I made this in just 5 hours!
I hope it will serve for our case. If you find errors, please report them to me, I'll correct them soon!
EDIT: Back again at 1748 Central.
"I am Director of Collections at the Internet Archive, responsible for all video and audio files.
This video clip is part of a collection from the TV Archive of global television coverage of the events that occurred on and shortly after September 11, 2001.
This clip, among others, has drawn quite a bit of attention because it appears to show a BBC reporter in New York reporting that World Trade Center Building 7, also referred to as WTC7 or the Salomon Brothers Building, has collapsed before it actually did collapse.
It's a keeper. G. Edward Griffin, author of "Creature From Jeckyll Island: A second look at the Federal Reserve" weighs in on the BBC, CNN, Google, Youtube, Internet Archive, Federal government, Larry Silverstein, Ruddy Ghouliani, WTC 7 fiasco. For those unfamiliar with Griffin's book and are curious about money creation and debt, I highly recommend this video as a quick primer,
Money As Debt
Paul Grignon's 47-minute animated presentation of "Money as Debt" tells in very simple and effective graphic terms what money is and how it is being created. It is an entertaining way to get the message out.
Click here to avoid the spoiler below:
After laying out his reasonable hypothesis and certain facts, Griffin comes to the following conclusion:
Considering these facts, for anyone to issue a report to the press that Building Seven was expected to collapse, is powerful evidence that some people actually did have prior knowledge – not necessarily of the 9/11 attacks, but prior knowledge that Building Seven was going to be brought down by controlled demolition. Since it takes many weeks of prior planning to bring down a building like that by controlled demolition, preparations would have started long before 9/11. That fact, alone, is all we need to unravel the whole shoddy fabric of lies.
BBC REPORTED COLLAPSE OF WTC BUILDING 7 BEFORE IT FELL!
But that may not mean what you think
G. Edward Griffin March 2, 2007
In the final week of February, 2007, the Internet was ablaze with a video tape that showed news commentators for the BBC on the morning of 9/11 stating categorically that Building 7 at the World Trade Center had collapsed, but the announcement was made at least twenty minutes prior to the event. In one scene, reporter Jane Standley is seen saying that Building 7 had collapsed, all the while it is clearly visible in the skyline behind her.
Archive.org (the same thing as the "Internet Archive") has re-posted the BBC video regarding the collapse of WTC 7.
If I correctly understand what Archive.org is saying, the original BBC video clip downloaded from the Internet Archive's beta site had an incorrect time stamp put on it by the Canadian who recorded it:
"News from BBC TV was recorded by the Television Archive, a non-profit archive. Video available as a loan (stream) only.
BBC World was received from Bell ExpressVu (a Canadian direct-to-home service) and encoded using a real-time MPEG-2 encoder. The encoder was setup to include the time in UTC as part of the video – UTC is also known as GMT (Greenwich Mean Time) and is the time in London during the winter. Because of daylight savings time being in effect, this means that UTC is four hours ahead of Eastern Daylight Time. The time that was used to set the encoder’s time-code came from NIST using the NTP protocol.
The following was then posted in the "Review" section by someone claiming he was an engineer involved in capturing the video:
This video sums up all the evidence for the controlled demolition of Building 7 and should convince anyone but the die hard skeptics. It contains all known footage of the collapse, including BBC's footage that was broadcasted on the evening of september 11th on 'Newsnight'.
WHY IS RICHARD PORTER ALLOWED TO CONTINUE COVERING UP THIS WTC7 DEBACLE?
We are demanding the OMBUDSMAN investigate this. Mr. Porter's responses are deliberately vague, hostile and untrrustworthy. No attempt has been made to get the documented evidence which was the source of the broadcast announcement.
Instead, we are to believe that because CNN said somethinhg SIMILAR, though not the same thing at all, that it is okay, and that we should just trust Mr. Porter.
CNN said that the building may have collapsed, and qualified the statement. BBC did not qualify the statement, instead repeating it multiple times as an authoritative statement of fact.
If CNN did it is an excuse, then why do we need a BBC at all? Is CNN the source for all of your reportage?
"Because three BBC channels were saying this in quick succession, I am inclined to believe that one or more of the news agencies was reporting this, or at least reporting someone saying this." -Richard Porter
The ABC News message board is currently censoring any new posts made in support of the 9/11 Truth Movement
There can be no doubt about it: The ABC News message board is currently censoring any new posts made in support of the 9/11 Truth Movement.
Yesterday, I signed up with the message board under my standard username, Mekt_Ranzz, and created the forum “Why did the BBC report the collapse of WTC7 23 minutes early?” to discuss the recently revealed BBC reporting blunder of the WTC7 collapse:
"I would like to know why ABC News has not covered the recent story where on 9/11 the BBC reported several times on a live feed that WTC7 in New York had collapsed -- 23 minutes before it actually did!
Here is the link detailing this fascinating story so far:
For awhile, I was actually getting a quite a few responses from other board members who ranged from being outright debunkers to friends of 9/11 Truth.
However, this was not to last.
Despite the fact that most of the relevant discussion was civil and constructive and that all statements and claims, at least on my part, were backed by Internet links to facts and credible sources, my thread was deleted.
Here we go again. From the editor:
So how did the BBC report that Building 7 at the World Trade Centre had collapsed around half an hour before it did so? My earlier posting on the subject has attracted a lot of interest so we've been doing more investigating within the BBC to put together the sequence of events.
Five and a half years have passed so it's quite difficult to answer every outstanding question. But we do know quite a bit more than we did on Tuesday, as a result of checking the BBC archives and what other media were doing at the time. I've also read through some of the reports published after 9/11 to help put together the sequence of events.
Like everyone else, I am trying to piece all this information together but there are outstanding questions, to which I can't find answers.
Who would call WTC7 the Saloman Brothers Building? Was it commonly known by that name in NYC? Did CNN call it by that name?
Let's say that there was general concern that afternoon about the stability of WTC7 due to damage but why wasn't there the same concern reported about the other buildings, which had been more damaged? Why didn't we hear that those buildings were in danger of collapse? If they weren't in danger of collapse, how did they know that?
Who made the decision that WTC7 was about to collapse and on what evidence was this based - general concern or visible movement or scientific measurements?
What time was it when that decision was made? If the BBC made a mistake and interpreted 'about to collapse' as 'has collapsed', then they had that news close to 16.50 NYC time. What time did CNN report the imminent collapse?
When those firemen were told to leave the area due to the imminent collapse of WTC7, were other firemen moved away from the other WTC buildings, which were more damaged? If not, why not?
The 911 Script and the Age of Terror
Wednesday February 28th, 2007
I must admit that I have been deeply shocked by a story that appeared today on my website, to the effect that the BBC reported the collapse of WTC Building 7 23 minutes before it actually took place. Previously, the BBC claimed that it had lost all of its 9/11 coverage, but this video has now surfaced. I watched it myself, and sat there with my blood literally running cold as I saw their reporter saying that Building 7 had collapsed while it was still visible behind her, perfectly intact.
Now, why wasn't this just a simple mistake? CNN was reporting rumors that Building 7 might be about to collapse an hour before it happened.
BBC World wrote:
Hello and thank you for your email in reaction to claims made in an article published online.
The notion, as suggested on such websites, that the BBC has been part of any conspiracy is patently ludicrous. We reported the situation as accurately as we could, based on the best information available. We cannot be categorical about the exact timing of events that day - this is the first time it has been brought to our attention and it was more than five years ago. If in the chaos and confusion of that day our correspondent reported that the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been a genuine error.
BBC World Customer Relations
Your response is ludicrous.
1. The "collapse" of the building in question exhibits 11 characteristics of controlled demolition. Not least of which, it ended up in its own footprint in a neat pile. Other collapses are not so neat and precise.
Not exactly MSM. But fairly written and even throws a shout out to us at 911blogger.com
Source: The Santa Fe New Mexican
Blog by Devin Green
March 1, 2007
As today is my last day setting the homepage for The Santa Fe New Mexican I thought I would bid you all farewell. I resigned two weeks ago to better pursue my personal interests. It is to my great amusement however that this day coincides with an astonishing story to share in this blog. There is an uproar rising across the Internet over what is being called yet another blatant, 9/11 smoking gun.
Early this week an independent researcher, reviewing video archives of the BBC's 9/11 coverage, divulged the discovery of an earth shaking incongruence. BBC reporters announced the collapse of the 47 story Salomon Brothers Building 23 minutes BEFORE the actual sudden collapse. This building, also known as WTC 7, is clearly visible, standing tall, as a reporter gestures to the live view through the window behind her.
This is only a portion of the policy. Archiving and material retension statements can be found within. See the direct link below for the full HTML version. I have attached an unofficial 14-page PDF copy that I made. Included in this post are only the Introduction, Section 1, and a portion of Section 2. The bold emphasis is mine.
I discovered this at http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ . Thanks Mike!
How long can the BBC expect their explanation to hold now?
BBC MEDIA MANAGEMENT POLICY: OVERVIEW
Intended Audience: Global. All areas of the BBC need to ensure they are archiving relevant material.
Use: This document is intended to give background and context to the Media Management Policies and Requirements. It includes all the high Level Policy Statements, and summary archive requirements.
The policy Statements and Requirements set out what must be retained, and how. Most of the sections within this document are available as separate documents, to enable different business areas to ensure that the requirements are met.
Last Reviewed: 15/04/03
Granted, there was no television coverage of Pearl Harbor - but you get the idea :)
digg_url = 'http://digg.com/world_news/BBC_CNN_Employ_Magical_Psychic_News_Announcers';
From my favorite source for political satire:
The Internets are buzzing with the bizarre story of BBC News reporting the 9/11 collapse of WTC7 before the building actually collapsed - all over a live shot of Ground Zero, with the 47-story highrise clearly in view and clearly standing.
What it "proves" is anyone’s guess, but it sure makes for hilarious viewing. But BBC reporters and anchors who maybe didn’t know the Manhattan skyline so well could possibly be forgiven for reporting an erroneous story and not knowing that great big highrise was World Trade Center 7 (otherwise known as the Salomon Brothers building). So why doesn’t the BBC simply say it got a story wrong and didn’t know any better? Stranger still, why did New York-based CNN anchor Aaron Brown do the same exact thing on September 11, 2001? We’ve got all the creepy video and much more to make your head asplode, after the jump.
First, the BBC video which has been posted and then +deleted+by+Google and then posted and then deleted by YouTube again and again this week. The great big highrise next to the lady reporter’s head is WTC7:
BBC World News started reporting that 7 World Trade Center had collapsed about 23 minutes before the building actually came down... (...) A video clip establishing this anomaly was discovered on the archive.org news service and first pointed out to the public Monday by the blog writer veritas911 at 911blogger.com. The ensuing controversy has prompted a swift, unusually angry response from the BBC, which however has failed to address the substantive issue: (...) [b]Who was that source?[/b]
The answer may be essential to settling the long-standing dispute over whether the third skyscraper to fall on 9/11, which was not struck by an airplane, was demolished using explosives, or collapsed entirely due to structural damage and fire.
(...) we are making available a three-minute, 10-megabyte WMV video showing the key excerpts from the segment, with inserted time labels based on a start time of 4:54pm EDT.
DOWNLOAD VIDEO – FULL COVERAGE OF BBC WTC 7 CONTROVERSY
I had a similar thread earlier this day:
Here are more points that came to my mind:
· At 09:44 PM on 27 Feb 2007,
· Jason wrote:
I'm confused...what is the conspiracy? What are the implications of reporting WTC7 falling before it actually did? Who cares I was living in NYC at the time and it was widely reported that other building that were part of the WTC were collapsing or would collapse eventually. So they jumped the gun? What are the implications everyone is getting at here????
So, spot on.
I have heard several times now the spin that the BBC probably mixed up these other reports that “other buildings might collapse” with “Building 7 has collapsed”. Besides all doubts that the BBC could made such an unbelievable error and that other news-outlets were running similar news:
Early Monday morning, after reading the initial blog post (http://911blogger.com/node/6458) I located a list of what raw news files were available via archive.org (posted below) and downloaded as much as possible because it was obvious that this was too good to continue. As the story broke the content was removed. Timestamps indicate the data had been available for a few weeks if not longer.
Every one of these files is "in the wild" and I bet that a few people were able to get all of them. Below I have posted what I was able to download. Please help fill in the missing files or missing links. If you can help, contact me via http://911blogger.com/user/1665/contact and we will arrange a data transfer. The goal is to make this entire archive available via bittorrent. I'll host the trackers on the moon if necessary.
Now, with three confirmations about early (means before it actually happened) reports on the collapse of WTC7, we can assume that there was indeed an early press release, stating that Building 7 has collapsed due to fires and damage from the fallen debris of the Twin Towers.
The CNN guy was confused, as he could see the building still standing in the skyline, which made him switch to “Is collapsing” as he reads the news.
The BBC reporter, who did not necessarily knew the Manhattan skyline in detail, gave us the original report: “indeed it has collapsed.”
The people behind this press release should be taken unter close scrutinity, they are most likely the real perps of that day. We can only speculate, if it was the OEM or a similar organisation or group of persons.
I mean, this early reporting was not necessarily an “error” in the script Matrix.
Remember that WTC7 slided into oblivion after that day, from 01-09-12 on?
Contact BBC World here:
The head of your division, Richard Porter has just given the world a disgraceful response to a matter of enormous importance and seriousness.
The fact that your New York reporter said that the Salomon Brothers Building (WTC7) had collapsed a full 20 minutes before it had, with accompanying graphic, should be cause for a thorough investigation of how that information came to be in the heads of your personnel. This investigation does not appear to be in evidence. No serious effort, apart from allegedly asking the reporter to recall, seems to have taken place.
Next, in the realm of absurdity beyond belief, your department head claims that the BBC has LOST the tapes of September 11th coverage!
digg_url = 'http://digg.com/political_opinion/BBC_s_9_11_The_Conspiracy_Files_A_Video_Rebuttal';
Tuesday, February 27, 2007:
BBC World News started reporting that WTC 7 had collapsed about 23 minutes before the building actually came down, as video of news coverage on September 11th shows. The segment establishing this is available on the archive.org news service and was discovered by veritas911, a member of 911blogger.com.
(The 1-gigabyte video of BBC World News coverage on Sept. 11th starts at 4:54pm EDT and is available at http://ia311517.us.archive.org/2/items/bbc200109111654-1736/V08591-16.mpg)
Speaking from London on the afternoon of September 11th, BBC World News anchorman Philip Hayton asks reporter Jane Stanley in New York about the collapse of the "47-story Salomon Brothers Building," also known as WTC 7. Although the building is still standing and clearly visible through the window behind Stanley, its collapse is repeatedly described as a past event. Hayton asks Stanley if there were any casualties in the building, and advances an explanation for its collapse already provided by officials, that it was weakened structurally by the prior collapses of the Twin Towers.
Direct download, 911podcasts mirror: http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=200
Edit(s): Changed title and text to "Famous" from "Infamous" - added Digg for PrisonPlanet story.
PLEASE NOTE: This is NOT a tacit or overt endorsement of the veracity of the claims made in the linked video by 911blogger.com.
Please stop submitting blogs on this! Message received!
See at 15:00 time mark.
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.
9/11 was unusual enough, without BBC World being able to foretell the destiny of WTC 7.
What is even stranger, is that the women reporter is telling the world that the building had collapsed when you can see it in the background over her left shoulder.
Then at 5:15pm EST, just five minutes before the building did actually collapse, her live connection from New York to London mysteriously fails.
So the question is, on 9/11 how did the BBC learn that WTC7 collapsed 23 minutes before it actually did.
Building Seven was 47 storeys, modern in design with structural steel throughout, yet symmetrically collapsed in 6.5 seconds, was someone leaking information.
GlobalResearch.ca has published a review of the BBC documentary, 9/11: The Conspiracy Files:
Global Research, February 24, 2007
More than five years after the disaster of September 11, 2001, England’s BBC stepped into the ring of media outlets airing programs about the tragedy that is now referred to as “9/11” on February 18, 2007. The program, entitled “9/11: The Conspiracy Files,” took the time to interview some well-known Americans on both sides of the 9/11 argument. The hour-long program looked as if it might reveal something worthwhile, for about nine minutes. Guests like the outspoken Alex Jones, 911 Scholars for Truth Co-Founder Dr. Jim Fetzer, and Loose Change producer Dylan Avery actually got to make several excellent points before the real conspiracy was revealed.
BBC hit piece available for download here, including a high quality, 1.3GB AVI version, Big thanks to Dem Bruce Lee Styles for getting these for us:
Also, here are a couple of flyers for placing in windows, sticking to light posts, etc compliments of Matthew from www.ts911t.org:
BBC Discredited; Retractions on 9/11 Hit Piece Forthcoming?
Complaint responses suggest consternation within corporation on revelations of bias in Conspiracy Files documentary, indicates large number of complaints received
Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
The BBC's response to complaints made against the bias and inaccuracy of the 9/11 Conspiracy Files documentary suggests that an overwhelming backlash has caused considerable consternation at the network and possible retractions or apologies may be forthcoming, with BBC bosses potentially fearing the company's credibility has been tarnished.
Here is my effort. Even as my english still sucks, I hope to encourage others to do the same.
Be polite, but straight forward. Pack a polite message on the envelop, too.
Adress for Complaints:
PO Box 1922
Alex Jones interviewed Guy Smith, producer of BBC 'Conspiracy Files: 9/11', today on his show. He also had on Dylan Avery and Paul Joseph Watson as well.
Definitely worth the listen.
Update: Updated post with trimmed MP3 from truthcult.com
Big thanks to nw0.info for the original rip, and Bozo for the trimmed MP3!