Time-Stamp Corroborates 911Veritas' Timing

"We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don't help clear up the issue one way or another."
- Richard Porter, head of news, BBC World.

Also here.



Or, in the new vernacular:


Take that, 9/11 enablers.

That's right, you're either

That's right, you're either interested in the truth or complicit to the crime.

And there's more... This is looking right-on-the money...

Be nice to have a longer "rip" though... more the merrier :-)

"physicist" has posted a bit more on his local forum...

Link : http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=58222#58222

Direct Link to Video : http://www.mega-file.net/video/view.php?video=060fd20368d8d62c2e6b1c710df5b8eb

Seems fine to me...

PS.... physicist, re your avatar, if you read this, that's the starboard engine exiting the corner of WTC2, not the nose-cone ;-)

Best wishes and thanks for digging through your old video

Is it just me, or did

Is it just me, or did YouTube remove the BBC report from 9/11? It was up on 130.000 views.

We can push this one now:


The one with 130.000 views

The one with 130.000 views is still working fine where I'm sitting.

ok. It;s still gone on

ok. It;s still gone on mine..

Push this Google Video link


We've GOT to get something up in the top 100 of Google Video and this is the only one I could find with the added text descriptions, and the U2 musical interlude. It seems to be sticking, so I think it's safe to pass around now.

I'm surprised this hasn't gone viral on Google Video yet. Then again, they were taking it down yesterday as fast as we could get it up.

At this stage, I do believe they've given up and in. Bend Google Video, bent to our collective will, and welcome, to the noosphere!

And if you pull everything down, then some rich fucker among us will figure out a way to harness 100 server farms, and we'll bypass you altogether.

I uploaded the new, big

I uploaded the new, big version today and they deleted it immediately...

Ya know what's great about this?

We get to YANK the chain of the perps with the BBC as the handle, and in the bowl, swirls all the spectics who are crying out that this is just nothing and is entirely normal.

It's amazing! Loving it! Thanks so much for this 911veritas!

And I'm sure the thing that made you focus first on the BBC's coverage was that hitpiece they did a couple weeks ago..

Pathetic irony.


Now, who upped the raw footage that veritas used to the Archive?


See this post at 911truth.org;

Appendix: E-mail from archive.org

From: Renata Ewing (renata@archive.org)

Date: Feb 27, 2007 11:48 AM

Subject: Re: BBC Footage verification question

To: Janice Matthews

Hello Janice

Thank you for your email.

The item you write about is not actually ready to be viewed. It is part of a test of a new collection on 9/11. It was not meant to be streamed or downloaded.

Since we are not the source of the footage, we are not able to verify the information contained in it.

The Television Archive is a division of the Internet Archive.




I understand that that's where he got it, but

they went and pulled it, since they were not prepared to have these files downloaded, and so they were indeed the source..

Ask 911veritas..?

I wish...

..that Janice's original email message were also included. Only to know whether archive.org answered the actual question asked.

Knowing the original source of the videos in their archive would be a good thing. I wonder if the directory and file naming format are standard or if archive.org created or renamed the directories and files to suit their needs.

Does anyone know whether archive.org has agreed to allow copying of the files? I know that requests have been made by individuals who have offered to host these files. However, this does bring up the chain of custody issue again.

Also, has archive.org given any tentative date for future availability? Releasing this information possessed by archive.org to the public NOW should be considered a moral responsibility, at the very least.

The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001

I don't want to rain on our parade here re: 2nd vid time stamp

but the time stamp on THIS video COULD be BST and not GMT which would make it one hour later, and thus 30 minutes post-collapse..

Ok, here we go:

P.S. What do you make of this argument?

New Spin On Bbc And Wtc7

BST and the BBC report on WTC7
Video: BBC was half an hour too early reporting on WTC collapse By thedreadzone 26 Feb 2007 'On September 11th 2001, BBC World reported at 4:57pm Eastern Time that the Salomon Brothers Building (more commonly known as WTC7 or World Trade Building 7) had collapsed. This even made the 5pm EST headlines, what is bizarre is that the building did not actually collapse until 5:20pm EST.' Note: Over 100 people have sent me this link, or links to other websites linking to this video. In the UK, clocks move 1 hour ahead for British Summer Time (BST). In 2001, BST was in effect between the 25 March and 28 October. In New York, Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) was in effect on 11 Sept. As a CLG reader David West observed, the British were on BST on 11 September, and therefore only four hours 'ahead' of Eastern Daylight Time. Thus, the story reported above is simply wrong in its implication. --LRP

Permanent URL for this post: [URL=http://www.legitgov .org/bst_ and_bbc_report_ on_wtc7_280207. html]Permanent url[/URL]

what a crock...


I know it's nonsense, as the building was right there behind her while she was talking to the anchor, but could we get some clarification on this please? Thanks.



Here's something I found in reply


Here's the thing, its true that the difference between BST and new york time on that day was only 4 hours, however you have to take into account that the BBC world video is not broadcast in the UK its worldwide, therefore the time they used on the day was GMT as to avoid confusion with other nations because their time zones are GMT + or - this explains how building 7 is still standing, any recording of BBC world would be time marked with GMT, this however shows us that the BBC 24 reorts of WTC7 falling were actually correct as this is a news channel broadcast in the UK and is showing BST which is 1 hour behind GMT, I think this was a red herring thrown our way to try and confuse us probably by the BBC, so in conclusion the BBC 24 footage was correct at the time and the building had collapsed.
BUT the BBC world footage although appears to be the same time is actually 1 hour earlier because they are on GMT for the benefit of the international audience.
I hope this clears things up. Nice try BBC but we aint as dumb as you hoped we were.


This would suggest (though this needs further clarifcation) that the BBC 24 footage is NOT a valid time stamp... for a pre-collapse report. However, that said, it's rather odd that the event would be first reported on BBC 24 a full 31 minutes after the fact...

We'd better check this out with our British friends across the pond..


I am reminded how the head of BBC World in his blog reply referred to their BBC 24 footage... ??? a red herring thrown our way...???

Perhaps, just maybe, they were trying to set us up over this one hour difference aspect, so as to create confusion in regards to the BBC World video - now conveniently "lost"..

This needs to be CHECKED OUT!

If the BBC 24 timestampt was BST and not GMT, then we have a problem with THIS video, but not the other one...

Ummm...WTC7 is clearly

Ummm...WTC7 is clearly visible in the background during the report of its (soon-to-be) collapse; therefore time stamps are irrelevant.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

I am referring to the 2nd BBC 24 video

which is the subject of this thread, not the BBC World one with the building still standing in the background while Jane Standley talks to the anchor. I think they the BBC have tried to throw us a red herring intended to confuse and obfuscate.. maybe. This needs further checking..

Of course they cannot get around the first BBC World video. They're already nailed on that score.

News 24 Shows UK Local Time...

Only GMT in the winter, BST in the summer (Daylight saving comes in October).

Just run the date (Sep-11 2006) through http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html

London - New York 5 hours difference.

Looks fine and checks with the BBC World, so I cannot see an issue, but I'm a bit comatose, yet pretty sure it all checks out fine.

Best wishes Robert Rice and thanks for the heads-up on "The Century of The Self" Adam Curtis series you posted a couple of weeks back... That first episode says it all,,,


And good work friend! I'd say with that research, you (we) served to expand our movement by 10 million souls while at the same time dealing a crushing blow to the BBC who can spin all they like, but they cannot get around the fact that, if the official story is to be believed, if their "9/11 Conspiracy Files" hit piece is to be believed, no one can predict when a steel building on fire is going to collapse or that it even will collapse. Their ONLY possible "spin" will be that somewhere along the line someone misinterpreted talk about an "imminent collapse" and turned that into "collapsED" and that is the very best they can do. But now they've claimed to have LOST their video of 9/11, which is utterly absurd and an obvious lie.

Just goes to show that in the age of the "noosphere" the little guy CAN and DOES make a BIG TIME difference. You made the head of BBC World flat out LIE, repeatedly! Get some sleep and take a break my friend. Ya done good!


Time differences

From http://www.timezoneconverter.com
21:54:00 Tuesday September 11, 2007 in Europe/London converts to
16:54:00 Tuesday September 11, 2007 in America/New_York

BBC News 24 on the TV displays UK time, including the changes for BST so when the screen showed 21.54, then it was 16.54 in New York. .

The BBC World Service on the radio is the one that is always in GMT, regardless of the time of year.

Doesn't New York

also have their own version of "Daylight saving Time" or some such so would also be an hour ahead?

on edit: BBC News 24 is a domestic UK service so would use BST. International services like BBC World would use GMT.

My best guess is that Gov't perps deliberately

fed the newswires the story that WTC-7/Solomon Bldg had already collapsed because they didn't want any reporters getting a "scoop" from firemen, cops, or anyone else in the area that it was imploded in a controlled demolition.

The Gov't perps beat everyone to the punch by issuing the phony press release that the building had already "collapsed", & they probably also stated or implied that it was due to damage from fallen debris & fires.

Very good! Makes perfect sense.


They had to somehow pre-empt that kind of reporting from the scene...

More foreknowledge on 911 Guliani BBC

Everyone please watch this clip http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=201... Could someone help me determine exactly what this mysterious bald guy is saying . I hear "seven" used twice.

Sounds to me

like he said "we can't go to City Hall"

And remember that Bldg 7 was evacuated long before that, even before the south tower was hit, or it was started at that time.


I believe you may be right about that. Just out of curiosity who would that guy be , OEM? I've seen a few clips of this "tough guy mayor "where he indicates foreknowledge of collapses and generally runs around like a scared little rat.

Sounds like.....

'We can't go to 7, we cannot go to 7....'

Or maybe....

'We can't go to 7, we shouldn't go to 7....'

Baldie's Urgent Warning

That's what I heard too, but as Robert pointed out they had abondoned it some time ago , is that confirmed ?My question is who is this aide who knows so much about where they can't go but is so cryptic about the reasond why?

Suggested new mantra . . .

"9.11 truth movement, you're either with us, or against us"

9.11 veritas, this is a home run. Everybody can get their arms around this. No longer must we quote Newton's Laws or Galileo to make a point. This is the greatest 9.11 truth piece ever, make no mistake.

Suggestion: I'm going to call my State Senators and Representatives today and ask them how this BBC event was possible. Maybe you all should too. I want this painful gas bubble to be felt on Capitol Hill immediately. And I'm going to keep asking. One of them told me once, regarding the 9.11 truth movement; "I have to keep this at arm's length, or I would have to act on it".

Well, buddy, it's not at arm's length anymore. This has gone global, and it's going to stay there. Visit the BBC's web site and look at the massive drubbing they are taking from their viewers on this gaffe, and the subsequent loss of the tapes. This is a firestorm, and we need to fan every wisp of flame.

God Bless 9.11 Veritas!

P.S., to my fellow bloggers: Don't dog anybody that suggests Flight 93 was supposed to hit WTC 7. The longer I think about it, the more I like it. Certainly would explain why this jury rigged building hit the deck five hours after the other two. Like my old blog "MIHOP or LIHOP, you gotta decide", there would be no reason for an explosives-laden building to be left after the attacks. Plane or no plane, it had to hit the deck, or all would be lost.

"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it might cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know it - now"
- Patrick Henry