From the BBC's explanation of the WTC7 coverage:

4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I'd love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don't help clear up the issue one way or another.

From the BBC's own archiving policies:

The following components to be retained:-

· Two broadcast standard copies of all transmitted/published TV, Radio and BBCi output – one to be stored on a separate site as a master

· One browse-quality version for research purposes, to protect the broadcast material

· All supporting metadata to enable research and re-use

· A selection of original (i.e. unedited) material for re-use/re-versioning purposes

· Hardware/software/equipment to enable replay/transfer of the media

So they lost three copies? How many homework-eating dogs do they have over in England?? Anglo-Saxon please...

More myth-busting video. Peter Jennings interviewed WTC carpenter Marlene Cruz from her hospital bed on 9/12/01. I don't think Jennings' knew what he was about to hear; he asks Cruz how she received her injuries, and she describes how an explosion stopped her freight elevator- when she was in a sub basement of the South Tower, six floors below ground.

video is five minutes long. Google pulled this, but it's still on youtube

Fast forward to the 44 second mark to hear the bomb-related part of the interview.

I know almost nobody will watch this, but I really hope that if one of the debunkers does watch this, they don't try and tell me that a fireball traveled 900 feet down ( Down?? ) an elevator shaft into the sixth level of the basement and then proceeded to mimic a bomb. I really hope not, because that would sound totally stupid if somebody alleged that.

BadComrade wrote:Bob, have you seen this video of WTC7 before?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdt7wRQtaY


Looks pretty fucked to me.

i have a feeling that green flame (at 3:33) will be used to prove conspiracy. but this video is not very convincing - the guy repeats what we can see way too much, almost like he is tring to make up for the fact you can't really see that much in this vid. single picture showing large part of the bottom part of the building missing is way more convincing.

emmanuelle cunt wrote: single picture showing large part of the bottom part of the building missing is way more convincing.

An arguably large part of the bottom of the building is missing, caused by the chaotic barrage of random bits of debris from the towers. So that's why it fell down in the beautifully symmetrical and rapid way it did.
Uh huh, it's so clear now.

Experienced demolition teams would be giving each other high fives over that sort of result but we now know that their expertise is surplus to requirements. To bring a skyscraper down just like a controlled demolition all you need to do is chip off a few random chunks and set it on fire with kerosene or diesel and wait. I could do that. In fact it would be fun.

Around half an hour before it collapses you can announce that it fell because, hey, it's as good as down anyway.

So yeah, architects, demolition experts , fire fighters , Underwriters Laboratories, metallurgists and physicists... back to the drawing board with the lot of yuz.

Mose Varty-Seppanen wrote:

emmanuelle cunt wrote: single picture showing large part of the bottom part of the building missing is way more convincing.

An arguably large part of the bottom of the building is missing, caused by the chaotic barrage of random bits of debris from the towers. So that's why it fell down in the beautifully symmetrical and rapid way it did.
Uh huh, it's so clear now.

Well put. People think like cavemen on this. They think fires are magic. "Oooga, oooga! Fire burn! Hot Hot Hot! Steel? What is Stee Uhl? Caveman no know steel?? Caveman know FIRE! Hot hot Hot!".

Yup, controlled demolition crews can all retire. We figured out a new way to knock down steel buildings- caveman style! Big rocks!! FIRE! Oooga ooga...

Mose Varty-Seppanen wrote:

emmanuelle cunt wrote: single picture showing large part of the bottom part of the building missing is way more convincing.

An arguably large part of the bottom of the building is missing, caused by the chaotic barrage of random bits of debris from the towers. So that's why it fell down in the beautifully symmetrical and rapid way it did.
Uh huh, it's so clear now.

take a closer look at the video and you will notice the collapse is not that symetrical as it looks at first glance. it clearly starts on the side of the building with the gap, and goes (pretty slowly) from there. but i agree that it still looks quite smooth.

clocker bob wrote: We figured out a new way to knock down steel buildings- caveman style! Big rocks!! FIRE! Oooga ooga...

S'right! Thanks.

Anyways, me hungry, ug!

emmanuelle cunt wrote:
take a closer look at the video and you will notice the collapse is not that symetrical as it looks at first glance.

Yes, it kinks, and if you look at the kink, it's closer to the southeast side of the building, which is odd to me, because all the pics of debris damage are of the southwest corner. If that southwest corner was caved out, why didn't the building drop on that side first?

it clearly starts on the side of the building with the gap, and goes (pretty slowly) from there. but i agree that it still looks quite smooth.

Can you explain 'pretty slowly'? The penthouse reached the ground in 6.5 seconds.

jongoodwin wrote:If the building to the right of her head isn't there anymore, that's proof that that building is the third and final one to collapse that day, and thus proof that the collapse was reported prematurely.

NO - this proves that the government used this whole WTC "explosions" as a ploy to cover up the fact that they blew up AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT 47-story building in downtown NYC - WHICH THEY DID 20 MINUTES BEFORE blowing up the 3rd building!

I don't know how this has gone unreported, but I'm going to get to the bottom of it, that's for damn sure.

clocker bob wrote:

emmanuelle cunt wrote:
take a closer look at the video and you will notice the collapse is not that symetrical as it looks at first glance.

Yes, it kinks, and if you look at the kink, it's closer to the southeast side of the building, which is odd to me, because all the pics of debris damage are of the southwest corner. If that southwest corner was caved out, why didn't the building drop on that side first?

it clearly starts on the side of the building with the gap, and goes (pretty slowly) from there. but i agree that it still looks quite smooth.

Can you explain 'pretty slowly'? The penthouse reached the ground in 6.5 seconds.

yeah. at double speed