9/11: "Honest Mistake" or BBC Foreknowledge of Collapse of WTC 7? Jane Standley Breaks Her Silence

Originally posted by HolographicPrincipal

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by micpsi

 

Linking sloppy journalism to a plot has always been a ridiculous stretch. If you had planned this, why would you telegraph what was about to happen? Such planning would try to minimize discovery, not complicate issues and make things more risky for the plotters. You would have no reason to tell anyone what was about to happen. Everyone would know soon enough, even if broadcasters misunderstood their feeds and tried to scoop the competition without fact checking.
The simplest plot would be to let the aircraft strike their targets. All proposed goals could be accomplished whether the buildings collapsed or not, the hijackers would be dead, and the event could be explained as "incompetence at the highest levels of government." This last is eminently believeable by the public, especially with the track record of Bush administrations.

I have always wondered this as well... if it was slated to happen, why would a report be distributed in advance? Wouldn't that just be unnecessary room for error? Anyone have thoughts on this?

that's why i was wondering how long in advance it was slated....is the evidence that we are finding part of a plan within itself? sounds quite familiar.....



misclassified.cz.cc...

You may say that the goyim will rise upon us, arms in hand, if they guess what is going on before the time comes; but in the West we have against this a manoeuvre of such appalling terror that the very stoutest hearts quail - the undergrounds, metropolitains, those subterranean corridors which, before the time comes, will be driven under all the capitals and from whence those capitals will be blown into the air with all their organizations and archives.

The second secret requisite for the success of our government is comprised in the following: To multiply to such an extent national failings, habits, passions, conditions of civil life, that it will be impossible for anyone to know where he is in the resulting chaos, so that the people in consequence will fail to understand one another. This measure will also serve us in another way, namely, to sow discord in all parties, to dislocate all collective forces which are still unwilling to submit to us, and to discourage any kind of personal initiative which might in any degree hinder our affair. There is nothing more dangerous than personal initiative; if it has genius behind it, such initiative can do more than can be done by millions of people among whom we have sown discord. We must so direct the education of the goyim communities that whenever they come upon a matter requiring initiative they may drop their hands in despairing impotence. The strain which results from freedom of action saps the forces when it meets with the freedom of another. From this collision arise grave moral shocks, disenchantments, failures.

By all these means we shall so wear down the GOYIM that they will be compelled to offer us the international power of a nature that by its position will enable us without any violence gradually to absorb all the State forces of the world and to form a Super-Government. In place of the rulers of to-day we shall set up a bogey which will be called the Super-Government Administration. Its hands will reach out in all directions like nippers and its organization will be of such colossal dimensions that it cannot fail to subdue all the nations of the world.

reply to post by HolographicPrincipal


Let's be honest about it, you don't go into that much detail about a collapse of a building prior to it collapsing. As the OP stated, this will be like reporting the assassination of JFK 20 minutes before it happened.

I'm surprised at the lack of OSers contributing their thoughts on this one though.

reply to post by Yankee451

Yeah, you're right...these folks are just as fallible as the rest of us. It was a mistake, and the take home lesson is indeed that all the media are in on it.

All the media??
According to the truthers hundreds of thousands of people are 'in on it'.
All the NYC fire fighters are in on it and agreed to coverup the murder of there co workers.
All the NYC police for the same reasons.
All of Congress past and present.
All of the worlds physics professors.
All of the worlds HS Science and physics teachers.
All of the worlds demolition experts.
All of the worlds pilots who know planes can't manuver like that.
And the list goes on.

Except for a handfull of backyard know it alls on a few websites.

As to the reporter.

Could it be that she was in front of a green board with a delayed video being superimposed. And the news outlet didn’t want their viewers to find out they didn’t really have a reporter ‘on the scene’?

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Yankee451

 

Yeah, you're right...these folks are just as fallible as the rest of us. It was a mistake, and the take home lesson is indeed that all the media are in on it.

All the media??
According to the truthers hundreds of thousands of people are 'in on it'.
All the NYC fire fighters are in on it and agreed to coverup the murder of there co workers.
All the NYC police for the same reasons.
All of Congress past and present.
All of the worlds physics professors.
All of the worlds HS Science and physics teachers.
All of the worlds demolition experts.
All of the worlds pilots who know planes can't manuver like that.
And the list goes on.

Except for a handfull of backyard know it alls on a few websites.

you think that we believe that ALL of those people are covering up? wow, i did not know that about myself, interesting....

Originally posted by samkent
As to the reporter.

Could it be that she was in front of a green board with a delayed video being superimposed. And the news outlet didn’t want their viewers to find out they didn’t really have a reporter ‘on the scene’?

you forget, they reported it collapsed before it did...doesn't matter whether they had a reporter at the scene or not.

Originally posted by samkent
As to the reporter.

Could it be that she was in front of a green board with a delayed video being superimposed. And the news outlet didn’t want their viewers to find out they didn’t really have a reporter ‘on the scene’?

That is really of no consequence. The BBC still reported it has having collapsed 20 minutes before it actually collapsed.

They didn't report that it was in danger of collapsing, they reported that it had actually collapsed!!

ETA:- Patternfinder beat me to it.

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by Yankee451

 

Yeah, you're right...these folks are just as fallible as the rest of us. It was a mistake, and the take home lesson is indeed that all the media are in on it.

All the media??
According to the truthers hundreds of thousands of people are 'in on it'.
All the NYC fire fighters are in on it and agreed to coverup the murder of there co workers.
All the NYC police for the same reasons.
All of Congress past and present.
All of the worlds physics professors.
All of the worlds HS Science and physics teachers.
All of the worlds demolition experts.
All of the worlds pilots who know planes can't manuver like that.
And the list goes on.

Except for a handfull of backyard know it alls on a few websites.

It's either all or nothing with you, isn't it?

Why not consider only four producers would be needed to account for the four mainstream "live feeds"?

Why not then consider that since it was breaking news on four big stations, everyone else simply repeated what those stations were playing? No HUGE conspiracy, just HUGE pack mentality.

Same goes for the rest. Professors and scientists know the score...if they don't toe certain lines, they dont' get funding. Folks smart enough to figure out how corrupt it must be to allow a pathetic lie like 911 be passed off as true, are going to be smart enough to know not to rock the boat. Honest ones would stay silent. Spooks would pretend to start a truth movement.

For the rest of your "All"s; the only person I see using absolutes is you. Not sure why you'd automagically jump to such wild conclusions...

reply to post by patternfinder

Originally posted by samkent


Yeah, you're right...these folks are just as fallible as the rest of us. It was a mistake, and the take home lesson is indeed that all the media are in on it.


All the media??
According to the truthers hundreds of thousands of people are 'in on it'.
All the NYC fire fighters are in on it and agreed to coverup the murder of there co workers.
All the NYC police for the same reasons.
All of Congress past and present.
All of the worlds physics professors.
All of the worlds HS Science and physics teachers.
All of the worlds demolition experts.
All of the worlds pilots who know planes can't manuver like that.
And the list goes on.

Except for a handfull of backyard know it alls on a few websites.

Originally posted by patternfinder

you think that we believe that ALL of those people are covering up? wow, i did not know that about myself, interesting....

Yes, that is what you are telling us wether you know it or not.

reply to post by Cobaltic1978

That is really of no consequence. The BBC still reported it has having collapsed 20 minutes before it actually collapsed.

They didn't report that it was in danger of collapsing, they reported that it had actually collapsed!!

So true.

I blather on about the media being the culprit, when right here is a perfect example.

Complicity is the only explanation for this mistake.

reply to post by waypastvne


i appologize if that's what i was coming across as...that wasn't my intention...there is enough people out there that are coming forward on it and no one is showing it on mainstream media, just like they aren't showing ron paul...it's a media blackout of immense proportions...they don't show you what they don't want to show you...period

hopefully you don't think that the media blackout of ron paul is just us being nuts...it's the same principle

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by micpsi

 

Linking sloppy journalism to a plot has always been a ridiculous stretch. If you had planned this, why would you telegraph what was about to happen? Such planning would try to minimize discovery, not complicate issues and make things more risky for the plotters. You would have no reason to tell anyone what was about to happen. Everyone would know soon enough, even if broadcasters misunderstood their feeds and tried to scoop the competition without fact checking.
The simplest plot would be to let the aircraft strike their targets. All proposed goals could be accomplished whether the buildings collapsed or not, the hijackers would be dead, and the event could be explained as "incompetence at the highest levels of government." This last is eminently believeable by the public, especially with the track record of Bush administrations.

But it was not sloppy journalism by the BBC. CNN also reported WTC7 collapsing before it did. The BBC never independently check the veracity of ALL their stories every time - that would be an impossible task. Instead - as in this case - they rely on other news services getting their facts right. So your characterization of the BBC's reporting as "sloppy" is merely a pathetic excuse to hide the REAL problem that you don't want to recognize because it implies a conspiracy. The BBC was not part of the plot. It simply - as a British government-controlled institution - decided not to rock the political boat by asking difficult questions about how on earth a press release could have been made about a building collapsing before it did.

It was not a case of telegraphing it. Someone who was NOT part of the "insiders" who had planned to bring down WTC7 got to learn that it was going to be blown up and the story got garbled and released prematurely. Simple as that. Heck, there is even video footage of police and fire fighters, shortly after an explosion at the WTC7, telling people to get back as the building was about to be blown up (mind their words: NOT "about to fall" but ABOUT TO BE BLOWN UP"). So it was hardly a deep secret withheld from everyone else. Lots of first responders had by then got to know what was about to happen.

One theory is that Flight 93 was intended to hit WTC7, but the plan went wrong and it was shot down over Pennsylvania.

reply to post by waypastvne


And your thoughts on the OP?

Can you find a rational explanation for a broadcaster reporting that a building had collapsed a full 20 minutes before it actually collapsed?

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


I suspect the reason OSers and even Official Truthers get squeamish over this subject is due to their hanging their hats on the Media as proof of their claims. If you take the media out of the mix...all bets are off.

Can't blame them for not showing up.

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by waypastvne

 

And your thoughts on the OP?

Can you find a rational explanation for a broadcaster reporting that a building had collapsed a full 20 minutes before it actually collapsed?

I already told you. 2 other WTC buildings had already collapsed. There was precedent. It could have easily been a mistake. I bet there were other things reported that day which didn't even happen, because information got mixed up. But those are ignored because they weren't "mysterious portents into the future."

There's nothing here of substance because nothing can be proven, and there is a reasonable explanation as to why it may have been a mistake. Focusing on these circumstantial pieces of evidence does not help the 9/11 truth movement in any way, it just gives debunkers yet another loophole to use to defeat you.

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
reply to post by waypastvne

 

And your thoughts on the OP?

Can you find a rational explanation for a broadcaster reporting that a building had collapsed a full 20 minutes before it actually collapsed?

I already told you. 2 other WTC buildings had already collapsed. There was precedent. It could have easily been a mistake. I bet there were other things reported that day which didn't even happen, because information got mixed up. But those are ignored because they weren't "mysterious portents into the future."

There's nothing here of substance because nothing can be proven, and there is a reasonable explanation as to why it may have been a mistake. Focusing on these circumstantial pieces of evidence does not help the 9/11 truth movement in any way, it just gives debunkers yet another loophole to use to defeat you.

it's proven that they said that they made a mistake in reporting it too early, they didn't say the report itself was a mistake....and your bet that other things were reported that day isn't proof of anything...information about something that hasn't happened yet doesn't just get "mixed up" and if it did, then why was that information even being placed in the roll at all? they shouldn't have gotten that information till after the building collapsed, am i wrong?

Do you think that if "TPTB" were capable of orchestrating the biggest fraud in the history of mankind, one that pushes the very limits of the imagination, they would announce the fall of a building in advance? Do you honestly believe that could happen under such circumstances?

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Do you think that if "TPTB" were capable of orchestrating the biggest fraud in the history of mankind, one that pushes the very limits of the imagination, they would announce the fall of a building in advance? Do you honestly believe that could happen under such circumstances?

Why, are TPTB omnipotent and infallible in your world?

Originally posted by Yankee451

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
Do you think that if "TPTB" were capable of orchestrating the biggest fraud in the history of mankind, one that pushes the very limits of the imagination, they would announce the fall of a building in advance? Do you honestly believe that could happen under such circumstances?

Why, are TPTB omnipotent and infallible in your world?

I'm not even sure they exist, in 'my world'. Nevertheless...

Consider the planning that had to go into such a plan.
Consider the number of people involved.
Consider the resources at their disposal.
Consider the consequences of exposure.

And yet they get it SO WRONG that they announce the fall of a building in advance. The fall of a building!

Sorry. Can't buy it.