http://etherzone.com/2007/nath040407.shtml

911 – A TALE OF MISSING TAILS
Deconstructing the BBC2 Smear Job

Nathanael

On February 18, 2007 Britain’s world-renowned broadcast organization aired an hour-long episode in its series, The Conspiracy Files. It purported to debunk the “inside job” claims of those in the 911 Truth Community. Dylan Avery from the Internet movie “Loose Change”, James Fetzer from Scholars For 911 Truth and Alex Jones from Infowars.com were the token representatives of those who consider the US FedGov “official story” to be utter fabrications.

The goal of this analysis is not to expose each and every bogus or misleading aspect of the BBC2 video. It will be to concentrate on a few key examples within this TV show (it is not a fact based documentary) and let you decide whether the series’ tagline - “Separating Fact From Fiction” - is apt or just so much BBC-BS.

Madison, WI (PRWEB) March 30, 2007 – Some members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a non-partisan organization of students, experts and scholars dedicated to exposing falsehoods and revealing truths about 9/11, have filed complaints against the National Institute of Standards and Technology for legal defects in its studies of events of 9/11 involving the Twin Towers and Building 7. James H. Fetzer, the society’s founder, believes these actions have the potential to break the back of the cover-up that has enveloped these events.

“It would be nice if the government would tell us the truth about our own history,” Fetzer said. “But all we get from the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State and former Secretary of Defense is a ‘song and dance’ that keeps the American people in ignorance.” The complaints have been filed by Ed Hass, who edits The Muckraker Report; Morgan Reynolds, past Chief Economist in the Department of Labor in the Bush administration; and Judy Wood, former professor of mechanical engineering at Clemson University. Reynolds and Wood are both members of the society.

I had a similar thread earlier this day:
http://www.911blogger.com/node/6513

Here are more points that came to my mind:
******************************************************************************************
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html#c861586

· 119.
· 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:

E-mail on the Abuse of Power at the WTC - twintowersalliance.com

Dear Twin Towers Supporters,

The people behind the third-rate plans for the WTC are ignorant, arrogant, and powerful. But who is giving them their power? It's not ultimately the media, who prove everyday what patsies most of them are. And it's not the minority of the population that wants to build something else in place of the Twin Towers. It's the silent majority, those who know that the Towers should be rebuilt, but don't speak up and say so because they don't think they can make a difference, who are responsible for what is going on – and it is time for them to find their voices.

George Pataki, Michael Bloomberg, Rudolph Giuliani, Hillary Clinton, and even Eliot Spitzer, think of themselves as presidential material. So why don't we make them care what we think? Most people still believe that the right thing to be built at Ground Zero is Twin Towers. Why would we let them put up a crazy quilt of odd buildings and then have the effrontery to call it The World Trade Center? Why would we let them wear us down until we think that anything is better than nothing? It's NOT.

The Twin Towers were not the target on September 11th, as much as it was the American way of life that came under attack – and that is what will be endangered until we get engaged as a society and stop leaving every fight to someone else. We won't have a country left if we turn away from the incremental ways it is being taken away from us – at the very time we face one of the most lethal enemies we have ever known.
..
When the politicians and the media are not serving the public good and we do not take back the power we have lent them and object to their manipulations, then it is as if flesh-eating bacteria are at work on the body politic, robbing Americans of their will. If not attacked, that disease could rob us of our country.
..
In the end, the reason we keep up the fight against the odds is because we are not willing to give this country over to the ignorant, the arrogant, and the powerful.

Please tell everyone you know that it is time to join this movement because the best memorial to all that we lost and all we have still to protect is to rebuild the Towers. Urge them to sign the petition and forward this message on to everyone they know. Urge them to use the LobbyByFax link at the bottom of our petition page. And urge them to understand that there is nothing but spit holding the current plans in place -- and not to believe anything to the contrary.

The Twin Towers Alliance has an ongoing petition to rebuild the twin towers and not the freedom tower - if you feel so inclined go check it out.

Thanks JR for the heads up!

By Stallion4
October 8, 2006

Thunderous "booms" can be heard coming from the North Tower seconds before it falls down in this recently discovered 9/11 interview with BBC correspondent Stephen Evans:

YouTube Video Link
Video Download

(I recommend wearing headphones while watching and listening to this video clip. If you do not have headphones, try turning up the volume on your computer speakers to pick up the sound of explosions and the reactions from bystanders)

While the "booms" are occurring, bystanders begin pointing and looking in the direction of the North Tower. One bystander can be heard saying "Oh my God!". A few seconds after that another explosion can be heard, and the person being interviewed, Stephen Evans, covers his ears in a fright and turns around to see the North Tower begin to fall. (Continued...)

Why Did Iron Boil in the Rubble of the World Trade Center? *PIC*

Posted By: ChristopherBollyn <Send E-Mail>
Date: Saturday, 6 May 2006, 1:36 a.m.

THE EVIDENCE OF BOILING METAL AT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER

Christopher Bollyn
American Free Press

The plumes of bluish smoke that rose for weeks from the rubble of the destroyed World Trade Center contained unprecedented amounts of toxic ultra-fine particles which are created only when metal boils.

DAVIS, California – In the days after 9-11, when he saw the light bluish smoke rising from the rubble of the World Trade Center, Thomas A. Cahill, an expert on airborne aerosols and director of the DELTA Group at the University of California at Davis, knew the plumes contained large amounts of the very smallest particles, the extremely toxic ultra-fine particles less than 1 one-millionth of a meter in size, and smaller.

Unlike the much larger dust particles from the destruction of the twin towers, these ultra-fine and nano-particles are particularly hazardous because of their extremely small size, which allows them to pass throughout the body and penetrate into the nucleus of the human cell.

Note: This probably should have been a blog instead of a story. The views expressed herein are solely those of GeorgeWashington, and not of 911Blogger.

In order to test the no-plane hypothesis that CGI imagery generated fake video images of planes crashing into the Twin Towers on 9/11, it would be useful to analyze the number of eyewitness (earwitness) reports that they HEARD the planes.

My theory is that if enough witnesses heard planes, then CGI would be highly unlikely, since that would not account for the sounds of planes (especially if witnesses heard planes from multiple locations).

The following Google search (i.e. using the search terms 9/11 heard plane "world trade center") yields 55 pages worth of results.

Anyone want to divide this up and find the relevent quotes? Let's figure out whether the acoustical evidence refutes or supports the no-plane theory.

Become a part of history. Do some original research, and help be a part of a team which tests this theory.

Alternative searches could use the words "Twin Towers", "South Tower", "North Tower", "WTC", "1" and "2" instead of "world trade center"