Forums: Community: The Soap Box:
BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read.
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Soap Box

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


arrettinator


Mar 1, 2007, 12:02 PM
Post #1 of 29 (1517 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Posts: 8517

BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read.
Report this Post
Can't Post

I know this should go into the SoapBox, but nobody would see it there.

I heard in the local coffee shop about this video.

"BBC reporters report the collapse of WTC Bldg 7 (alias the Salomon Brothers Building) 23 minutes before it actually happens.... with Bldg 7 ... all » in full view in the background (still standing!) as they report it already collapsed!!!!"

Check it out.
http://video.google.com/...q=7%2C+bbc&hl=en
Does anyone else find this to be a bit out of sorts?
Unimpressed


Partner j_ung


Mar 1, 2007, 12:50 PM
Post #2 of 29 (1490 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Looks to me like, in the confusion of the day, somebody leaked the decision to pull it before it actually happened. Either that or the American government iorchestrated 9/11 in an attempt to start a war with a secret race of space aliens.

What? We're not at war with space aliens?

Well, the war ain't over yet, is it?

Crazy


jgloporto


Mar 1, 2007, 12:51 PM
Post #3 of 29 (1488 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 8, 2006
Posts: 5522

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

arrettinator wrote:
I know this should go into the SoapBox, but nobody would see it there.

I heard in the local coffee shop about this video.

"BBC reporters report the collapse of WTC Bldg 7 (alias the Salomon Brothers Building) 23 minutes before it actually happens.... with Bldg 7 ... all » in full view in the background (still standing!) as they report it already collapsed!!!!"

Check it out.
http://video.google.com/...q=7%2C+bbc&hl=en
Does anyone else find this to be a bit out of sorts?
Unimpressed

No. They were reporting that surrounding buildings had collapsed that are still standing today, notably the Millenium hotel which I believe collapsed two or three times between 9/11 and 9/13. There was confusion as to which buildings where which and there was almost zero visability of the surrounding buildings until almost 2 pm and only then, things were only clear south and east of the WTC site. I couldn't see any of the buildings around me.


Partner j_ung


Mar 1, 2007, 1:10 PM
Post #4 of 29 (1480 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [jgloporto] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

http://72.14.209.104/...amp;client=firefox-a



LaughLaugh


jgloporto


Mar 1, 2007, 1:18 PM
Post #5 of 29 (1469 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 8, 2006
Posts: 5522

Re: [j_ung] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
http://72.14.209.104/...amp;client=firefox-a

[image]http://www.websurdity.com/images/thepetbantha.jpg[/image]

LaughLaugh


I knew it was those Jedi scum that almost blowed me up that day... but Lord Palpatine... not Lord Palpatine...


arrettinator


Mar 1, 2007, 2:29 PM
Post #6 of 29 (1444 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Posts: 8517

Re: [jgloporto] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

jgloporto wrote:
No. They were reporting that surrounding buildings had collapsed that are still standing today, notably the Millenium hotel which I believe collapsed two or three times between 9/11 and 9/13. There was confusion as to which buildings where which and there was almost zero visability of the surrounding buildings until almost 2 pm and only then, things were only clear south and east of the WTC site. I couldn't see any of the buildings around me.
No, they were reporting that WTC7 collapsed, but you can see it in plain view when she moves to the side, and then you see it to her left over her shoulder. Then, they post written text "The 47 storey Salemon building close to the World Trade Centers has also collapsed" but there it is right over her shoulder. You don't find that odd that officially 26 minutes before it actually came down they reported that it collapsed.


hangerlessbolt


Mar 1, 2007, 4:06 PM
Post #7 of 29 (1424 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2001
Posts: 7255

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Some (conspiracy theorists) theorize that the collapse was the result of a controlled demolition and was, therefore, known in advance and that, perhaps, this information was leaked to BBC.

March 2006, Dr S. Shyam Sunder, NIST's lead WTC disaster investigator, said, of 7 World Trade Center, "We are studying the horizontal movement east to west, internal to the structure, on the fifth to seventh floors"; he added "But truthfully, I don’t really know. We’ve had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7”

When asked about controlled demolition theories, Dr. Sunder said, "We consulted 80 public-sector experts and 125 private-sector experts. It is a Who’s Who of experts. People look for other solutions. As scientists, we can’t worry about that. Facts are facts." In answer to the question of whether "a controlled demolition” hypothesis is being considered to explain the collapse", NIST said that, "[w]hile NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, it would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements."

NIST anticipates that it will release a draft report in early 2007.

You can entertain youself for days (or months for some of our slower readers) reading the various reports, research, and claims on both sides of the argument.

With that said, I believe that there are other subjects, that if you're willing to allocate the time and energy in committing yourself to research, that will make better use of your time.

I find it unfortunate that Community was split up and agree that many topics discussed in "Soapbox" are likely to be missed by the majority of folks here.
Granted, not all topics discussed in SB are worthy of attention, but there are some that are.


jgloporto


Mar 1, 2007, 7:46 PM
Post #8 of 29 (1404 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 8, 2006
Posts: 5522

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

arrettinator wrote:
jgloporto wrote:
No. They were reporting that surrounding buildings had collapsed that are still standing today, notably the Millenium hotel which I believe collapsed two or three times between 9/11 and 9/13. There was confusion as to which buildings where which and there was almost zero visability of the surrounding buildings until almost 2 pm and only then, things were only clear south and east of the WTC site. I couldn't see any of the buildings around me.
No, they were reporting that WTC7 collapsed, but you can see it in plain view when she moves to the side, and then you see it to her left over her shoulder. Then, they post written text "The 47 storey Salemon building close to the World Trade Centers has also collapsed" but there it is right over her shoulder. You don't find that odd that officially 26 minutes before it actually came down they reported that it collapsed.

I still disagree. The entire thing was totally confusing that morning. No one had accurate information. Practically speaking, even for weeks afterwards, the towers were a visual marker so it was totally disorienting looking at the skyline and picking out specific buildings. The only building that I could readily identify after clearing the area was the Citigroup building which is at 388 Greenwich (five or six blocks away and the only reason I could make it out was because it has the signature giant red umbrella on it... and I can smell my way through lower Manhattan. So its a little unrealistic to think that a BBC reporter standing infront of a blue screen knows that 7 World Trade was one of the buildings off in the distance behind her. I assure you that people standing on Fulton Avenue didn't have a f'ing clue what was going on and they were staring at it. I didn't know exactly how the towers fell until about 2 o'clock that afternoon and I was running from them as they were coming down. The cops didn't know what was going on, the firefighters did know what was going on, the media sure as f@ck had absolutely know clue about what was actually happening. When the towers were there, 7 World Trade was totally masked as was the Marriot Building. If it wasn't for the fact that I had a friend that worked on the commodities exchange which was right on the other side of 7 WTC, I never even would have known which building it was and I was there every day.

I'm one for conspiracy theories but nothing could have been that well executed given the conditions. And frankly nobody really appreciates how close we all were to something a 1000 times worse. The slurry wall in the pit almost cracked which could have flooded the entire NYC subway system and the gas lines running through lower Manhattan almost ignited which would have turned everything from Battery Park to City Hall into a Roman Candle. The losses would have been catastrophic and probably would have included yours truly. At 9 o'clock in the morning there are probably 4 million people in lower Manhattan.

And again, they reported that several other buildings had collapsed which in fact never did (the Millenium Hotel and the Bankers Trust Building directly south of the South Tower).

Some orchestrated conspiracy, I just can't accept it... though if you told me that GW assassinated Kennedy I'd buy it.


reno


Mar 2, 2007, 4:01 AM
Post #9 of 29 (1390 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Arret:

With as much respect as I can muster....

Dood, you're too smart to buy into that stupid bull.

I'm going out on a limb, perhaps, but safe money says that the BBC reporter didn't have a damn clue which building was #7 and which was #17.

That, and the total fragmentation of info that day can only lead to erroneous reporting.

Remember reporters telling us about the cannabilism in the Super Dome during Katrina? Yeah, they were wrong about that, too. Reporters are human, guy.... they make mistakes, too.


hangerlessbolt


Mar 2, 2007, 4:17 AM
Post #10 of 29 (1388 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2001
Posts: 7255

Re: [reno] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

reno wrote:


Remember reporters telling us about the cannabilism in the Super Dome during Katrina? Yeah, they were wrong about that, too.

No way, man...I'm pretty sure I saw a dude eating this chick...then mumbling something about "red snapper"...


reno


Mar 2, 2007, 4:25 AM
Post #11 of 29 (1386 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283

Re: [hangerlessbolt] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

hangerlessbolt wrote:
No way, man...I'm pretty sure I saw a dude eating this chick...then mumbling something about "red snapper"...

Was that the same guy who later said the fish tasted like shit?

Tongue


hangerlessbolt


Mar 2, 2007, 4:51 AM
Post #12 of 29 (1380 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 2, 2001
Posts: 7255

Re: [reno] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

reno wrote:
hangerlessbolt wrote:
No way, man...I'm pretty sure I saw a dude eating this chick...then mumbling something about "red snapper"...

Was that the same guy who later said the fish tasted like shit?

Tongue

What can I say... dude's got an 'overbite'


Partner j_ung


Mar 2, 2007, 6:54 AM
Post #13 of 29 (1365 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

arrettinator wrote:
jgloporto wrote:
No. They were reporting that surrounding buildings had collapsed that are still standing today, notably the Millenium hotel which I believe collapsed two or three times between 9/11 and 9/13. There was confusion as to which buildings where which and there was almost zero visability of the surrounding buildings until almost 2 pm and only then, things were only clear south and east of the WTC site. I couldn't see any of the buildings around me.
No, they were reporting that WTC7 collapsed, but you can see it in plain view when she moves to the side, and then you see it to her left over her shoulder. Then, they post written text "The 47 storey Salemon building close to the World Trade Centers has also collapsed" but there it is right over her shoulder. You don't find that odd that officially 26 minutes before it actually came down they reported that it collapsed.

I find it unlikely that you could have recognized the building without a slew of conspiracy websites pointing it out to you. I gave you a perfectly reasonable and likely explanation above. And now you also have an eye-witness account that tells you, essentially, there was NO WAY to determine exactly what was going on that day and that mistakes weren't just likely, they were definite. Do with it what you will, but frankly, I think conspiracy theories like this one are not just wrong, they're in questionable taste.


(This post was edited by j_ung on Mar 2, 2007, 7:01 AM)


arrettinator


Mar 2, 2007, 12:55 PM
Post #14 of 29 (1327 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Posts: 8517

Re: [j_ung] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

So nobody finds it odd that they report a building, by name, has collapsed for almost half an hour when it is still there?

Seriously, if I didn't know what building they were talking about, which at the time I didn't, I would assume that it did in fact fall. If I did know what building they were talking about, and I saw the report, I'd see that it was still there in the background and think WTF are they talking about.

I'm a skeptic, (except about electronic voting, but that's another topic altogether, eh thorne?) but this just seems odd. Passing it off as conspiracy theory doesn't cut it for me anymore. I'm sick of everything being dubbed tinfoil hat without even questioning it. Especially when the tallest building in the view is said building and that there is no blue, green, or whatever screen behind her, unless they've figured out how to shine sunlight through them.

I don't want to accept a conspiracy, but this seems like something that should be all over the news, even if it were only to dub it conspiracy theory. Nothing on CNN. Nothing on MSNBC. Nothing on FoxNews. I haven't checked elsewhere, but even just a simple google search only shows small cheeze websites. The only thing the BBC stated was this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html
They dub it conspiracy theory, too.

Nobody finds it odd? Give me a break.


reno


Mar 2, 2007, 1:06 PM
Post #15 of 29 (1322 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Many of us find it odd indeed, but chalk it up to simple human error.

It seems you're buying into the "George Bush and the Zionists planned 9/11!" conspiracy theories.


arrettinator


Mar 2, 2007, 1:27 PM
Post #16 of 29 (1314 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Posts: 8517

Re: [reno] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

No. You are reading that into my posts, although I guess I'll have to do another google search.

Anyway, that's really all I need. But just passing it off as theory bs is no longer a valid excuse anymore.


Partner wideguy


Mar 2, 2007, 2:02 PM
Post #17 of 29 (1304 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 15026

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

It was a mistake. period. It was a bunch of BBC reporters stationed in New york who probably got pressed into service covering a story they had no background on. I was glued to the TV that whole morning and for some time after the first tower fell people were reporting it was only part of the tower, mixing up which tower went first... it all depended which channel you flipped to which story you got.

I had a friend working in a building that was reported as "standing but would likely need to be demolished because of it's damage" and he was back working two weeks later. Turns out his building was several blocks away and someone mixed up the names.

There were 5 more unaccounted for planes for an hour after the Pentagon got hit then the FAA came out and said there was no more unaccounted for traffic, then we had the flight dive into PA.

Just because you, in hindsight, know that building, because you're focusing on it, doesn't mean you're right to assume every person in New York new every building by Name and number before that day. Some british BBC news editor probably didn't know building 7 from FAO Schwartz but he heard something and ran with it.

I look at the full timeline and try to remember back to the day and you suddenly remember that 20 minutes passed in the blink of an eye. People on the ground reported a plane (Flight 11) hitting the first tower, it was 7 minutes before airborne fighters were redirected to the crash site to intercept a plane that was already gone and 8 more minutes before that same, already demolished plane, was reported as having been lost on the FAA's radar scope.

Hell, I stood outside later in the day for an hour marveling at the lack of planes in the sky, (We're in the approach path to Logan airport) ... a full hour before I realized it.

No, someone mispoke, went on to covering another part of the story, some other breaking headline, and 20 minutes slipped by before someone caught the eroor? Don't find that hard to believe at all.


jgloporto


Mar 2, 2007, 2:10 PM
Post #18 of 29 (1302 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 8, 2006
Posts: 5522

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

arrettinator wrote:
No. You are reading that into my posts, although I guess I'll have to do another google search.

Anyway, that's really all I need. But just passing it off as theory bs is no longer a valid excuse anymore.

Without going into explicit detail, I think there were a lot of things wrong with the entire thing and I have no love for the current administration. Evidence suggests we were well aware that the Japanese were planning an attack on a US installation in the Pacific and that we let it happen to justify our involvement in WWII. True or not true, the theory has some legs and it seems like something that could actually happen. If you were peddling a similar idea, namely that we had information that an attack was imminent and we let it happen (maybe not knowing the scale of the attack), I'd probably bite. But this planned demolition and a leak to the BBC idea is just insane. Do you know how many people mistake the Chrystler Building for the Empire State Building. Do you know how many times people have asked me if the JPMorgan tower on Wall Street is the Empire State Building? (to which I usually reply, "That's it, the guards at the desk will let you right on up to the top. Meg Ryan will be waiting for ya." Especially when they are French tourists...)

The reason the BBC reported 7 WTC went down is because that was being broadcast on the police radios. As I understand it, the subsurface floors below the WTC site continued to collapse for a few hours after the towers came down so every few minutes the earth would shake and smoke and flames would shoot up into the air and everyone would assume another building collapsed.

If the BBC folks got a report ripped from the wire saying that 7 WTC had collapsed they would have gone live with it, even if they were reporting from 7 WTC.

I don't think everything was on the up and up that day from the government's perspective but I don't think this particular journalistic screw up is evidence of anything. If anything, this type of speculation does two things:

a) It clouds the real issues with what went wrong; and,

b) it makes all of the legitimate questions about our own involvement/mishandling of 9/11 and all the shit that spewed from that seem like crackpot theories. Instead of making a rationale connection like the Pearl Harbor theory it comes out more like "Aliens were working with the Government" stuff.

Leave that stuff for the Inquirer and spend more energy on the real questions.

I am neither a Republican or Democrat (I am a nihilist agnostic, so I don't believe or subscribe to anything), so believe me, I am more than happy to bite on conspiracy theories, but this thing is Ockham's Razor all the way.


col


Mar 8, 2007, 6:34 PM
Post #19 of 29 (1252 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 23, 2004
Posts: 232

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Movie: The Long Kiss Goodnight wrote:
"You're telling me that you're going to fake some terrorist thing just to get some money out of congress?"
"Well, unfortunately, Mr. Henessey, I have no idea how to fake killing four thousand people. So we're just going to have to do it for real. Oh, and blame it on the Muslims ..... naturally."


lagr01


Mar 9, 2007, 10:08 AM
Post #20 of 29 (1228 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 18, 2005
Posts: 2417

Re: [arrettinator] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Oh, so the BBC planned 9/11? everything starts making sense now...


ihategrigris


Mar 15, 2007, 1:29 PM
Post #21 of 29 (1186 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Posts: 757

Re: [jgloporto] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

jgloporto wrote:
this thing is Ockham's Razor all the way.

I'm not sure if flying debris from the colapsing WTC hitting WTC 7 is the simplest explentation for the reason it collapsed. From an engineering standpoint it doesn't seem particularly plausable.

No i'm not offering up any conspiracy theories, I'm pointing out that the accepted theory for the collapse of WTC 7 just doesn't make much sense.


jgloporto


Mar 15, 2007, 2:01 PM
Post #22 of 29 (1178 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 8, 2006
Posts: 5522

Re: [ihategrigris] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ihategrigris wrote:
jgloporto wrote:
this thing is Ockham's Razor all the way.

I'm not sure if flying debris from the colapsing WTC hitting WTC 7 is the simplest explentation for the reason it collapsed. From an engineering standpoint it doesn't seem particularly plausable.

No i'm not offering up any conspiracy theories, I'm pointing out that the accepted theory for the collapse of WTC 7 just doesn't make much sense.

What are you talking about. Flying debris? The collapse of the World Trade Center produced a force equivalent to a 1 kiloton nuclear warhead explosion. 7 WTC shared the same foundation system as towers one and two. The structural integrity of all of the surrounding buildings was compromised. The Bankers Trust building is still unoccupied and they had to build an exoskeleton so crews could reach the upper floors because the foundation is so unstable.


(This post was edited by jgloporto on Mar 15, 2007, 2:02 PM)


zozo


Mar 15, 2007, 2:05 PM
Post #23 of 29 (1173 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 3, 2004
Posts: 3431

Re: [jgloporto] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I have a hard time with MOST of the conspiracy thoeries but there are two things that bug me, one is that Building 7 was a controlled demolision and the other is that there was not one piece of the plane found at the pentagon.

Not saying anthing other than those two things still make me think.


jgloporto


Mar 15, 2007, 2:09 PM
Post #24 of 29 (1171 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 8, 2006
Posts: 5522

Re: [zozo] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

zozo wrote:
I have a hard time with MOST of the conspiracy thoeries but there are two things that bug me, one is that Building 7 was a controlled demolision and the other is that there was not one piece of the plane found at the pentagon.

Not saying anthing other than those two things still make me think.

What controlled demolition???

You people all need to get out more and stop reading e-mail chains...


zozo


Mar 15, 2007, 2:22 PM
Post #25 of 29 (1165 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 3, 2004
Posts: 3431

Re: [jgloporto] BBC report on Building 7!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please read. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Meant to say "Looked like a controlled demolition"

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Community : The Soap Box

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook