Building 7

Rosie O'Donnell openly believes in the explosive demolition of Tower 1, 2, 7 & links to Scholars for 9/11 truth on her website

proof above and below, not a joke! this is real.

Mary writes: do you believe the wtc was controlled demolitions???

Rosie: ask some of the worlds leading experts
see if fire has ever caused a steel building to collapse
it only happened 3 times in all of history
on one day
9 11

nancy writes: Ro-I luv ya and I agree with u 99.9% of the time. But WTC comments are dangerous. Steel buildings, yes, but 3 planes full of jet fuel poured into those buildings and fed fire. Not just a normal fire.

Rosie: research it

james writes: Ro I can see how you can hate bush but “controlled demolitions”? How many buildings ever been hit with airplanes with jet fuel? Hate fairly

Rosie: scholars for 9 11
research it

(blog submitted by the beheading hoax guy)

Documentation on media coverage on WTC7

I search for the BBC coverage on WTC7 after it collapsed. I've just read something by 911veritas, but can't find it anymore. can someone help me out?

Their behaviour could be important for further investigations, as we have to know how they handled their early WTC collapse reporting "error".
As far as I know the immediately decided to made a cover-up.

In this matter it could be interesting to dig for the coverage of all news outlets regarding WTC7.

I suspect no one was live on, several broke their live feeds just minutes before the collapse, I need to know when were the first pictures of the smoldering debris shown, when the actually collapse?

Because of the strange behaviour of the BBC in special, but all media in general when it somes to WTC7 and the oblivion, I feel maybe we find out more interesting details.
It should be worth the time.

They can't shake the WTC7 ghost

Inspired by the cartoon image of the WTC7 ghost knocking on the BBC's door posted by GeorgeWashington...

Click for full size

A Blast From The Past Reminds Us Why The Official Story Surrouding WTC 7 Is Absurd!

''We built in enough redundancy to allow entire portions of floors to be removed without affecting the building's structural integrity, on the assumption that someone might need double-height floors,'' said Larry Silverstein, president of the company. ''Sure enough, Salomon had that need. Source:

The comment and NY Times article above completely brings into question the fire/gravity reason for the collapse of WTC 7.

Warning Of WTC7 Collapse As Early As 10:28am+

These were just posted on on 3/2/2007.

After 10:28 a.m. September 11, 2001: Fire Fighters Trying to Extinguish Fires in WTC 7

WTC7 The Smoking Gun of 9/11

About 13 minutes.

"It looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out. It was horrifying. About a second later, the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that. We saw the building crash all the way to the ground. We were in shock."

This is a quote from an emergency worker who was near World Trade Center Building 7 just prior to its collapse on 9/11/01.

Now ask yourself is there such a thing as a fire hot enough to weaken the entire steel frame of this building but NOT hot enough to blow out its windows?

The quote above can be found at time: 3:56. ABN

All BBC / WTC7 relevant news in one .pdf

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!

Another footage of WTC7 Foreknowledge???

Hello. I am new to this site and I am so glad that I got here.
I have few clips here that I like to share. Although it doesn't have a time stamp on it. But I could confirm it was between 2pm-2:30pm. Because as I fast forward the tape there was a local channel with a time stamp on it and also there was a Guliani press conference with a big clock behind him. Anyway here is the clip.

At 1:37 she interviewed a cop. Listen to what he had to say.

Here another clip of an eyewitness describing the second plane.

G. Edward Griffin - BBC early report - may not mean what you think

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.


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.

Back to basics

While interest swirls around the important BBC report and the source question remains promising, has anyone really made an effort to identify the company and individuals potentially responsible for the controlled demonlition itself. Were, for example, the "consruction workers" who were leaving the area prior to the collapse ever interviewed? Have the limited number of firms able to do this kind of work ever questioned? One would assume there would be a paper trail of some kind... Where are the next Woodward and Bernstein when we need them?

Internet Archive Reposts (and "Corrects") BBC Foreknowledge Video (the same thing as the "Internet Archive") has re-posted the BBC video regarding the collapse of WTC 7.

If I correctly understand what 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:

WTC7 ,The Smoking Gun video, contains BBC's collapse footage

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'.

The British Respond: Part of the conspiracy? (2)

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.

WTC7 questions

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?

Blog Wars Continue In Infowar

At the heart of last weeks Blog War between the infowarriors (and makers of and the BBC was arrogance. How arrogant of the BBC to dictate to a group starving for information about a perceived wrong that they were not smart enough or worthy enough to view said material. The truculent parent scolding with a meritorious sneer. The News Director for the BBC, Powers, let loose a low-bowl chundle at the like of Alex Jones. The meaningless arrogance of the infowars militia was appalling also in its unrehearsed, harsh and dillatorious foul mood. Their only attack was to scream louder.

The lack of statements from the responsible parties affecting digital changes to the story google, digg, the Internet Archive, youtube and the BBC itself- the speed with which the entire event transpired should give one pause. Just long enough to miss. Has the BBC actually managed to lose all its recordings of 911? What a facestious idea driven by some prim notion of copyright legalese. If only the infowarriors "streamed" rather than wholesale raided, it might still be there. I'd have shut my library doors against that hoodlum onslaught most days too.