February 26, 2007

9/11 Building 7 Collapse - WTC7 23 Minute Warning - Salomon Brothers Building

BBC Error ! Huge smoking gun of pre-knowledge collapse of WTC7 *911blogger.com

“On September 11th 2001, BBC World reported at 4:57pm Eastern Time that the Salomon Brothers Building (more commonly known as WTC7 or World Trade Building 7) had collapsed.

This even made the 5pm EST headlines, what is bizarre is that the building did not actually collapse until 5:20pm EST.

9/11 was unusual enough, without BBC World being able to foretell the destiny of WTC 7.

What is even stranger, is that the women reporter is telling the world that the building had collapsed when you can see it in the background over her left shoulder.

Then at 5:15pm EST, just five minutes before the building did actually collapse, her live connection from New York to London mysteriously fails.

So the question is, on 9/11 how did the BBC learn that WTC7 collapsed 23 minutes before it actually did.

Building Seven was 47 storeys, modern in design with structural steel throughout, yet symmetrically collapsed in 6.5 seconds, was someone leaking information.

No steel framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire, before or after 9/11, most people who find out about WTC7, believe it was brought down by a controlled demolition, even demolition experts agree.” *911Blogger.com

It’s here!!! The smoking gun of 9/11 that can not be disputed. BBC reporters jump the gun reporting the collapse of WTC7 until they cut the feed just 5 minutes prior to the actual demolition. People, the news is choreographed, this proves it and shows how wide spread the disinfo goes. No more denial, this is it….. they have to strike now. I can’t wait for the spin on this blunder, it will be extremely brazen. The timeline is indeed accurate given the anchor’s comments at 00:17:30 into the video where he states “it has been some 8 hours since the attack.” 9 am plus 8 equals 5 pm !!!!! If this clip is faked, then they did an excellent job and we need to know who did it.

VIDEO (http://rattube.com/blog1/2007/02/26/the-smoking-gun-wtc7-bbc-jumps-the-gun)

Lets pretend that BBC knew beforehand. What is your conclusion from that?

Sounds to me more like a time error than anything else.

Sounds to me more like a time error than anything else.
Yea, but I want to see where they run with this tidbit.

time error? What like predicting 'John Smith' will be in a car accident in 1 hour?

The thing about this is no steel building had ever fallen from fires, ever. The 3 in one day. The excuse for the twins was that they were hit by planes. WTC 7 was not hit by planes, Had much lass damage then other WTC buildings, had a minor to medium fire. Someone told the stations that the building was going to fall when there is absolutly no reason for it to fall. The question is who?

The OEM also had warned people that the WTC 1 and 2 were going to collapse before they did. Even when none of the fire cheifs or anyone else thought it would. The OEM was run out WTC7.

I'm not saying who or what, I'm just saying it stinks.

The New York Field Office of the FBI was in Building 7.
The New York Field Office of the CIA was in Building 7.
Both these buildings seem to have exterior walls exploding just before the building did a strait drop.

Sorry misprint. Building 7 is ONE building.

it is quite odd, this surfaced on youtube a week or so ago. hmm just adds fuel to the fire i suppose.

time error? What like predicting 'John Smith' will be in a car accident in 1 hour?
No, like some retarded web loon going back after the fact and looking at time signatures without a clue as to what was really going on at the time. Our city buses can't even run on time, what makes you think that all of the world's broadcasts are going to be reported perfectly accurate timewise down to even the half-hour?

That would be like me going back and claiming that aliens from outer space infiltrated the '20s race riots, from some random French commentator's idle musings, when all I have to interpret them is BabelFish.

The New York Field Office of the FBI was in Building 7.
The New York Field Office of the CIA was in Building 7.
Both these buildings seem to have exterior walls exploding just before the building did a strait drop.
find a rubber ball or balloon, then press down on it. now imagine it covered with brick and glass.... when the weight bearing structure fails and the rest of the building suddenly takes the load you'll get the same effect from a building.

Seriously guys, even FT went back on the WTC7 thing, and said that the official reason given for its collapse was perfectly scientific. If that isn't a big indicator that the theory is bunk, I don't know what is.

What would be pressing down on it. The only damage this building could have sustained would be from debris from the twins, which would damage one, possably two sides, thus tipping the thing over, not a strait drop.

What would be pressing down on it..
the weight of the building above the point where the internal weight bearing structure failed. steel is a funny thing, sure it has a high melting point, but it loses 50% of it's strength around 600 degrees.

Why would there be a conspiracy to know down WTC7 in the first place? No one even knew it existed before 9/11. If it hadnt fallen wed still be fighting the "war on terror"

Why would there be a conspiracy to know down WTC7 in the first place? No one even knew it existed before 9/11. If it hadnt fallen wed still be fighting the "war on terror"

Exactly. Apparently whatever nefarious group that took down the twin towers felt that WTC 7 was what people would really get upset about. That's why you see all of those "Remember Building 7" bumper stickers.

Internal groups of the United States Government knew what was in Building 7, they're the only ones you can be sure of.

Thats the scary part if you think of it...

Only THEY know!!

Let me ask you guys this. If none of the buildings fell, if the WTC and bldg 7 were still standing today, do you think that our response would have been the same as it was? Do you think that if 9/11 was a conspiracy that the conspirators thought it necissary to take the buildings down? Do you think that Americas support for the war would be far less as it is even now, if say perhaps only 2-300 died on 9/11 as opposed to 3000? This is of course a hypothetical question, and I use the word "only" in the most sensitive way possible.

I dont really believe there is a big conspiracy here, granted there have been some interesting points made since 9/11.

I think the war on terror would have taken a different course, Saddam would still be alive and OBL would be dead

Why would there be a conspiracy to know down WTC7 in the first place? No one even knew it existed before 9/11. If it hadnt fallen wed still be fighting the "war on terror" If anything about 9/11 was known or had been planned by officials in government positions WTC is where the OEM was situated. It would be the prefect place to monitor, hold and destroy evidence. Thats just one possiblity.

The BBC and CNN reporting the building to fall or have fallen before it actually did is not significant by itself. However...

Theres many videos from 9/11 online in which various people say the building was Demo'd. Larry Silverstein says "the decision was made to pull it". Fire fighters were told to evacuate the building before it fell. NO plane hit the building (which is the only explaination that anybody will give for why the towers were the 1st to steel building in all of history to fall from fires).

is it possible that 2 massive 110 story building falling down right next to it may have made it unstable and it was safest to just demolish it? you know, they destroy building all the time that are unsafe to inhabit, its no conspiracy then.

Yes, very possible, but to do a strait drop, seems very convenient

what did a straight drop? building 7? of course if they blew it up on purpouse they wouldnt make it explode and shower shrapnel and debris all over mahattan

If anything about 9/11 was known or had been planned by officials in government positions WTC is where the OEM was situated. It would be the prefect place to monitor, hold and destroy evidence. Thats just one possiblity.

The BBC and CNN reporting the building to fall or have fallen before it actually did is not significant by itself. However...

Theres many videos from 9/11 online in which various people say the building was Demo'd. Larry Silverstein says "the decision was made to pull it". Fire fighters were told to evacuate the building before it fell. NO plane hit the building (which is the only explaination that anybody will give for why the towers were the 1st to steel building in all of history to fall from fires).
pull "out of" as in evacuate, not pull "down".

no other steel building have ever been doused with jet fuel. yes steel has a melting point much greater than free burning jet fuel, but it loses 50% of it's straight at a lower temperature than what could have been expected. add on that steel exposed to sulfur has nasty habit of weakening and that every I beam in NYC has spent a day behind a flatbed truck belching out exhaust from high sulfur diesel, i'm surprised that more buildings haven't fallen on their own....and BTW-building 7 was on fire too.

what did a straight drop? building 7? of course if they blew it up on purpouse they wouldnt make it explode and shower shrapnel and debris all over mahattan
and managed to set charges that normally take a week in a couple of hours with firefighters running around, but who noticed nothing.


but of course that only means that FDNY was in on it too!:eek:

It would be the prefect place to monitor, hold and destroy evidence.

Right. Except for that it's almost completely insecure when compared to the Pentagon, FBI building, CIA building, NSA building, White House, etc. etc. And that you have to hope everything in this incredibly complex conspiracy would go just right in order to destroy all of your evidence. But besides that, yeah, it's perfect.

hey people asked for a possibility. I don't have to provide anything. The point is there have been buildings with far worse damage and far harsher fire then anything at WTC 7. With the BBC and CNNs 'predictions' along with various other testimonies of those on scene it becomes pretty obvious that the government is lying about (at the very least) what happened at WTC7.

Here's a site with pictures of the fire. If you scroll down further theres descriptions of many other, and far worse, building fires.
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7/fire.html

pull "out of" as in evacuate, not pull "down". you haven't even bothered to watch a clip of him saying it and yet pretend to know what he meant. He said "pull IT" not 'pull them'. IT as in one thing, as in the building.

I said this before, and I'll say it again:

The US Government engineered and executed the 911 attacks, and then a half dozen Government agencies (including the NYPD and NYFD) who were co-conspirators all managed to keep their mouths shut about it??

Jesus Christ, that is beyond stupid.
I work for the US Government. You can't plan or execute a plan to go to the bathroom without several dozen people complaining about the gender-dynamics of the bathroom, several dozen more filing a sexual harassment greviance over the very notion that a man needs to go to the bathroom, and at least a half dozen going to the union to request some sort of compensation for past-misdeed associated with said bathroom-going.

In other words, the very notion is beyond stupid, and the notion that all these human beings involved in the conspiracy could manage to keep their mouths shut about it is beyond the valley of the shadow of stupid.

And I say that with all due US Government authority.

The US Government engineered and executed the 911 attacks, and then a half dozen Government agencies (including the NYPD and NYFD) who were co-conspirators all managed to keep their mouths shut about it??yup that'd be ridiculous. It'd never work. Which is exactly why if anybody did do such they sure as hell didn't do it that way. It is not needed to inform any more then 10 people to orchastrate what happened.

Unlike the government story: The most sophisticated and well funded spy aparatus in the world was taken off guard by a bunch of former cave-dwelling jihadists with boxcutters and executed a militarily precise attack on the worlds most heavily defended country. Not only that but managed to stike to military nerve center 1 1/2 hours after the country knew it was under attack, with absolutly no interference. Yes your conspiracy theory sounds much more plausible...

Sorry, my large, gorilla-like friend. You can't have it both ways.

You can't perpetrate a Herculean feat like downing all those buildings (with carefully-controlled explosions, if I remember the kookery from another popular conspiracy-theory thread related to this one), and not involve literally thousands of engineers, technicians, and hired goons.

You gotta choose;
conspiracy-theory kookery
or
common sense.

Which is it gonna be sir?

Unlike the government story: The most sophisticated and well funded spy aparatus in the world was taken off guard by a bunch of former cave-dwelling jihadists with boxcutters and executed a militarily precise attack on the worlds most heavily defended country. Not only that but managed to stike to military nerve center 1 1/2 hours after the country knew it was under attack, with absolutly no interference. Yes your conspiracy theory sounds much more plausible...

dont forget we had our hands tied by out of control political correctness and government imposed barriers. fear of lawsuits, fear of being called racist are the main culprits in 9-11. Sure it looked odd for a bunch of arabs with no bagage paying cash all gettin gon the same plane with one way tickets. Who is ging to say anyhting about it though? no one. the ACLU has managed to scare to death anyone willing to point out the obvious.

You can't perpetrate a Herculean feat like downing all those buildings (with carefully-controlled explosions, if I remember the kookery from another popular conspiracy-theory thread related to this one), and not involve literally thousands of engineers, technicians, and hired goons. I'm not even gonna bother debating this with you because you either don't have a grasp on reality or are intentionally lying to try and prove your point. It's ridiculous on its head to suggest that it takes thousands of people to plant explosives to demolish a building.

dont forget we had our hands tied by out of control political correctness and government imposed barriers. fear of lawsuits, fear of being called racist are the main culprits in 9-11. Sure it looked odd for a bunch of arabs with no bagage paying cash all gettin gon the same plane with one way tickets. Who is ging to say anyhting about it though? no one. the ACLU has managed to scare to death anyone willing to point out the obvious. Wrong again. The people who did it were under surveilence and were flagged by the FBI multiple times. What stopped them from operating was being over-ruled by higher ups with no explaination given.

Wrong again. The people who did it were under surveilence and were flagged by the FBI multiple times. What stopped them from operating was being over-ruled by higher ups with no explaination given.

thats becuase ther was no explanation other then "we dont want to get sued if we are wrong"

Must say, in the aftermath of 9/11, I was waiting on Bush resigning, but alas.....................................

Must say, in the aftermath of 9/11, I was waiting on Bush resigning, but alas.....................................

You must have little comprehension of American politics to say such a thing. No American president, regardless of party, would even consider resigning after such an attack on U.S. soil and citizenry. I could envision one having a heart attack or suffering a stroke & dying, but certainly not submitting their resignation in the face of such an incident.

I'm not even gonna bother debating this with you because you either don't have a grasp on reality or are intentionally lying to try and prove your point. It's ridiculous on its head to suggest that it takes thousands of people to plant explosives to demolish a building.

Nossir. It doesn't take thousands of people to demolish a building with explosives. Only a couple hundred.

But to bring down the entire World Trade Center, after a pair of jetliners have slammed into them, in a carefully-choreographed series of controlled explosions, ignoring the fact that all that jet fuel would bring them down anyway, in front of a half-million witnesses?
Yeah.
It would take a few thousand.

And PLEASE do not bother debating me on this, because there is no debate.
You either want this fantastic theory to be true so badly that you would hitch your star to these conspiracy-theory kooks,
or
you have a shred of dignity and common sense left inside you.

Which is it, monkey man?

Really, be rational. Emotion wants you to believe this fantastically complex conspiracy story. Reason wants you to believe what you see. If the government was going to blow up the buildings with bombs, why wouldnt they just blow up the building with bombs and blame it on terrorists? After all, that was how the WTC was attacked the first time.

You must have little comprehension of American politics to say such a thing. No American president, regardless of party, would even consider resigning after such an attack on U.S. soil and citizenry. I could envision one having a heart attack or suffering a stroke.....

Yeah.....or perhaps flying halfway across the country, going down into a fortified bunker, and crawling under a bed and pissing his pants.

Yeah.....or perhaps flying halfway across the country, going down into a fortified bunker, and crawling under a bed and pissing his pants.
up until your second comma, that's been the contingecy plan for decades in the event of war with the USSR. as for what you wrote after that-just because that's what you would do, doesn't mean anyone else would.:rolleyes:

Here's a site with pictures of the fire. If you scroll down further theres descriptions of many other, and far worse, building fires.
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7/fire.html
wind & camera angle.

you haven't even bothered to watch a clip of him saying it and yet pretend to know what he meant. He said "pull IT" not 'pull them'. IT as in one thing, as in the building.

i don't have to watch or listen to it again. i lived with a firefighter for 4 years, and every time her dept. gave up on a structure fire, she described it the exact same way "we had to pull it", i.e. pull out of it. it's just the way firefighters talk.