BBC News Reports Building 7 collapse 23 Minutes before it collapses.

Here's what i assume must be the female reporters contact information.

BBC - New York
1995 Broadway
New York, NY 10023

Jane Standley, Chief Correspondent : Phone: 212-501-1556; Email: [email protected]



Link to source

[edit on 27/2/07 by theBman]

Originally posted by nowthenlookhere
Some people said when they downloaded the clip from the BBC archives the reporters section was edited out...

Does anyone still have this sanitized clip?? If so can you upload it? maybe to mediafire or something?

cheers

I downloaded the BBC footage from the link provided earlier.
It was a 2 hour download for my normally fast PC and broadband connection.
I have yet to watch it, but when I do I will let you know if it is the 'sanitized' version.

Originally posted by Hal9000
I don't have time to read the whole thread, so can someone explain where this came from and why it is just now being made public?

Here's what we "know"

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you can possibly read the whole thread (or even skim it) there's a LOT of questions answered. It's worth it, IMO.

I remember watching CNN on 9/11 when they were saying the building was going to collapse, and wondering how they knew that.

I remember that, too. Try finding a video of that today. No, don't waste your time, they're not there.

I'm moving my last post to here as I have been working on it all day and don't want the info in it to get lost.

Ok, I reckon I have identified the building from which the recording was made.

Using this view:





Possibility One
Lat: 40°43'24.26"N
Long: 74° 0'19.14"W

Junction of Watts Street and 6th Avenue

Possibility Two
Lat: 40°43'23.60"N
Long: 74° 0'16.57"W

Possibility Three - Soho Grand Hotel
Lat: 40°43'19.17"N
Long: 74° 0'16.77"W

Small Billboard and water tower
Lat: 40°43'17.36"N
Long: 74° 0'21.08"W

Beige Building
Lat: 40°43'16.49"N
Long: 74° 0'21.09"W

Large Billboard (Central)
Lat: 40°43'17.56"N
Long: 74° 0'19.55"W

Prominent Brown/Red Building - Western Union Building
Lat: 40°43'3.52"N
Long: 74° 0'31.06"W


I'm pretty sure the recording was made from Possibility Two, unsure as to the name of the building, but am still looking. This is the only building of signicant height that allows for the view where you can see the Small Billboard, and the 2 water towers in the configuration shown in the video.

Anyone have any ideas as to the name of the building?

The roads around it are:
Watts Street,
Thompson Street,
Grand Street
and
6th Avenue

Unsure as to what time the present google image was taken of this area, but note the direction of sunlight relative to that on the video.



The above is a zoomed in shot of the building in question showing the aforementioned trajectory with regard to the water towers and the billboard.


[edit on 27-2-2007 by Koka]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Here's what we "know"

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you can possibly read the whole thread (or even skim it) there's a LOT of questions answered. It's worth it, IMO.

Thanks for the links BH. I will read the whole thread later, but at work right now, and this thread is growing fast.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
But someone had to know the building was coming down to put that piece of information out there. Full stop. Conspiracy Busted!

The fact that it was known the building would collapse is not in question, the area had been evacuated by the FDNY because they knew it was likely to come down and the potential for collapse had been known since much earlier in the day.

(4:30 p.m.) September 11, 2001: WTC Building 7 Area Is EvacuatedThe area around WTC Building 7 is evacuated at this time. [Kansas City Star, 3/28/2004]...

...A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building’s integrity was in serious doubt.” [Fire Engineering, 9/2002]

9/11 Timeline

The question, as yet unanswered to the satisfaction of some, is what caused it to collapse. So there is no surprise that news organisations knew the building was probably going to collapse just that they broadcast the news before it happened.

This Video is Simply Amazing!!! This screams Inside Job the whole way!!! I bet here are so many more video's out there somewhere that are very similar to this. I do find it very strange that Google Video kept yanking the video down. I've been able to finally watch it this morning, on several channels including You Tube, Live Link, and Google. I heard about this yesterday, and was not able to see it.

I think most of us here can agree that the video is real, and there was no green screen used. Like most have said this is very, very damning evidence. Thanks to all the people that have made copies on their hard drive and put it on CD's!!

Now how can we continue to push this video all over the internet?? How can we get this in front of many people as we can!!! It would be great if the MSM were to cover this, but we know that's bit of a stretch!!

If people could list some action steps that would help promote this video and authenticate it, that would be awesome!!! Here are some action steps that we could take!! Please feel free to add to this list with links, emails, etc.

1. Contact the reporter
2. Try and get the video in Google's top 100
3. Digg it as much as possible
4. Post links on Craig's list- Politics or Rants and Raves

Please feel free to add more action items to the list to help promote this piece of damning evidence!!!

The question, as yet unanswered to the satisfaction of some, is what caused it to collapse.

Here's a very good report on the WTC7 collapse, it's a 48 page pdf

Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely
Collapse?
ABSTRACT
In this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the
Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use
of pre-positioned cutter-charges. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11
Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all
three buildings. And I present evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is
suggested by the available data, and can be tested scientifically, and yet has not been
analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.

So there is no surprise that news organisations knew the building was probably going to collapse just that they broadcast the news before it happened.

"probably going to collapse" and "has indeed collapsed" is too far a stretch for me.

Originally posted by timeless test

The fact that it was known the building would collapse is not in question, the area had been evacuated by the FDNY because they knew it was likely to come down and the potential for collapse had been known since much earlier in the day.

Where is the evidence that firefighters said it was going to come down due to damage?

I find that hard to believe, because WTC7 realistically did not take that much damage, and for firefighters to state that it was in bad shape seems like a blatent lie to me, ie, they never said that.

Originally posted by mustbebc

Originally posted by Insolubrious

When she is talking about wtc7 collapse its probably because it was infact aired later after the collapse, and that woman talking has been super imposed onto the scenario, it looks that way. The BBC have no shame about putting people on to fake scenarios, a bit like how they do with the weather forecast. Hell, they do it for the Queens speech and everyone knows it.

On top of all the explanations myself and others have given to why this isn't blue/green screen there still is the question of why would they bother. It is so much easier to just whack a reporter (whom we know was at one time based in New York) in front of a window. Why would they bother to install a green screen and go to great lengths to fake the lighting??

Why would they bother with blue/green screen? The same reason they always bother - BBC likes to look good and present on the scene - as so do their reporters. Many times we have seen reporters super imposed onto disaster scenarios they are reporting about without actually being there (which is pretty sad imo). She pretty much presents the scenario much like a weather girl would. The reporters knew this was going to be a huge story so probably made a little extra effort in presentation. Although this is low resolution video its hard to tell but it does look like there is some type of feathering between the background and herself like a super imposed image would. Its much harder to spot these days because they have gotten better at doing it.

Thats my first impressions anyway, it reminded me of when the Queen done her speech on a super imposed Buckingham palace, it was only just noticeable. I have the news on right now and there is a politician super imposed on a scenario with big ben in the background. Above it says 'LIVE westminster' ! Its a joke!

Perhaps it would be worth asking the reporter if it were super imposed.

However if this is the real deal and the video is all its supposed to be and recorded when the uploader claims it was, then it is very damning evidence of insider knowledge! Its particularly freaky when she gets cut short just before the collapse is supposed to commence! Gheesh someone really knows how to pull the strings :0 I think its so damning this is why I have trouble believing this, also shouldn't these sources be traceable? BBC must of aquired there info from somewhere.

The fact that it was known the building would collapse is not in question, the area had been evacuated by the FDNY because they knew it was likely to come down and the potential for collapse had been known since much earlier in the day.

How was it known the building was going to collapse?

When never in the history of the world had a steal frame building collapsed due to fire.

Cheney unhurt after deadly blast at Afghan base
Suicide bomber kills up to 23; Taliban spokesman says VP was the target

www.msnbc.msn.com...


CAN ANYONE SAY BULLLLLLLLSHEEEEEEEEEEET



CMON the day after we uncover the most damning peice of evidence ever,


Ohh yeah IMO put STOP LOSSES on any stock you may have,looks like the market is taking a trip to tankedville

BE SAFE

I think someone should write a concise report and send it to Keith Olbermann

His contact info is on that page, under "Countdown with Keith Olbermann"


[edit on 27-2-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I think someone should write a concise report and send it to Keith Olbermann

Great IDEA DO IT!!!!!!!!!


SREAD THIS LIKE WILDFIRE

Originally posted by shrunkensimon


Where is the evidence that firefighters said it was going to come down due to damage?

I find that hard to believe, because WTC7 realistically did not take that much damage, and for firefighters to state that it was in bad shape seems like a blatent lie to me, ie, they never said that.

graphics8.nytimes.com...

www.firehouse.com...

Firehouse: Other people tell me that there were a lot of firefighters in the street who were visible, and they put out traffic cones to mark them off?
Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o�clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o�clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that�s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn�t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

I'm requesting footage from the archives of belgian television to see if they received the same info on the newswire before the actual events.

I'm in direct contact with the archives rather then some contact person, so I have hopes that if there is something there too, I'll find it.

I do see a possibility that there is no life footage at that time here though, since the moment it happend was past 11pm local time and I don't know or remember if news services were still live at that point.

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
[Where is the evidence that firefighters said it was going to come down due to damage?

I find that hard to believe, because WTC7 realistically did not take that much damage, and for firefighters to state that it was in bad shape seems like a blatent lie to me, ie, they never said that.

Well, rather than accusing people of lying you could read the link I posted and also try Firehouse.com. A number of the testimonies on that site detail the siutation around Building 7. I don't have time to check them all as it's some time since I read them but you could certainly look at Deputy Chief Nick Visconti's story towards the bottom.

He says:

He said to me, Nick, you�ve got to get those people out of there. I thought to myself, out of where? Frank, what do you want, Chief? He answered, 7 World Trade Center, imminent collapse, we�ve got to get those people out of there.

D/C Nick Visconti's story

Edit to add... Or you could read Peter Hayden's story, (thanks Deltaboy). In fact I would strongly recommend you read them all, they are very powerful and very moving.

[edit on 27-2-2007 by timeless test]

someone just posted this on digg

The reporter actually turns and looks towards the scene and the camera ZOOMS in. This is a complete giveaway that there is in fact NO composite shots and that it is indeed real (ie optical)

its a good point.

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
I tell you what needs to happen, is we need to contact that news anchor women and ask how she came to state wtc collapsed

Hopefully she'll be around long enough for someone to ask!

Next thing's next. Are there archives of other networks (CNN, FOX, Sky, ITV, channels in France, Germany, Australia etc) available? If so, people need to watch every second of them from that day and see if anyone else reported the collapse before it happened. If not, then the question to me becomes, where did this reporter get her info from?

If the BBC was the only news coverage in the world that made such a report, then it couldn't come from a newswire/press release as it would have happened elsewhere. That leaves the BBC being the only ones "in on it", or word of mouth and/or in a "WTC7 is going down, pass it on - WTC7 has gone down, pass it on, banana milkshake down, pass it on" style. Other suggestions here welcome.