Boycott the BBC! "Cock-up" Reveals Pre-Knowledge of WTC 7 Collapse, but Damage Control Afterwards Points to Conspiracy

The BBC has been in the middle of a blogger firestorm the last couple days after clear and incontrovertible evidence appeared, showing that the Beeb had reported the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building -- better known as World Trade Center 7 -- before it actually collapsed! Check out the screen grab below (I've circled WTC7):

The BBC engaged in some quick (and pathetic) damage control but failed to calm the boiling outrage erupting around the world. In so doing they revealed that they've lost all of their tapes from 9/11 and doefully ask somebody to send them a copy, plz. (I'm not fucking kidding. Check the link):

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.

I don't even know where to begin.

Okay, Beeb... so you're telling me that nobody fucking bothered to save or secure any of the tapes from an entire day of broadcasting -- a day that, even for the Brits, would have to rank as one of the most important in a generation at least, and then you meekly ask for a copy as if it's our job?! What the hell?! Then you claim incompetence (just like the Bush regime)?! Well, your excuse is so fucking pathetic I'm inclined to agree that you are a bunch of morons.

Do you believe them? I don't. This is bullshit. I'm starting to think that the BBC, and all the other major news organs, are in fact part of the conspiracy -- after the fact.

So how did the Beeb get the news that the WTC7 building was about to collapse? Well, that certainly could be fairly innocent on their part. If a "trusted source" informed them of the collapse, they would be inclined to report it, and not bothering to check and see that the building is still standing does reek of incompetence. However, they seem quite competent at getting videos removed from YouTube and GoogleVideo. Strange for a news organization that was supposedly trying to get their tapes back.

I managed to find a clip on YouTube that hasn't been taken down yet. It's got a full 25 minutes of the BBC's feed from 9/11, so you'll have to fast forward ahead to the 15 minute mark to see the footage in question.



So, this could be an isolated incident, right? A fluke bout of premonition by a major media outlet that is unique in the pages of history? Not quite.

CNN did the same damn thing. In fact, the footage of WTC7 is even better in the CNN version and you can see that the building is not really on fire. There's plenty of smoke around it, but most of it appears to be coming from the wreckage of the two towers. Reporter Aaron Brown at least seems vaguely aware that the building is still standing, but he clearly mentions a collapse that either has occurred or is about to occur.



What are we to make of all this? Well, I think that's pretty obvious. The corporate-controlled media is lying to us. Every day, with every breath, and every death in Iraq or from the growing numbers of dead or dying first responders... they're lying to us. They know which way the evidence points, and they're doing everything they can to cover it up. After the BBC's litany of pathetic excuses they had the gall to mock those of us who question the official story:

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... "

So they're not only mocking those of us genuinely concerned about the events of 9/11 (if we don't learn what really happened, how can we prevent another one?), they've sunken so low they're using a Bush regime apologist's anonymous comments on YouTube to make their case. FUCKING PATHETIC.

What's even more intriguing is how the BBC flak, Richard Porter, seems more interested in carrying water for the Bush regime than he does in showing his news organization as a competent and trustworthy news source. In fact, he goes out of his way to make the BBC appear utterly incompetent -- no doubt because it helps the Bush regime with their own claims of incompetence rather than malfeasance. Instead of acknowledging legitimate questions about that fateful day he does all he can to back up the official story (which, by the way, is a conspiracy theory no matter how you slice it). I say again: FUCKING PATHETIC.

That's it. You're done, Beeb. I had you in my bookmarks, but you're gone now. You're fucking gone. You are nothing more than an agent of evil to me now. I will give you the same amount of trust I give the Bush regime -- less than zero.

I'm calling for a BOYCOTT, folks. We can't let our media LIE to us and get away with it. Going back to them and reading their deception-stained news would be like an abused wife going back to her drunked and violent husband. Enough!

What's the number one thing a news organization is supposed to do? Tell the truth, right? When a news outlet refuses to do that, what good are they? They're about as useful as a knife in the eye. They're about as helpful as gonorrhea.

I'm calling for a boycott until such time as the BBC fires that arrogant, pandering fuckhead, Richard Porter, head editor of world news... AND launches a full and impartial investigation into the tragic events of 9/11 -- giving all theories equal credence until the evidence makes clear which is most likely. And not a trashy hit-piece like that Conspiracy Files piece of shit (which was debunked about 5 minutes after it aired).

It really pains me to do this. The BBC has a lot of quality programming and some of their shows have really hit hard and exposed lies and crimes in government. However, they are tainted meat to me now. I can't eat the rest of it just because it looks okay -- how do I really know? Trust is such a fragile thing, and getting it back after losing it is not easy. Good luck, BBC. I hope you do the right thing.