|
printable version
- js reader version
- view hidden posts
- tags and related articles
View article without comments
by $
Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2007 at 7:47 AM
The 9/11 Inside Job, America's Reichstag Fire, both perpetrated by the ruling class to promote war and fascism to maximize the profits of the capitalist class, continues to be investigated. The latest evidence that the bombings of 9/11/01 were an Inside Job is that the BBC reported the collapse of Building 7 of the World Trade Center almost 30 minutes before it actually happened!
The 9/11 Inside Job, America's Reichstag Fire, both perpetrated by the ruling class to promote war and fascism to maximize the profits of the capitalist class, continues to be investigated. The latest evidence that the bombings of 9/11/01 were an Inside Job is that the BBC reported the collapse of Building 7 of the World Trade Center almost 30 minutes before it actually happened! See http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/88.html which states: Here's the claim: "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. (4:30) 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. (14:40) Then at 5:15pm EST, just five minutes before the building did actually collapse, her live connection from New York to London mysteriously fails. (21:15s) 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. Please Investigate 9/11 - Time is of the essence." Source: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=49f_1172526096 http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/88.html
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/88.html
Report this post as:
by Sheepdog
Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2007 at 8:54 AM
With a growing body of incriminating blatant evidence of fore knowledge and collusion involving 9-11 there is the new evidence that Terry Nickles released about FBI involvement ( which brings to mind the incredible kluster f*ck about unexploded bombs and murdered witnesses ) in the OK Bombing, typical of their activities which brought about the first ( okay, not really, but this was so draconian giving even more power and funding to these assholes )of the 'anti-terrorist' laws. How long does it take a nation to realize that their secret police are goons, killers and attack dogs for the rulers?
Report this post as:
by Sheepdog
Wednesday, Feb. 28, 2007 at 11:25 AM
It shows that the BBC was scripting an event we were all told, was an unexpected 'fire collapse'. The lies are deep and tangled between the upper echelons of power and their hands are very visible in this clear, knowledge of an incident which, in fact, had not occurred, yet were evidently known before hand as were the cover propaganda ( explanations ) and complicity in pre meditated murder.. these are perpetrators for questioning.
Report this post as:
by Topper
Friday, Mar. 02, 2007 at 8:25 AM
lifted from Portland-
The 911 Script and the Age of Terror Whitley Strieber
I must admit that I have been deeply shocked by a story that appeared today on my website, to the effect that the BBC reported the collapse of WTC Building 7 23 minutes before it actually took place. Previously, the BBC claimed that it had lost all of its 9/11 coverage, but this video has now surfaced. I watched it myself, and sat there with my blood literally running cold as I saw their reporter saying that Building 7 had collapsed while it was still visible behind her, perfectly intact.
Now, why wasn't this just a simple mistake? For a simple reason: the collapse of Building 7 has been explained to us as a sort of freak accident that nobody expected. It is, frankly, impossible that the BBC reporter's statement was accidental. She is clearly seen reading from a teleprompter. Obviously, she was reading something written on it, and not making up what would have then seemed to be a wild tale out of whole cloth. In other words, she was reading a script, and that script had been put up on her teleprompter early.
Somebody wrote that script and distributed it to the media. I have long since abandoned the US media as a lost cause. Thank God we have the internet, because the American press are just a bunch of whores, frankly. I spent 45 minutes yesterday with CNN Headline News today, looking for news of Iran. 31 of those minutes were spent on Anna Nicole Smith, and the rest was fluff.
Pravda did better during the height of the Soviet Union. At least it didn't insult the intelligence of its readers, but only bored them with its obvious lies. The American media goes it one better, by ignoring the real news and running the silly stuff. And the papers that should be doing better, such as the New York Times, have been singing the "no conspiracy here" song since the days of the Kennedy assassination. Because of what appears to be an almost surrealistic belief that people cannot do bad things in concert, they missed Watergate. And they are missing 9/11 as well. They all are, and, in the end, they will be abandoned by the public because their silence and refusal to investigate are, in effect, lies spoken without words on behalf of what is coming to seem a devastating and widespread conspiracy against the lives of thousands of people, against western civilization and against human freedom at the deepest level.
At present, virtually every street in Britain is watched by video, and their is a bill on its way into parliament that will ban public photography. Can you imagine, not being able to take a picture outdoors? What madness is this, what evil insanity? But it's real, and it doesn't end in Britain. Last October, without debate and in the dead of the night, the president was given the power by language buried in the budget bill to use the military as a police force within the United States, and to nationalize the National Guard without consulting governors. In other words, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and the Insurrection Act of 1807 were usurped without a single word of debate and without the least whisper from the American press.
To its credit, the New York Times did pick up on this story recently, reporting the event on February 19, many months after it happened. But why wait? These two acts are cornerstones of American freedom, but they have gone the way of habeas corpus, sacrificed to what now appears to be a self-generated war on terror, the purpose of which could not be more clear: it is not to protect us, it is to take away our freedom and turn this country into a dictatorship, and its little sisters the United Kingdom and Australia into the bargain.
And the scale of the thing is terrifying. If the BBC was reading a script, as it must have been, then they were all reading scripts, and not one reporter has come forward, not one editor, and there is not a breath of suggestion in the 9/11 Commission report that any such thing might have been happening.
And yet, one cannot forget that there was substantial trading in puts on the stock of insurance companies and airlines prior to 9/11, and that some of this trading was traced to individuals who had been associated with the CIA, as Jim Marrs reports in the Terror Conspiracy.
One also cannot forget that Condoleezza Rice testified before the 9/11 Commission that the National Security Council was blindsided by the attack, even as the 11 memos warning of it that the FAA sent to her while she was its chairman were classified until after the last presidential election.
How long can this go on? How much more can we stand? I find it utterly fantastic that conservatives are not outraged about the usurpation of Posse Comitatus and the Insurrection Act, and the attack on habeas corpus, not to mention the wholesale use of torture and atrocity as a matter of national policy.
The Bush presidency is a burnt-out rump, it would seem, reduced to this odd recent practice of sending its officials into harm's way in the apparent hope that any misfortune befalling them will gain it some sympathy, even as the president prepares for the future by buying a large estate in Paraguay. (However, he might have done a little more research about that country before he bought, given that the Colorado Party, which has been in power since it was set up by Nazi sympathizers and German immigrants in 1947, is now facing a serious threat from Msgr. Fernando Lugo Méndez, a populist bishop who is likely to win the next general election.)
And then there is the terrifying prospect that another 9/11 will take place, but this time one so terrible that we will all desperately cleave to authority in the hope of preserving our lives, no matter who we think might be responsible. Anything less than a nuclear attack on one or more American cities would drive Bush from office, because it would reveal his entire anti-terrorism apparatus for the gimcrack sham that it is.
And when I say sham, I mean sham. Right now, they are just getting around to installing equipment that would detect nuclear weapons being brought, for example, into the Port of Los Angeles—equipment that should and could have been in place every American port six months after 9/11.
So it's perfectly possible that nuclear weapons are already in our cities, and have been there for years. As the Bush presidency winds down, the only real question is, will they be used to bring the American people to heel, or will he choose the Paraguay option?
I used to believe that the Administration let 9/11 happen so that it could have an excuse to attack Iraq and destroy our freedoms. Condoleeza Rice ignored the FAA warnings because she knew that an attack would transform an unpopular president into a beloved leader—which it did...for a time.
Given this latest piece of news, I think that anybody who seriously thinks that the whole event wasn't carefully planned and fed to us as a scripted "news event" needs to have their head examined. It was planned, period. Otherwise this reporter wouldn't have been announcing one of the disasters before it happened. It's inescapable.
Report this post as:
|