BBC: We reported 9/11 third tower collapse before it happened

Watch
SpikeyTeeth
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/th...spiracy_2.html


Fact: A third tower went (Building 7) down at 9/11 & BBC reported it before it happened. (Just a reminder the largest 2 towers that went down were the “North” and “South” Tower NOT Tower 7).

Obviously, in this virtual reality/ hyper-reality (some would say brainwash) post 9/11 reality world, any facts are not true unless your God (the mass media especially the BBC) say they are true.

In this case your God, admits (no doubt for the sake of “conspiracy nuts” (so they can’t be called on it, and this will be under the radar to “normal” – half brain use folk)

To quote the BBC: “So how did the BBC report that Building 7 at the World Trade Centre had collapsed around half an hour before it did so?” [followed by an explanation of the fog of the events in the day etc. etc.)

Since that day the media has remained silent about Building 7, which is not part of the popular or accepted version of events.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/th...spiracy_2.html

[9/11 was a government preorchastrated event to build a collective fear in order to bring about a series of events for building a “New American Century” – a project which seems to be failing due to a “global awakening”.]
2
reply
Miel Purple
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
Ok sure
0
reply
581371
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#3
Report 6 years ago
#3
Ok so what do you want to so about it
0
reply
A Mysterious Lord
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
*yawn*

Isn't it past your bedtime?
1
reply
tory88
  • Study Helper
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
So the American's couldn't cover up Monica Lewinsky, but they could cover up 911 being an inside job?

Name:  jet_fuel.png
Views: 3005
Size:  31.6 KB
4
reply
Genocidal
Badges: 19
#6
Report 6 years ago
#6
Boooooooooooooring ~
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
I think care in the community should come with strings attached like no Internet access.
1
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 6 years ago
#8
Journalists making mistakes when reporting on events half a world away? Gosh, that's never happened before, least of all to the BBC…
0
reply
RF_PineMarten
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
It was a mistake by a journalist. As far as I can remember, some official said they expected the building to collapse soon, and the BBC reported that it had already collapsed when it didn't collapse until later.
0
reply
RoyalBlue7
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 6 years ago
#10
It was all controlled demolition. All evidence point towards it.

I thought people knew that :confused:

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
reply
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 6 years ago
#11
All these conspiracy theories seem to either be the annoying musings of the bored and paranoid or cannon fodder to back unscrupulous political agendas.

I think this is an insult to the memories of those who died and a waste of my time. Good day.
2
reply
Huskaris
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 6 years ago
#12
Omg it must be jewish conspiracy?!?!?!?11?!"!!!!!eleve n!!!!!!
0
reply
SilverAlex
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#13
Report 6 years ago
#13
There is plenty of evidence suggesting it was indeed an 'inside job'.
However, I can't see the US government ever doing that. It's too extreme, too ridiculous and it could never be kept under the radar.
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 6 years ago
#14
no it was UKIP who orchastrated the events of 9/11
0
reply
meenu89
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 6 years ago
#15
That was 2007, time to think about other things now?
0
reply
RedStar98
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#16
Report 6 years ago
#16
I have an absolute fascination with all things 9/11 related and Building 7 is a huge interest to me. I read books on the subject all the time, and I know quite a fair bit and have written essays etc. on it. I find the other flights (such as flight 93) equally interesting, it's really great to see someone else who knows about this kind of thing, not enough people do.
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 6 years ago
#17
Even if 9/11 were an inside job you are positing that some BBC sub-editor was in on the plan. Why? And if someone so low down on the food chain was in on it, how many tens or hundreds of thousands of others?

Your conspiracy theory - that the BBC was involved in the 9/11 inside job - is considerably more implausible than the original conspiracy theory - that 9/11 was an inside job - on which it is based.
1
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#18
Report 6 years ago
#18
(Original post by RedStar98)
I have an absolute fascination with all things 9/11 related and Building 7 is a huge interest to me. I read books on the subject all the time, and I know quite a fair bit and have written essays etc. on it. I find the other flights (such as flight 93) equally interesting, it's really great to see someone else who knows about this kind of thing, not enough people do.
I've never met the fools that are actually the targets for these money making schemes.
0
reply
SpikeyTeeth
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#19
(Original post by Observatory)
Even if 9/11 were an inside job you are positing that some BBC sub-editor was in on the plan. Why? And if someone so low down on the food chain was in on it, how many tens or hundreds of thousands of others?

Your conspiracy theory - that the BBC was involved in the 9/11 inside job - is considerably more implausible than the original conspiracy theory - that 9/11 was an inside job - on which it is based.
The implication is not that the BBC was involved in a conspiracy an certainly by some mid lever reporter.

The fact that there are many skyscrapers in the area and the BBC just happened to report that one particular one about half the size of the twin towers was going to go down before it did is some coincidence.

I would say that it's more likely that there was an implementation plan that was being worked through and it also had a communication plan, so that information could be fed to media outlets in the desired way (e.g. Use the words hijack and suspected Bin Ladin).

The BBC early release of Building 7 collapsing must have been human error in the execution of the comms plan.

Military events are handled this was and the media is handled this way through managed media information centres, so why not this event if we are to regard it as a military event?
0
reply
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 6 years ago
#20
(Original post by SpikeyTeeth)
The implication is not that the BBC was involved in a conspiracy an certainly by some mid lever reporter.

The fact that there are many skyscrapers in the area and the BBC just happened to report that one particular one about half the size of the twin towers was going to go down before it did is some coincidence.

I would say that it's more likely that there was an implementation plan that was being worked through and it also had a communication plan, so that information could be fed to media outlets in the desired way (e.g. Use the words hijack and suspected Bin Ladin).

The BBC early release of Building 7 collapsing must have been human error in the execution of the comms plan.
That doesn't make any sense at all; the events were reported in the most obvious way they appeared. It's not as if the BBC would not have reported the collapse of that building without prompting!

Again you're positing the existence of a lot more conspirators (this time PR people feeding information to newspapers and TV stations) who contribute nothing to the successful execution of the conspiracy, while reducing the chances that it could have stayed hidden so long.

This is really the biggest logic hole in all the 9/11 conspiracies that are based on funny business happening during the attack itself: if the US government (or whoever) has infinite resources and a clear willingness to murder US citizens at random, why wouldn't they just have carried out the actual 9/11 operation as the mainstream story describes it, indoctrinating and hiring muslim guys through intermediaries to actually fly filled planes into the buildings? Same outcome, far fewer people in the know, and far less blow-back if the plan is intercepted or goes wrong at any level but defection from within the inner circle of government conspirators.

I think that's not only the most likely, but probably the only way such a conspiracy could be carried out. But then you have to think, if people have that sort of power, what were their goals, and why couldn't they achieve them some other way, that is less immoral and carries less risk?

Military events are handled this was and the media is handled this way through managed media information centres, so why not this event if we are to regard it as a military event?
Military events are not reported before they happen, quite obviously because no one knows the outcome of any military operation before it is over.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (643)
33.49%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (813)
42.34%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (378)
19.69%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (86)
4.48%

Watched Threads

View All