"“We have lent a huge amount of money to the U.S. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I am definitely a little worried.” "


Chinese premier Wen Jiabao 12th March 2009


""We have a financial system that is run by private shareholders, managed by private institutions, and we'd like to do our best to preserve that system."


Timothy Geithner US Secretary of the Treasury, previously President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.1/3/2009

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Mystic Meg took over BBC TV news room on 9/11 - reports buildings fall 20 minutes before they do ! Amazing pictures !

Alex Jones @ Prison Planet Has the unsettling video "BBC Reported Building 7 Collapse 20 Minutes Before It Fell" uncovered from the archives today, which shows the BBC reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of 9/11. The incredible footage shows BBC reporter Jane Standley (AKA Mystic Meg ***) talking live about the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building (WTC 7) while it remains standing in the live shot behind her head. Must see. BBC explanation awaited with interest.

***For ignorant Yanquis, Mystic Meg is a celebrated astrologer who peddles her pap in Rupes Rags, NOW, The Soarway Sun AKA Margaret Anne Lake (65) Graduate from Leeds University in English hosted a slot when the UK National Lottery started in 1994.

Stef reports the rapid appearance / disappearance on Google /You Tube of the above clip which is now circulating and being re-posted... and a very interesting riposte to the BBC Conspiracy Theories 9/11 fillum from Germany on Google here. Must see ... the story is crumbling .. quick time for Pearl Harbour Mk 3.

A longer copy of the BBC archive fillum from Live Leak is available below. This puts the clip into context of the news as it was running that day.

See also WTC 1 cut down with thermite bombs - proof April 26th 2006 - first picture.







The BBC have put out an explanation on a blog as Stef has commented below. There are some nice comments, which keep rolling in ...add yours. Curiously none seem to think the BBC story is in any way defensible.

4 comments:

Stef said...

There's an unsourced quote bouncing around supposedly from Richard Porter, Head of News, BBC World

"If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that."

Well, that's for sure...

In a way it, it doesn't really matter if this particular story turns out to have legs or not.

People are looking at the video for themselves, asking questions and looking for answers - completely independent of the mainstream media

Brilliant!

Stef said...

Official BBC Explanation, complete with now mandatory reference to missing video tapes, here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html

aka

http://tinyurl.com/2vzkmb

The Antagonist said...

BBC: DOG ATE MY TAPES OF THE DAY THAT CHANGED THE WORLD!!!

stickdog said...

This 9/11 BBC World News footage shows the BBC reporting that the WTC-7 building had already collapsed even though WTC-7 is clearly still standing right behind the reporter outside the window. The satellite feed goes dead about five minutes before the WTC-7 building actually collapsed -- making it the first steel frame high rise to collapse due to fire in the entire history of the world!

Here is the BBC's response to this controversy:

1. We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.

So if nobody told told you this was about to happen, how did you correctly predict the collapse of WTC-7 23 minutes before it actually happened? Is Miss Cleo one of your producers?

2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I'm quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate - but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did - sourced our reports, used qualifying words like "apparently" or "it's reported" or "we're hearing" and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

Sorry, but all of these words are noticeably missing from the report in question.

3. Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I've spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn't remember minute-by-minute what she said or did - like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing; what she was being told; and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

Does she not remember the building right behind her imploding into rubble just minutes after the anchor told her it had already collapsed?

And why are you blaming poor Jane Standley for this. Wasn't she simply agreeing with what the anchor told her?

Finally, if you were a reporter who confirmed to the entire world on live TV that the WTC-7 building had already collapsed 23 minutes before it actually collapsed on the most historic day of this century, would you be able to remember the source that steered you wrong?

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.

So the dog ate the BBC's only copy of its 9/11 video? Do you actually expect us to believe this? Ever heard of www.archive.org?

5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today "so the guy in the studio didn't quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy... "

OK, now you are quoting a commenter on youtube.com? Seriously? That's your explanation for going with a psychic prediction that the WTC-7 tower was about to collapse while the building itself is still obviously standing right behind you? And if you read the youtube.com comments, how are we supposed to believe your excuse about the dog eating your video? Didn't you just see it on youtube?

*****

This is some truly bizarre stuff. Who was pushed this story on the BBC such that they went with it without so much as fact checking the obvious fact that the WTC-7 tower was still standing in plain sight on their own camera footage while they were making this very report? Remember that no steel frame high rise has ever collapsed due to fire on any day in human history other than 9/11. So what made the BBC's source so certain that WTC-7 was going to come down 23 minutes before it actually did such that the BBC went ahead and reported that this had already occurred with the WTC-7 building still standing in plain sight in their own footage?

(C) Very Seriously Disorganised Criminals 2002/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 - copy anything you wish