another example of why "911 truth" pisses me off.

[OMGturt1es]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=RiNK-cWt7DY&mode=related&search=

"WTC 7 controlled demolition from BBC Conspiracy Files - complete version with explanation of how WTC came down."

disgusting. ****ing liars.

[Foolmewunz]

Well, at least the most recent poster in the comments thread nailed the issue. That's not a BBC report - they spliced in a bit of commentary with a Brit accent in the front that might have been from the BBC (or from a UK 911 Truth group, who knows).... but the rest seems to be The Doc's penpal.

ETA: And nice to see that they close with the bogus footage of the fireman flinching, and to which they've over-dubbed a totally unrelated explosion.

neongoddess (1 hour ago) Marked as spam
you ****ing liars. how the **** can you plice in part of "911 Mysteries" and claim that it's the BBC report? if you want to annoy us with your inane ideas, fine, but don't ****ing lie. **** YOU. GET CANCER.

[Hourglassmemory]

Well, getting cancer would do the trick...yes....

[peteweaver]

They did splice in a little footage from the BBC's conspiracy files documentary.

But like so much other things they've done, they've misrepresented it.

[peteweaver]

Here's the original:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ylwz3EqpgcU&mode=related&search=

[Foolmewunz]

They did splice in a little footage from the BBC's conspiracy files documentary.

But like so much other things they've done, they've misrepresented it.

Yeah, they spliced in the opening so it'd look like it was a BBC production. Plus, the schmuck used "Rosie" as his headline, also in an effort to get more hits/views. Propaganda of the worst sort.

[T.A.M.]

I curse Bill Gates for the computer revolution, which has now made computers so cheap, that Mom's and Dad's can afford to put one down in every basement in america....jhc

TAM:)

[OMGturt1es]

Yeah, they spliced in the opening so it'd look like it was a BBC production. Plus, the schmuck used "Rosie" as his headline, also in an effort to get more hits/views. Propaganda of the worst sort.

the big problem is the extended description, wherein it is claimed that the video is "WTC 7 controlled demolition from BBC Conspiracy Files - complete version with explanation of how WTC came down."

these ******** know that they have no credibility, and that their CT sounds insane to sane people, so they are trying to use the BBC's name to lend themselves and their crack pot claims some amount of credibility. they are actually claiming that this video is a clip from the BBC documentary.

this clip contains a very short bit of the BBC documentary, after which "Improbable collapse" is spliced in. liars.

and yes, after they were called on it, they removed the comments. how's that for seekers of the truth?

and you know, some poor sap is just going to get suckered by this.

[DGM]

For all it's worth I sent the link to the BBC.

[uk_dave]

and you know, some poor sap is just going to get suckered by this.

Shouldn't worry about it too much.

Poor sap gets suckered.
Goes around saying the BBC believe 911 'woz an inside job!!1!!!1'.
Eventually it gets pointed out that the BBC said no such thing.
Poor sap discovers 'truthers' are bastard liars.
Poor sap no longer a believer in 'truthers'

Of course, 'truthers' attempt damage control and try to blame disinfo/cointelpro/jref for the deception.

[gumboot]

For all it's worth I sent the link to the BBC.



The BBC are quite proactive about getting their material taken off youtube. I don't expect this to remain up for long.

-Gumboot

[OMGturt1es]

Shouldn't worry about it too much.

Poor sap gets suckered.
Goes around saying the BBC believe 911 'woz an inside job!!1!!!1'.
Eventually it gets pointed out that the BBC said no such thing.
Poor sap discovers 'truthers' are bastard liars.
Poor sap no longer a believer in 'truthers'

Of course, 'truthers' attempt damage control and try to blame disinfo/cointelpro/jref for the deception.

the problem is that those that get suckered will start to think that these theories are plausible. the BBC endorsement will lend credence to all the 911 truth arguments and evidence. these folk will get sucked in. once it is revealed that the BBC did not endorse the evidence, many will still be convinced that 911 was an inside job.

the problem with 911 truth is that they make **** up. they create lies that make their theories seem very likely. one that decides to dig deeper is then exposed to SO MANY lies, that when one is exposed as the lie it is, one still can support the stance on 10,000 other lies.

i've convined a few friends very recently that the 911 truth stuff is crap, but i caught them very early. those that i've known that got sucked in are unsinkable. they read so much convincing evidence that they become certain that they are correct.

DGM, thank you for sending the link in. i should have done that myself. i was going to, but after posting here, i went straight to bed. i've been very busy today with family, and i just returned. i'm glad you've reported the link already.

[The Silver Shadow]

despicable, absolutely despicable. I thought they were searching for the truth behind 9/11, not to tell stories :rolleyes:

[zeppy_gorrila]

I've contacted the BBC about this. Everyone else be sure to email them about this bs.