July 08, 2008

BBC neglect key points in WTC 7 doku

In the BBC's The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower documentary (watch here), they fail to mention a few key points that you have to wonder why a major network like the BBC would do so if they went through all the time, trouble, and money to do a "thorough" documentary on the conspiracy theories about the WTC 7's unusual collapse.

1) The BBC neglected to show the unusual implosion of the East Penthouse on top of the WTC 7 seconds before the rest of the building imploded even after truther Richard Gage mentions it in the documentary.

(The about video clips were not shown in the BBC's documentary.
Red circle below is the East Penthouse on top of the WTC 7.)

"The Penthouse dropped and then the entire perimeter of the main building begins and goes straight down in 6 1/2 seconds which is virtually free-fall speed." - Richard Gage

What are the odds a Penthouse on top of a skyscraper implodes seconds before the rest of the building does?

2) They neglected to find out (or mention if they knew) who was the alleged fire department commander who Larry Silverstein uttered his most infamous phrase to.

"I remember getting a call from the, uh, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'You know we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is, is pull it.' Uh, and they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." - Larry Silverstein

How odd is it that years after Larry's infamous "pull it" remark, we still don't know who this fire department commander who allegedly called him was?

NOTE: The BBC shows FDNY Fire Chief Daniel Nigro after mentioning Larry's infamous "pull it" comment which makes it seem like the BBC is implying that Chief Nigro was the one who allegedly called Larry on 9/11, however in an email response, Chief Nigro says it wasn't him.

See also:

1 comment:

L.L. said...

I still don't get after all this time, why anyone still uses the Silverstein "pull it" comment as evidence of the building's controlled demolition. It is obvious that he was talking about pulling the crew out of the building. Even if he really was talking about "pulling" the building, it can't be proven anyways, so why do so many people online debate that ridiculous issue? The evidence that the building was "pulled" is firmly established by the video. His so-called admission isn't necessary, but instead makes the evidence seem weak, as if those against the official story are somehow grasping at straws to find evidence.