exclusion airspace."...WRONG

Death count is four...WRONG (it was 2)

A total of four people have been confirmed dead - two people from the plane, two people from the building...WRONG

Update: A distress call was made before the crash...WRONG

Latest reports say that the pilot made an emergency call about a fuel problem...WRONG

The FAA confirmed that the pilot of the plane made a mayday, stating that he was having fuel problems...WRONG

ABC Radio reports people in the area say they saw a helicopter in distress...WRONG

ESPN confirms that Cory Lidle was alone in the plane...WRONG

Where did the plane hit?
19th & 20th floor
20th floor
30th floor
32nd floor
40th floor
40th & 41st floor
30th-40th floor
44th & 45th floor (said it was a helicopter)

Former Managing Director of NTSB Peter Goelz: "If I had to bet, I'd say it was probably a helicopter."

Bit of a crapshoot, that live coverage of confusing events.
 
I'll retract that. Although FEMA specifically mentions the diesel fuel hypothesis when saying "low probability of occurrence," they may be referring to any of their collapse hypotheses, and I'm fine with that idea.

It's interesting that conspiracists focus on this statement, in a report that FEMA and everyone else says was brief, preliminary, and inconclusive. FEMA said that further study was needed on a host of issues. That's what NIST has been doing. And conspiracists will only be satisfied if NIST determines that there is no rational explanation for WTC 7's collapse that does not involve explosives. So sad.

It's interesting because a source that JREFers respect, FEMA, published an opinion that found a low probability for the BEST HYPOTHESES the FEMA experts could think of to explain the WTC7 collapse.

What is not unusual, is that an important statement like that would be a subject of interest for anyone seeking the Truth?

It's also interesting how you, Gravy, can be so dismissive of an official opinion when it doesn't fit what you want to believe.

MM
 
Transit readings don't translate into a forecast of high speed, symmetrical, complete building collapses. For all the firefighters knew, a section of WTC7 was possibly going to collapse. It's not unusual for damaged buildings to drop large debris from severely damaged areas of the structure.

WTC7 was hit by debris from WTC1, a 110 storey building. I recall no report of a shower of heavy flaming debris.

Klingon cruisers are fantasy but if you feel that's required to support your comments than be my guest.

MM
Do you truly believe that the rest of the world is as stupid as you seem to be?
Placing the transet on the bulge will,indeed, forecast a complete building collapse. As the distance bulged per unit time begins to increase, it takse no rocket scientist to see that the rate of change is increasing rapidly.

And if you missed the point (as you obviously did), a fantasy is an extremely low probability event
 
Where to begin?
Remember the Kursk? The Russian submarine that sank with all hands? We were treated to news stories of the gallant but despairing survivors alive in their metal tomb for days, courtesy of the media. In fact the hapless crew were all dead within seconds.
Closer to home, I happened to be walking through Manchester city centre back in the 90's when those thoughtful Fenian rascals the IRA set off a bomb. One bomb, singular. By the time I got into our office HQ, the staff there were talking about up to sixteen bombs. Conflation, inaccuracy, media speculation, the sound dynamics of a city centre with lots of tall buildings, all played their part.
Plus, back in the late 70's on Top of The Pops, DJ Peter Powell described Boney M's hit single "Brown Girl In The Ring" thus: " - and who could forget Boney M's single "Brown Eyed Girl In The Ring".' Opinions vary as to whether he was being absent-minded or ironic.
 
It's also interesting how you, Gravy, can be so dismissive of an official opinion when it doesn't fit what you want to believe.
FEMA's "official opinion" is there for all to see in their report. They said more study needed to be done. Don't take my word for it. Here it is:
5.7 Observations and Findings

This office building was built over an electrical substation and a power plant, comparable in size to that operated by a small commercial utility. It also stored a significant amount of diesel oil and had a structural system with numerous horizontal transfers for gravity and lateral loads.

The loss of the east penthouse on the videotape suggests that the collapse event was initiated by the loss of structural integrity in one of the transfer systems. Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.

The collapse of WTC 7 was different from that of WTC 1 and WTC 2. The towers showered debris in a wide radius as their external frames essentially "peeled" outward and fell from the top to the bottom. In contrast, the collapse of WTC 7 had a relatively small debris field because the facade came straight down, suggesting an internal collapse. Review of video footage indicates that the collapse began at the lower floors on the east side. Studies of WTC 7 indicate that the collapse began in the lower stories, either through failure of major load transfer members located above an electrical substation structure or in columns in the stories above the transfer structure. Loss of strength due to the transfer trusses could explain why the building imploded, with collapse initiating at an interior location. The collapse may have then spread to the west, causing interior members to continue collapsing. The building at this point may have had extensive interior structural failures that then led to the collapse of the overall building, including the cantilever transfer girders along the north elevation, the strong diaphragms at the 5th and 7th floors, and the seat connections between the interior beams and columns at the building perimeter.

5.8 Recommendations

Certain issues should be explored before final conclusions are reached and additional studies of the performance of WTC 7, and related building performance issues should be conducted. These include the following:
  • Additional data should be collected to confirm the extent of the damage to the south face of the building caused by falling debris.
  • Determination of the specific fuel loads, especially at the lower levels, is important to identify possible fuel supplied to sustain the fires for a substantial duration. Areas of interest include storage rooms, file rooms, spaces with high-density combustible materials, and locations of fuel lines. The control and operation of the emergency power system, including generators and storage tanks, needs to be thoroughly understood. Specifically, the ability of the diesel fuel pumps to continue to operate and send fuel to the upper floors after a fuel line is severed should be confirmed.
  • Modeling and analysis of the interaction between the fires and structural members are important. Specifically, the anticipated temperatures and duration of the fires and the effects of the fires on the structure need to be examined, with an emphasis on the behavior of transfer systems and their connections.
  • Suggested mechanisms for a progressive collapse should be studied and confirmed. How the collapse of an unknown number of gravity columns brought down the whole building must be explained.
  • The role of the axial capacity between the beam-column connection and the relatively strong structural diaphragms may have had in the progressive collapse should be explained.
  • The level of fire resistance and the ratio of capacity-to-demand required for structural members and connections deemed to be critical to the performance of the building should be studied. The collapse of some structural members and connections may be more detrimental to the overall performance of the building than other structural members. The adequacy of current design provisions for members whose failure could result in large-scale collapse should also be studied.
Do you disagree that further study needed to be done, Miragememories?
 
Chedda- not only do we know explosives were used because they called it an "explosion", we can deduce from the word "explosion" that it was clearly symtex or c4, and it was clearly planted by Mossad agents Shlomo Berkowitz and Chaim Goldstein.
 
I am very surprised by Dylan Avery's reaction to this non-event.

I tought he would react more or less like miragememories.
But over at LCF he is gloating, doing as if this is some big thing, pep-talking his troups.

Of course, he doesn't explain what it actually means. He doesn't give a narrative.
His fans will be very disappointed when they realise within days that the world doesn't care for this empty "smoking gun".

In the meantime, Alex Jones has joined the party, with the usual lies:

The fact that the BBC reported on the collapse of Building 7 over twenty minutes in advance of its implosion obviously provokes a myriad of questions as to how they knew it was about to come down when the official story says its collapse came as a result of fire damage weakening the building's structure.
...
As we have documented before, firefighters, police and first responders were all told to get back from the building because it was about to be brought down.
(bolding mine)
 
Last edited:
I am very surprised by Dylan Avery's reaction to this non-event.

I tought he would react more or less like miragememories.
But over at LCF he is gloating, doing as if this is some big thing, pep-talking his troups.

Of course, he doesn't explain what it actually means. He doesn't give a narrative.
His fans will be very disappointed when they realise within days that the world doesn't care for this empty "smoking gun".
Yes, I'm sure that when WTC 7 actually did collapse, the BBC said, "No! No! It collapsed earlier!...I mean, it was supposed to collapse earlier...I mean, it was on the shedyool for 4:55-5:00...I mean, that obviously is some other building...no, no, no, it's a replay!...that's right, a replay of the earlier collapse!...which as we reported happened at 4:57 eastern whatever time this afternoon!"

What blithering idiots. I hope at least Avery provides some good quotes for February. It's been slow the past few days. What happened to Stundie?
 
AJ said:
As we have documented before, firefighters, police and first responders were all told to get back from the building because it was about to be brought down.
Edit. I thought this quote was Avery's. Nah, it's just Jones blaming the firefighters again.

I wonder when he'll stop doing that.
 
Last edited:
When this lady reported that a 47 storey building had collapsed, didn't she wonder why she hadnt noticed this taking place?


1. How do you know she DIDN'T wonder? Reporters read the news, they don't question it unless they are pretty darn sure it is incorrect. The kind of reflection it requires to pick up even fairly obvious errors is hard to muster while you are live on TV!

2. Who knows how much she knew about the WTC complex. The Saloman building may have been unknown to her. At this point lots of other buildings had been damaged or destroyed, maybe she was imagining building 6 in her mind.
 
Alex Jones article has been expanded in the last few minutes, and it is a must read (lies, lies and some more lies).

A few quotes:

It is widely acknowledged by those who were there on the scene that warnings were issued for people to evacuate the area in anticipation of the building's collapse, with some even stating that a 20 second countdown preceded the collapse of the 47-story skyscraper, again clearly suggesting that it was taken down by means of explosives as the video footage of its implosion illustrates.
...
This newly uncovered video confirms that the collapse of WTC 7 was no surprise, because television news stations were reporting on it before it happened!
...
Who told the BBC that the building was going to collapse before it did and why were they reporting its fall in advance of the event actually taking place?

Many have speculated that some kind of press release was leaked too soon and AP wires, radio stations and TV news outlets prematurely reported on WTC 7's collapse.
(bolding mine)

Notice that the "NJ-EMT"-email is now used as a source. :)

Someone should really explain to the CTist that the collapse of WTC 7 was not a surprise, it was anticipated.
 
Dylan is creaming himself there, a mistake made by a BBC reporter who had been fed incorrect info, means he can string his sad punters on for another crappy edition of lies.
If there really is a special place in hell, then Avery gets the hot seat everytime.
He has no shame.
And he has no honour.
 
Last edited:
Dylan is creaming himself there, a mistake made by a BBC reporter who had been fed incorrect info, means he can string his sad punters on for another crappy edition of lies.
If there really is a special place in hell, then Avery gets the hot seat everytime.
He has no shame.
And he has no honour.

While all of that is true, I think that Dylan's interest in promoting this is so he can strike back at the recent BBC documentary that showed him picking at his scabs while the interviewer explained what a simile is.
 
FEMA's "official opinion" is there for all to see in their report. They said more study needed to be done. Don't take my word for it. Here it is:
Do you disagree that further study needed to be done, Miragememories?


Further study equates to further investigation.

I've made no secret that the important goal is a full and proper investigation GRAVY.

Nice how you leap at the opportunity to cut & paste your FEMA info but dodge my original response.

To repeat; I stated, that of course anyone seeking the Truth would be interested in FEMA's original expert statement about why WTC7 collapsed. The fact that they said their best hypotheses to explain the collapse of WTC7 had a low probability of occurence was quite significant, especially given their access to all your rebuttal arguments and voluminous firefighter quotes.

MM
 

Back
Top Bottom