the bbc is an active player in the so-called war on terror. the ripple effect is a good look at the british inside job behind the 7/7 subway bombing, and how the bbc span that. the filmaker was extradited from ireland and spent eighteen months in gaol for his efforts at dissecting the london false flag.
9/11 was a psy-op, and certain upper echelons of the msm (bbc included) were an integral part of the operation.
to clayton:
i don’t think the role of media in 9/11 is any less important that who were the material executors of the “collapse”. did it never strike you as strange how quickly the jet-fuel caused structural failure story got aired so promptly? go fox!
Lol, what would the conspirators stand to gain by informing the media about their plan before actually carrying it out? That would just be overcomplicated, and the key to a successful conspiracy is to keep it simple.
They inform the media because the media acts as the molder of public opinion, a gatekeeper. They might not be privy to the exact procedure, but they know that UBL did it and that YOU need to fear what they tell you to.
Look at the evidence rather than thinking that your intuition is somehow more honed than others hard research.
Moderator note: profanity removed. -Nielsio
not everybody in the msm is privy to what the shadow state’s agenda is, any more than the grunt knows what’s happening in the executive suite of the pentagon.
The case against the official is almost ridiculously simple.
First of all, you don’t need a thousand reasons to doubt it, you just need one clear and convincing example of purposeful deceipt to establish that the official explanation is not true. To illustrate the point, take a look at this proof that the Zapruder film is a hoax. Even if that were the only mistake that the forgers had made, it would be sufficient to prove that the film is, in fact, a hoax. All you need to find is one mistake, one deceipt.
In the case of the WTC tower collapses, that mistake is the lack of cause and effect in each of the building collapses. The damage caused by the plane impacts on WTC1 and WTC2 is an apparent cause of those collapses. No doubt, the damage was significant. But the official story has a mistake - WTC7 wasn’t hit by an airplane, and the damage caused to WTC7 by the falling debris and the office fires was not unprecedented. The architects and engineers who designed WTC7 may have even made fatal mistakes in their design that made it especially susceptible to collapse. But no matter what explanation you give, you can’t get the entire roofline to fall simultaneously and symmetrically, keeping all four edges of the roof almost perfectly parallel to the ground. That’s like claiming a miracle happened. “Mother Mary appeared and then WTC7 collapsed” is as sensible and reasonable as “all 24 vertical support columns in WTC7 failed within a matter of seconds of each other and the building collapsed symmetrically.”
But if WTC7 was demolished, then the entire official story unravels from there. You don’t need to look at transcripts of cell phone calls or speculate about whether there were, in fact, planes or no planes. It really doesn’t matter. WTC7 was, as a matter of simple fact, demolished. Hence, WTC1 and WTC2 were also demolished. Why and how they were demolished are separate questions that cannot alter the fact that they were demolished.
Clayton -
You are all wasting your time endlessly analyzing tower collapse videos, be they of WTC1, 2 or 7 [or of any other WTC complex buildings]. They are all just crude, computer generated fakes.
All of the plane “into/ through buildings” videos are fakes [i.e. computer generated animations] , simply because the events depicted defy fundamental laws of physics.
All of the [supposedly “live”] collapse sequence footage of WTC1 and 2 are also obviously fake [i.e. computer generated animations] for the exact same reason [they defy fundamental laws of physics] - i.e. 1300 ft tall, 500,000 ton steel and concrete buildings can neither collapse from the top down [they must be demolished from the bottom up- removing the strongest part, the base, first], nor can they be demolished in under 20 seconds [ some videos of WTC1 show it collapsing from top to bottom in 10 seconds, which is free-fall speed].
Assume “False In One False In All”?
Although the collapse sequence for WTC7 looks more realistic [because the collapse starts at the base, not from the top down, as for WTC1 and 2], because all of the “plane into/through building” videos are obvious fakes, and all of the WTC 1 and 2 collapse sequence videos are also obvious fakes, it is safer to assume “false in one false in all”; meaning that in all likelihood, the collapse sequence for WTC 7 is also fake, although there is know way of knowing for certain.
regards, onebornfree.
@obf: No, I disagree on WTC7 footage. There is potentially footage out there of the WTC7 collapse that did not come from either major media or the government. It would be too dangerous to fake footage of the WTC7 collapse and have other private footage that contradicts it. I don’t know about WTC1/WTC2 footage but it’s not relevant given that WTC7 is clearly a controlled demolition.
As I said, I do not really know for sure one way or another regarding the authenticity of the building 7 collapse footage- it is impossible to know with absolute certainty [one way or the other].
All I said was that given the obvious fakery of the other famous footage I previously referred to, my own logic tells me that it was safer to assume “false in one false in all” regarding all supposed footage- including that purportedly showing WTC7’s collapse.
Logically, at this point in time, I can see no good reason to assume that it is not fake footage, while at the same time I try to keep, in the back of my mind, the slight possibility that it could after all prove to be authentic.
As to it being “too dangerous” to fake WTC 7 collapse footage, in light of the fact that the perps had already manufactured fake "plane into /through building " footage, and fake WTC1 and 2 collapse footage, I can see little justification for your claim.
Most likely, a combination of military style smoke screens and HERF were used. Smoke screens obscured the area , and HERF technology was probably used to jam/ inactivate any private cameras in the proximity of the WTC complex that day, so most likely, no real amateur footage exists of events that day that was taken close enough up to give us any discernible detail, including any showing the actual demolition of WTC 7 .
Have you come across any WTC7 collapse footage that you believe to be authentic?
Regards, onebornfree.
to onebornfree:
whilst i do share your view on the digital trickery of the “planes” , i’m not necessarily prepared to accept your exclusion of all film of the destruction, just because some visuals are doctored. i’d prefer to judge on a case-by-case basis.
it was september clues that opened my eyes to the visual deception in the first place, just to give credit where it’s due.
to mark:
i’ll have a look at the video later, your other links tread the same path that i did in coming around to the inside job. for what it’s worth, i don’t think it’s a matter of winning, as the establishment has already achieved what the objectives were all along - a war that did nothing but drain america of blood and money, and an internal security regime ready to crack down on any dissent.
Mark: Calm down, the caps-lock is unnecessary. Onebornfree swoops in from wherever he usually hides out whenever there’s a 9/11 thread on this forum and he is a proponent of the “no planes” theory. There are some interesting things pointed out in the September Clues documentary but I remain firmly planted on the fence. Given the nature of the problems experienced by the forgers of the JFK assassination footage, it stands to reason that the criminals behind 9/11 would want to simply avoid any genuine footage of the event. The only question that really matters is whether 9/11 was dirty business or not and the evidence is clear: it was. I think that WTC7 is crucial because it is the inevitable kink in the plans of the criminals. Something is bound to go wrong in an operation as complex as the 9/11 attacks and that’s what WTC7 is… the mistake.
Barry Jennings was actually in WTC7 and has gone on video describing his experiences (once on the morning of 9/11, just minutes after he survived his ordeal in the building). He died days before the NIST report on WTC7 was released. I’m sure he died of “natural” causes. Jennings said that there were explosions in WTC7 before the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2. One was so powerful it destroyed the platform he was walking on in the stairwell on the 6th floor. He denied claims that the explosions were from fuel tanks. WTC7 would remain standing for hours until it, too, mysteriously collapsed around 5pm in the evening. My hypothesis is that they had started blowing charges in preparation for the final demolition and were going to fully collapse it while it was engulfed in the smoke and dust of WTC1 or WTC2. This would automatically take care of the footage and noise problems. But something went wrong and the building didn’t collapse as it was supposed to. This is why there is basically no footage of the south side of the building… it probably bore visual evidence of HE charges. So, a military unit was dispatched into the building to rig another set of charges or to find and fix the problem with the original charges but first they had to wait for the fire department to beat back the office fires to where they could enter. The firefighters were pulled back at around 3:30 on orders from the fire chief and during the hour and 50 minutes after they pulled back, the military unit went to work rewiring the charges.
This is why I harp on WTC 7… it is the smoking gun, it is the screw-up of the 9/11 operation. It’s not that we cannot know from other evidence, as well, that it was an inside job, but WTC 7 is so easy to see through.
Clayton -
right on, but you’ve gotta understand that this is a CENTURY long war plan (and effort) to bulkanize three different sections of the middle east. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan. Get back and ill show you some links to the war maps and the white papers for the plans themselves.
The US is gonna have a draft unless we can get people to understand the big picture. 9/11 was only the beginning…
“whilst i do share your view on the digital trickery of the “planes” , i’m not necessarily prepared to accept your exclusion of all film of the destruction, just because some visuals are doctored.”
I understand.
The differences in our approach to examining the 9/11 video record archives appear to be that , speaking for myself, after having come across just one example of what I consider to be incontrovertible evidence that the official story is a lie, via the use of a neutral, non-biased approach for government/media “evidence” examination, I then deliberately , pre-examination of any more government/media “evidence”, assume that every other piece of 9/11 government/media story “evidence” I come across is suspect/untrustworthy until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt.
In other words from that moment on [ discovery of falsity via neutrality] I deliberately examine all subsequent government/media “evidence” with a pre-biased, “guilty until proven innocent” examination mindset.
I believe that this is the only approach that is reasonable for me to take, in a search for truth.
So , for me, after discovering even one example of government falsity , I am at that point no longer prepared to examine any other government/media “evidence” without a pre-supposition of it being completely inaccurate, or just plain false [ thereby holding all subsequently examined government/media evidence to that famous “higher standard of truth”]
Others,[ including yourself from what I can tell], after discovering undeniable evidence of a government lie, [in your case fake plane into building videos] appear to feel fully comfortable in reverting to a more neutral mindset for any evidentiary examination they might subsequently carry out - actually giving the government the benefit of the doubt on , what you have called " a case by case basis" .
This might seem to be a reasonable methodological approach for yourself [and others] - but for myself such an approach [giving a benefit of the doubt to the government on a case by case basis after discovery of a lie, or lies ] makes no sense whatsoever, plus, it runs contrary to the evidentiary procedures regarding any/all government evidence listed in the Bill of Rights, and also to the oft-used court instruction by judges to juries, whom after seeing/hearing a cross-examined witness exposed as a liar under cross-examination, are instructed by the judge that they have the right to completely disregard all testimony by that same witness and to apply the maxim “false in one false in all” if they so desire.
While I understand and respect your choices and thinking processes for yourself, personally I could never use them, as I believe they are liable to lead to false and possibly dangerous conclusions . However, “each to his own.”
Regards, onebornfree
9/11 was definitely the beginning of some weird, sinister plan. It feels like we’ve been living in a political/economic Twilight Zone since 2001. However, I think there is some hope because I don’t think everything is going to plan. I personally believe the Iraq war was a big monkey wrench in the globalists’ plans to start a war with Iran that would cascade at least into a regional war if not a world war. This would be the focal point of the world’s attention while the establishment of carbon cap&trade+carbon tax would give the United Nations an independent tax revenue stream, granting it real sovereignty for the first time. A chain-reaction of debt crises and collapse of national currencies would then impel nations into unifying in currency blocs, such as the Euro, Amero which would then be regulated directly by the UN. The final steps in solidifying world government would just be window dressing.
I think we’re going to see a gradual draw-down. The Iran thing has fizzled and I don’t think they’re going to be able to resurrect it. The cap&trade crap failed and I don’t think that’s coming back either. China has openly proposed a world commodity-based currency standard which, while not Austrian, is still a hell of a lot better than what we have now. I think that really scared the hell out of the globalists. Their worst nightmare is the end of the fiat money gravy train. So, I think that has forced them to back off and regroup. For that reason, I think this economic crisis is also going to fizzle… it’s not useful to the globalists any longer to have an economic crisis. So, they’ll continue going through the motions of QE and bailing out bad banks and so on but I think that, behind the scenes, things are probably going to be getting a lot tougher for the good ol’ boy network.
Clayton -
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/07/israel-iran-war-in-september.html
to clayton:
hope you’re right.
Mark,
I’ve deleted three of your posts and edited one remaining. Take note of the forum rules. A higher standard of conduct is required.
wow. okay. my bad.
LogisticEarth,
many many buildings were damaged, but didn’t fall. for a huge news agency to single out that one and say it fell before it collapsed is very strange and telling.
Just because your friend said some building fell before it happened doesn’t disprove that a conspiracy took place. nor does it take away from the strangeness of the BBC (an international news agency) reporting that a building fell before it fell.
although it regards the british analogue to 9/11 - the ripple effect should help to understand the bbc’s role in the war-on-terror psy-op.
