BBC Conspiracy Files: "The Third Tower"
What do explosions sound like?
First broadcast in 2008, this is another in the BBC series “Conspiracy Files”. It sets out to debunk alleged myths and misconceptions about the seemingly inexplicable collapse of the Saloman Brothers Building (aka Building 7, WTC7, or 7 World Trade Center), on the afternoon of 9/11.
Unlike WTC 1 and 2, Building 7 had not been hit by a plane, and its free-fall collapse into its own footprint was seen by many observers, both professional demolition experts and members of the public, to be all but indistinguishable from a controlled demolition. This program offers a perspective that these perceptions are mistaken.
For a critical analysis of this film see “The Third Tower”: a critical review
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
I would never waste time watching a BBC interview. I read somewhere that they target their news and documentaries at a 6th grade reading level and intellect. What’s more, you can always, always count on them to obediently parrot the official Washington party line as they have since at least the Persian Gulf War up to now.
Tony Rooke brilliantly exposed this fake documentary for the propaganda that it is, in his video evidence submitted for his court case against the BBC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5UzMjzk8bo
Whistle-blower Kevin Ryan wrote a review of the BBC’s “Third Tower”, including his correspondence with the producer.
read it here: “The BBC takes another shot at 911 truth”
http://digwithin.net/2011/08/01/the-bbc-to-take-another-shot-at-911-truth/
Were the twins hit by planes? No. The thin aluminum tubes would have bounced off like a mosquito off a net. A plane flying nearby, probably created a hologram but forgot to put engine sound on the approaching planes.. Here’s the Twins other conspiracy theories. OBL, the Arab in a cave in Afghan. shuts down the 1/2 trillion$ US air defenses with his laptop, this when OBL is reported dying in a Kuwait hospital with kidney failure. OBL then sends 22 L pilots to do an easy job. The pilots are named within 48 hours after the attacks, BBC stated many to be still alive later, CNN stated none were on the passenger lists. The pilots pass through security, get on board, are counted for takeoff.. without boarding passes or tickets. After takeoff they go through locked cockpit doors, overcome burly ex-military pilots with box cutters, fly to remote areas… Read more »
By such productions the BBC reveal themselves and their true nature. War-mongering liars are war-mongering liars.
From 2001 to today they continue to lie. Recent Chlorine attacks in Syria were reported as having been carried out by Assad’s government.
UN sources (no less) contradicted this by reporting that rebels created these events as propaganda for distribution on social media. No matter. The propaganda is ever repeated without contradictory evidence by the BBC.
Liars are liars. War-mongers are war-mongers. THE TRUTH IS OUT!
IGNORE THE BBC!!
IGNORE THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.
Give yourselves a chance at understanding what is being done to you.
Reblogged this on TheFlippinTruth.
So how did the BBC report the collapse of B7 before the event as recorded and available to a simple search on YT?
Anyone interested should Google Search: “Global Research. Seismic Evidence implies Controlled Demolition on 9/11″(dated December 1st 2012.)
The evidence(as compared to the NIST Report) is undeniable. Those buildings came down by controlled demolition. Time’s up for the criminals behind it.
A good documentary in fairness, even if it is the imperialist BBC. Gives balance to both sides. And well done to Offguardian for (having the temerity to post, lol) posting it. Cos 9/11 truthers get very precious when you give both sides, just look at the comments from them on Offguardian. In fact, I expect to get fried alive for submitting this post. I’ve always believed myself that WTC 7’s collapse was not a conspiracy, for any amount of reasons. Many respectable debunkers out there say it better than I do. In my opinion there are real conspiracies out there, eg, the USA, Sweden and the UK conspiring to bring down Julian Assange with a phony rape charge. Concentrate on them instead. Norman Finklestein puts it brilliantly But with respect, I am interested to know what admins like Kit or Catte, whose opinions I really respect, think aboout 9/11 –… Read more »
Why worry what anyone else believes? What are opinions worth?
The government conspiracy theory is no more able to stand than WTC.
That one is being lied to and that there is a very heavy investment in the lie illuminates something of the nature of a split mind.
Lets see what happens with the bill to allow Americans to sue Saudi Arabia that has huge support since the release of some of the redacted report.
“Too big to fail” is applied to so much of our entanglement in lies and corruption – but where is any hope of success without a core integrity from which to live?
Hi Andrew, With all due respect, Finklestein does not make the case that you imagine he does. His position, as he enunciates it in the video, is not that “WTC 7’s collapse was not a conspiracy,” but rather that the means of resistance that we, the average citizens, individually or collectively, can deploy against the wrongs perpetrated against us by the criminal ruling elites are scant and therefore can be easily squandered. It is therefore paramount, according to Finklestein, to choose our battles very carefully in terms of the means that we have at hand and that we can deploy in our deference. In his opinion, proving the “conspiracy” that 9/11 may in fact have been is a monumental task that will squander precious time and energy that would be better spent on matters that are every bit as egregious as 9/11, but more incontrovertibly the responsibility of our ruling… Read more »
Well spoken! And in deed we have to battle at many fronts. Surely the analysis of Nine Eleven´s consequences is as important as the analysis of the event as such.
“Nine Eleven a Dozen Years ago – Stirred it the Third World War?” http://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/nine-eleven-a-dozen-years-ago-stirred-it-the-third-world-war/
And there are the possible small hits against us, the People struggling for more justice and peace, which we have to counter:
Wordpress, WiPoKuLi: Back on Air: Strange Things Happen – „Incidentally“?! https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/back-on-air-strange-things-happen-incidentally-zurueck-auf-sendungzufaelle-gibts/
Regards
While the words, images and meanings used may seem froth to the action – they in fact frame and define the narrative re-action. The principle deceit operates to divide and rule… from the shadow or behind the mask – while the deceived fragmented or polarised identification battles to regain an authority or position it believes it has lost or been denied. Narrative identities are strongly defended against exposure of their foundation – but it is such an exposure or illumination that reveals the false as unworthy and futile or self-destructive to persist in AS a foundation. Every kind of decoy or strategy will be brought out to protect the perceived and believed (narrative) ‘truths’ pertaining to their respective identity, including of course the attack, denial, invalidation and sowing of doubt and division in the mind of anything deemed rival or threat. Thus insanity propagates itself as an ever more fragmented… Read more »
@Andrew I respect your opinion that differs from mine, and I support your comment that people who are convinced that 911 needs further investigation, or that it is a high crime involving US insiders, can get very defensive. I think this is understandable, however unhelpful. It is something I see on the other side, on the side of defenders of the official narrative also. We all have a lot at stake in the truth about 911. This last point is why I disagree with Normal Finkelstein. He makes a powerful argument about the preciousness of resources able to be deployed in combatting KNOWN evil in the world. I do though think that it is simplistic and flawed. It is based on an assumption that the generally accepted account, that of Zelikow and the 911 Commission has a factual basis that might or might not be legitimately challenged by ‘conspiracy theories’.… Read more »
Agreed. In order for WTC7 to have been a controlled demolition would have required a conspiracy of such mind boggling complexity it just defies credibility, to say nothing of the even more incredible theories like it having been a missile that hit the Pentagon. (If it was a missile what happened to the plane and all the people on board it?)
Now the question of did the US government know that a spectacular attack was in the works, and either fail to stop it, or allow it to happen is worth asking.
I found this article by Robert Parry convincing. robert-parry-911-truth-parlor-game
There are plenty of real government conspiracies out there such as the use of Jihadists to implement regime change in Syria without having to invent bonkers theories.
For a light hearted take on conspiracy theories try Mitchell and Webb
Did you read the scholarly piece on here that traces the term “conspiracy theory” to the CIA? They coined it in the early 60s to deter people from asking questions about the JFK assassination.
Censorship by ridicule no less.
You cannot just ignore the physical facts that PROVE controlled demolition with empty bluster such as “ridiculous to imagine conspiracy, too many people, impossible etc…”
The building was DEMOLISHED. Only fools try to deny it.
The question then arises. Who organised it? The Secret Intelligence services of the Deep International State … (all fingers point at Mossad, which maximises the keeping of US citizens out of the loop.) … or a guy in cave in Afghanistan.
A recent survey in the USA found that 50% of the public no longer accept the official narrative of 9/11.
Great news, don’t you think?
No?
Blimey! What is this anyway, A Hasbara trolls’ tea party?
I think it is easier to say that the attack on the Pentagon was categorically NOT a 767 flown by an amateur Jihadist. Why? The technical precision required to make the moves necessary to bring that plane to hit at exactly ground level require one of the top aviation experts in history, not just in 2001. The chances of an inexperienced pilot carrying out that manoeuvre on manual is flat zero. So: you have the more logical alternative that it was flown remotely using computer programmes, directed by person or persons unknown. In either scenario that a plane flew in, you then ask whether the forensic evidence is consistent with a commercial jetliner with dozens of passengers on board. Were there body parts? Bones? Were the metallic remnants of the jet airliner consistent with an impact into the Pentagon? Were the effects of impact on the Pentagon structure consistent with… Read more »
You can’t ignore physical scientific evidence that points one way just because you find it incredible. If there were provably explosives in the WTC then someone put them there somehow didn’t they. We can’t just sweep that fact away.
@Derek_J above: “In order for WTC7 to have been a controlled demolition would have required a conspiracy of such mind boggling complexity it just defies credibility …” Before deciding what is and whet is not ‘credible’ it is necessary to look at all the known facts of WHAT actually happened. Then, and only then, can one proceed with an analisys of HOW it happened. “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” – As Sherlock Holmes famously said. It has been repeatedly shown by professional and highly experienced engineering experts that the official narrative regarding the collapse of all three of the WTC building is not only seriously flawed, but is impossible, and the ONLY hypothesis which fits all the known facts is controlled demolition. The details of the actual conspiracy (there is no question that there was some kind of conspiracy –… Read more »
@Derek_J:
“I found this article by Robert Parry convincing. robert-parry-911-truth-parlor-game”
Parry’s article is full of distortions, halftruths, and total inaccuracies, and prejorative references to ‘Truthers’.
Please see Kevin Ryan’s reply to Parry’s article for a detailed analysis of what is wrong with it: “Why Robert Parry is Right About 9/11 Truth” –
http://911truthnews.com/why-robert-parry-is-right-about-911-truth/
Kevin Ryan is an independent investigator and former lab manger and scientist at Underwriter Labs, who has found significant discrepancies in the USA’s official 9/11 World Trade Center report. He has explained in detail why the report is not accurate and in many cases is misleading. He has shown the official investigation was unscientific and deceptive throughout the investigation.
Sorry but no, this is a terrible documentary which goes to great lengths to avoid and distort the facts. Watch Tony Rooke’s submitted video evidence for his court case against the BBC & you will see this “documentary” pulled to bits. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5UzMjzk8bo
At least this Video allows skeptics to talk, but in a way leaves the last word to the defenders of the official narrative. It´s interesting to hear Clarke state that the government doesn´t have the competence to organize something like this. Wow, but 14 men armed with boxcutters – totally incompetent “pilots” – directect by a man on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan have to comptence?! Does Clarke know what he says?!
„Recommendation: The Corbett Report! & Nine Eleven in Five Minutes!“ https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2016/06/28/recommendation-the-corbett-report/
Andreas Schlüter
Sociologist
Berlin, Germany
Reblogged this on Worldtruth.