Terror Threat raised to Severe

[Zingari]

If this theory is true then do you think this information was 'let out of the bag' too soon and the BBC were innocently reporting on what they were told or do you think the BBC knew what was going on?

that would involve me indulging in conspiracy theory , and i'm not going to ( i have my thoughts, but that is all they are and can't of course be proven )

i've already gone further down that road than i want to in this thread

i would merely encourage anyone to keep looking at the many inconsistencies , and keep an open mind . and always remember , the bigger the lie the more people believe it .

many ( usually faceless) experts are telling how 911 happened , but equally, many are telling that it was not possible , judge the many images available for yourself and and think deeply which makes more sense .

and try to do it without making alternative explanations as to who or why or how it happened , you don't have to explain how a magician actually does a trick to accept that it is not as it appears

[Babylon]

those BBC reporters are fookin good ,

are you not the least bit suspicious that all was not as it seemed ?

Have you ever watch Sky News or BBC News 24 and the like. When something big happens it's fairly clear most of the time they don't have a clue what's happening, I've seen it with my own eyes when so called witnesses say something and the reporters repeat it as fact, only to find out later it was complete and utter horse shit.

I remember watching it all on TV and the reporting of what was happening changed every minute. Christ the women begins her report with "the details are very very sketchy". In other words I don't have a clue what's happening, i'm just repeating what someone said.

[Zingari]

Based on what theory?

probably based on the theory that it probably can't be recreated ,

i'd risk a tenner no-one could do it ,

ask yourself

is it possible to slice through a number of girders at the top of a steel framed building , around three quarters of the way up ,

soak the rest of it in parrafin that has randomly soaked its way through the building by various channels such as lift shafts , heating ducts etc and ignite it ,

and the whole lot will come crashing down ? not once ,not twice , but three times in one day ,

i'd believe anyone if they told me they had got 6 numbers on the national lottery , its obviously possible , but 3 weeks running and i'd get a bit suspicious

i'd love to see it , i bet the explosives engineers are shitting themselves worrying about their jobs , if basically kerosene jet fuel and a few severed girders can do the job.

go and ask em

[Zingari]

Have you ever watch Sky News or BBC News 24 and the like. When something big happens it's fairly clear most of the time they don't have a clue what's happening, I've seen it with my own eyes when so called witnesses say something and the reporters repeat it as fact, only to find out later it was complete and utter horse shit.

I remember watching it all on TV and the reporting of what was happening changed every minute. Christ the women begins her report with "the details are very very sketchy". In other words I don't have a clue what's happening, i'm just repeating what someone said.

getting something wrong in a news report is hardly the same as getting it spectacularly right even before it happens though , is it ?

i mean there are bad football commentators that often get things wrong ,, but if one said , " oh what a wonderful goal from Beckham , 10 yards from inside his own half " , 20 minutes before the event , even you would be a little suspicious

[Houdini Logic]

that would involve me indulging in conspiracy theory , and i'm not going to ( i have my thoughts, but that is all they are and can't of course be proven )

i've already gone further down that road than i want to in this thread

That's quite a typcal response from anyone involved in consipracy theories (not a personal dig) - they often come forward with a suggestion of 'ooo look this doesn't seem quite right' and then when you try and get involved in the detail they seem to turn into the lawyer from south park...

[Guest Bilo]

Surely a message from the NYFD saying 'WTC7 is on the verge of collapsing, stay the hell away' can easily be misinterpreted in a fast developing, chaotic and unprecedented news situation as 'WTC7 has collapsed' somewhere along the line though. That's not too much of a stretch of the imagination surely? Certainly less of a stretch than the CIA rigging the building for a controlled demolition for months with no-one noticing and/or keeping quiet for 8.5 years?

[Zingari]

Surely a message from the NYFD saying 'WTC7 is on the verge of collapsing, stay the hell away' can easily be misinterpreted in a fast developing, chaotic and unprecedented news situation as 'WTC7 has collapsed' somewhere along the line though. That's not too much of a stretch of the imagination surely? Certainly less of a stretch than the CIA rigging the building for a controlled demolition for months with no-one noticing and/or keeping quiet for 8.5 years?

yes , but the man said , " we made the decision to pull it" , it's a statement of pro-active intent isn't it ?,

the statement fully implies that they had decided to do something ,not just allow something to happen , the two things are not the same .

what was that something, or "pulling it" , they decided to pro actively do ?

[Babylon]

getting something wrong in a news report is hardly the same as getting it spectacularly right even before it happens though , is it ?

i mean there are bad football commentators that often get things wrong ,, but if one said , " oh what a wonderful goal from Beckham " , 20 minutes before the event , even you would be a little suspicious

Getting something wrong is getting something wrong. The woman clearly doesn't know what building is what, if she did she wouldn't be stood in front of it doing her report would she.

Have you ever heard of chinese rumours? She's not predicting the bloody future hear like your stupid football analogy. There would have been reports and rumours going around that it was only a matter of time until WT7 fell. She is just repeating what's she has heard, and that has probably been passed down the chain of 100's of people.

We are talking about one of the biggest (if not biggest) incidents in the last 50 years, think back to what it was like yourself. No body had a clue what was going on, nobody knew what could be coming next. I'd imagine the woman was probably shitting herself, I bloody would have been. She's probably use to reporting on the stock exchange and then she gets thrust into all hell breaking loose. Repeating what you'd been told on a day like that hardly constitutes proof of a cover up... that the bloody bbc are in on.

[Zingari]

That's quite a typcal response from anyone involved in consipracy theories (not a personal dig) - they often come forward with a suggestion of 'ooo look this doesn't seem quite right' and then when you try and get involved in the detail they seem to turn into the lawyer from south park...

thats how most detective work is undertaken , if someone gives a you a story that does not add up , then just because you cannot supply all the ready made answers , does not mean the bull shit answers therefore suddenly becomes acceptable

[Babylon]

yes , but the man said , " we made the decision to pull it" , it's a statement of pro-active intent isn't it ?,

the statement fully implies that they had decided to do something ,not just allow something to happen , the two things are not the same .

what was that something, or "pulling it" , they decided to pro actively do ?

You're quoting it out of context. He'd been told by the firemen the building had a few hours left to stand, he'd been told everyone had been evacuated... is it not conceivable he was talking about the fire fighting operation?

What's more likely.... "Pull It" meaning the fire fighting operation, or "Pull It" meaning the building.

[Guest Bilo]

You're quoting it out of context. He'd been told by the firemen the building had a few hours left to stand, he'd been told everyone had been evacuated... is it not conceivable he was talking about the fire fighting operation?

What's more likely.... "Pull It" meaning the fire fighting operation, or "Pull It" meaning the building.

And surely in building terms 'pull' means exactly that. The allegation is that it was demolished with explosives, not pulled down.

[Babylon]

if someone gives a you a story that does not add up...

The story does add up to most people though, it only doesn't add up if you don't want it to.

[Zingari]

Getting something wrong is getting something wrong. The woman clearly doesn't know what building is what, if she did she wouldn't be stood in front of it doing her report would she.

Have you ever heard of chinese rumours? She's not predicting the bloody future hear like your stupid football analogy. There would have been reports and rumours going around that it was only a matter of time until WT7 fell. She is just repeating what's she has heard, and that has probably been passed down the chain of 100's of people.

We are talking about one of the biggest (if not biggest) incidents in the last 50 years, think back to what it was like yourself. No body had a clue what was going on, nobody knew what could be coming next. I'd imagine the woman was probably shitting herself, I bloody would have been. She's probably use to reporting on the stock exchange and then she gets thrust into all hell breaking loose. Repeating what you'd been told on a day like that hardly constitutes proof of a cover up... that the bloody bbc are in on.

she didn't get it it wrong , thats the whole problem , she got it spectacularly spot on , but twenty minutes too early ,

therefore someone had prior knowledge of an event ( the total collapse of a building ) that at the time should have been a complete shock

it would be like standing at the side of a road and reporting a car crash that hadn't yet happened

[Zingari]

You're quoting it out of context. He'd been told by the firemen the building had a few hours left to stand, he'd been told everyone had been evacuated... is it not conceivable he was talking about the fire fighting operation?

What's more likely.... "Pull It" meaning the fire fighting operation, or "Pull It" meaning the building.

the building of course , if he was talking about "pulling" firemen i would be accusing him of quite different things

[Babylon]

she didn't get it it wrong , thats the whole problem , she got it spectacularly spot on , but twenty minutes too early ,

therefore someone had prior knowledge of an event ( the total collapse of a building ) that at the time should have been a complete shock

it would be like standing at the side of a road and reporting a car crash that hadn't yet happened

Oh my f'ing god... are you for real?

She did get it wrong, because it hadn't happened yet. Yes someone had prior knowledge, experts on the scene of WT7 had said it was only a matter of time before it came down. Which is why there were no fire fighters etc around the building.

Again your analogy makes no sense and is nothing like what happened here.

[Babylon]

the building of course , if he was talking about "pulling" firemen i would be accusing him of quite different things

Yeah you think the building, because you want to believe that's what he meant. You haven't got one shred of evidence that can't be rationally explained another way.

[Webbo]

I can't understand why a BBC reporter would be in on a CIA plot.

[Zingari]

I can't understand why a BBC reporter would be in on a CIA plot.

no one has said the bbc reporter and CIA are linked

the problem is somehow she had prior knowledge of an event that was unique , a first in history

( a steel framed building collapsing) ,

steel framed buildings ( that had not been hit by missiles or aircraft ) had never collapsed before 911 or since , but 20 minutes before the event she was announcing the total collapse of a steel framed building ,

when someone does that , there are going to be suspicions , rightly or wrongly

but , please don't shoot me , i'm only the messenger for the theories

[Ford Super Sunday]

no one has said the bbc reporter and CIA are linked

the problem is somehow she had prior knowledge of an event that was unique , a first in history

( a steel framed building collapsing) ,

steel framed buildings ( that had not been hit by missiles or aircraft ) had never collapsed before 911 or since , but 20 minutes before the event she was announcing the total collapse of a steel framed building ,

when someone does that , there are going to be suspicions , rightly or wrongly

but , please don't shoot me , i'm only the messenger for the theories

And yet you keep coming back, time and time again, defending these theories you seem to only be the 'messenger' for, strange

[Zingari]

oh i nearly forgot ;

there are no actual definitive photographs of flight 77 hitting the pentagon

,

why ?

where is the photographic evidence that flight 77 hit the pentagon ?

there should be lots of pictures of it because there must be hundreds of cameras around the pentagon

why won't they release them ? apart from those 5 grainy images that just show a fireball

[Daggers]

Professor Steven Jones...is "a solid research scientist" with very high credentials.

I'm just trying to show that many Physicists are speaking out.

No you aren't - you are citing the works of a select and very small bunch of crackpots.

Jones, for example, carried out research in order to "prove" that Jesus visited America. He is a fruitcake. He maybe clever - but he is still one muon short of a subatomic particle.

Science is about peer-review. None of these handful of halfsharps have the backing of the scientific community for their research, only one piece made its way into the proper channel.

You can find people with PhDs wandering around dousing for ley-lines too - it doesn't mean they exist it simply means someone is grasping for meaning in the world or trying to make a fast buck out of peddling bullshit.

You seem to enjoy swallowing it so I'll leave you to it now.

[Zingari]

No you aren't - you are citing the works of a select and very small bunch of crackpots.

Jones, for example, carried out research in order to "prove" that Jesus visited America. He is a fruitcake. He maybe clever - but he is still one muon short of a subatomic particle.

Science is about peer-review. None of these handful of halfsharps have the backing of the scientific community for their research, only one piece made its way into the proper channel.

You can find people with PhDs wandering around dousing for ley-lines too - it doesn't mean they exist it simply means someone is grasping for meaning in the world or trying to make a fast buck out of peddling bullshit.

You seem to enjoy swallowing it so I'll leave you to it now.

i suppose asking you to sign the architects and engineers for 911 truth petition is out the question then ?

http://www.ae911truth.org/

[BoneDog]

probably based on the theory that it probably can't be recreated ,

i'd risk a tenner no-one could do it ,

ask yourself

is it possible to slice through a number of girders at the top of a steel framed building , around three quarters of the way up ,

soak the rest of it in parrafin that has randomly soaked its way through the building by various channels such as lift shafts , heating ducts etc and ignite it ,

and the whole lot will come crashing down ? not once ,not twice , but three times in one day ,

It's not possible. Thousands of physicists and engineers in the US (many more thousands around the world) plus millions of US citizens alone know it (including the 911 victims families groups), but some people are hypnotized to not know it. Either that or they just haven't really studied any of the subject and have just flicked through the odd newspaper report and watched the odd documentary on BBC2 and the Discovery Channel.

I think too many people are trusting the same press who they say they don't trust on most other things. They always trust them on the worlds biggest and most important stories.

People don't even bother to think about the molten iron etc., or the size of the dust particles, what was in those dust particles and all that other scientific stuff. (or either the military precision, planning, funding and top level US military security clearance of the operation. They just put the 'success' of the operation down to NORAD/FAA/Pentagon incompetence! The only day in their 50 year history that they have been incompetent, and 3 times! Complete jokers).

I think all of you who say this would be too hard to cover up have mis-underestimated Bush and his mates

[Fox You Forest]

I'm just watching a show about the escape from Alcatraz now, did they make the swim or did they die?

It'll save me a lifetime of wondering.

[Babylon]

and watched the odd documentary on BBC2 and the Discovery Channel.

Yeah much better to rely on Youtube.