bbc2 conspiracy files[sunday 9pm]

[timebase]

not showing it in Wales then

You didn't miss much...there's plenty to see if you go on sites like Google Video, Metacafe or YouTube and type conspiracy...

[mobymatt]

timebase and Damian,

The BBC are a regulated broadcasting body and are accountable for any output made under the BBC 'banner'. If you feel there has been a misrepresentation of the 'facts' or biased reporting then you can complain to Ofcom:

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/


As for your posts, I like to keep an open mind so have you got links or further information:


timebase:

Fire has never been the cause of a steel-structured building to come down.The fires in the Towers were nearly out when the firemen got up and the fires never even reached across to the other side. The plane that hit near the corner prob never even did much damage to the central steel core.
There are plenty of firemen and others who heard and felt all the explosions going off before the collapses.
The commentator didn't mention that the computer simulation didn't include the two engines of the plane that hit the pentagon, which rather made the whole demonstration worthless.The engines would have hit the outer wall and made a real mess but no sign of damage .In fact, there were offices with books and a computer not even burnt next to the hole.

Damian:

They also forgot to mention the people who were contacted before hand and told not to go into work.

They neglected to mention the absolutely amazing flying ability of the pilot to get the plane right across the lawn without so much as a scratch, despite the massive rate of decent and high speed with which it was meant to have been traveling at.

They also appeared to ignore the amazing coincidence that the one and only part of the Pentagon that had undergone strengthening and updating just happened to be the exact spot where the plane hit.

The also forgot to mention the training scenario which had been worked out years before which used a plane crashing into the Pentagon - in the exact same spot.

They also seemed to ignore the fact that various reports had been published in several years prior which showed an image of planes flying toward the twin towers which were over painted with a huge image like that of looking through a rifle scope.

And so on, and so on, etc..

[rainbowcraft]

I just wrote a LOOOOONG reply to this thread....and it's gone

And we currently have 20 guests viewing it. Watch what you say, chaps

[Paulwillhappy]

Yes i've got 3 Black Hummers & Chaps with dark glasses at the end of my drive...............

Mind you that paperboy's got nerve since his dad won the Lottery

[buttons-and-bows]

You didn't miss much...there's plenty to see if you go on sites like Google Video, Metacafe or YouTube and type conspiracy...

Thats not the point is it, I pay my telly license and I expect / want to see everything that the rest of the UK sees at the same time. I don't see why it should have been taken off just to put two guy's on poking balls round a table with two sticks. Its race discrimination that is

[DaisyChain]

Im not sure too much where i stand on this having seeing plenty of "proof" for the conspiracy and non-conspiracy.

Could the US government really commit mass murder on such a scale and would they?

Guatemala? Panama? anyone? The us backed death squads in these conutries and other banana republics, that isnt theory that is facts. The US policies in these countries led to the death of hundreds upon thousands.

I have no dount that the US could and would go to these lenghths, to get what they want...

But, as for these theories and so called facts that a building could or couldnt collapse after being hit by a plane, how do we possibly know? Were not talking about a plane flying into a building, we are talking about a plane being flown into a building......


As for dubya, i dont think if there was a conspiracy, he knew about it. Ok so he didnt looked "shocked", but he did look scared, he looked like the loniest man in the world at that point and he looked scared.........

I used to be a big conspiracy fan, JFK, the moon landings, Roswel, .......but umming and ahhhing about what could of happened, does nothing and serves no justice to what has happened. Did this event change the world? no. Although we like to shroud our eyes and belive it did. All that is happened is we have allowed our governments to do what the hell they like, all in the name of a "cause" stemmed from this single event. When we all dead, it will be our great grandchildren who know the truth, because there is too much misinformation out there deceiving everyone, the conspiracists and non conspiracists. Stop umming and ahhing, lets concentrate on the blood on our hands, our govenments hands and concentrate on ensuring people in higher places do not use events like 9/11 as an excuse to carry out their actions in our names, the dead of 9/11 names.........


i bet the dead are turning in their graves at that, i know i would be

Shame on us all really.....

[damian_steele]

But, as for these theories and so called facts that a building could or couldnt collapse after being hit by a plane, how do we possibly know? Were not talking about a plane flying into a building, we are talking about a plane being flown into a building......

Aside from the fact that there is no difference between the two points in your last sentence, we "know" because scientifically qualified people who have undertaken quite thorough investigations tell us so. These experts have, in many cases, conducted experiments of their own, have cited reference works, have pointed out well established scientific fact, have pointed out the fact that in none of the cases from all over the world, ever, has a building of a similar structure been destroyed in such a manner, even in similar circumstances - and yes, buildings have been hit by planes before.

But it's not just the fact that the buildings collapsed, it's all the other stuff that goes with it; the huge and sudden insurance policies that were taken out shortly before, the free-fall dropping of the building itself, the number of qualified people who stated that they heard multiple explosions prior to the buildings falling, the footage of smoke plumes coming out of the buildings, the fact that the second tower to be hit actually fell before the tower which had been burning longer (and therefore should have been weaker), the collapse of building 7 even though it was not hit by the planes - building 7 being the third building owned by the same guy who owned the twin towers which also happened to contain much of the evidence of numerous on-going investigations into multi-billions dollar frauds amongst other things. And so on, almost ad infinitum.

Did this event change the world? no. Although we like to shroud our eyes and belive it did. All that is happened is we have allowed our governments to do what the hell they like, all in the name of a "cause" stemmed from this single event.

Yes, it did change the world. It changed the will of the people to allow the governments to do what they have - just as those who planned it knew it would. Just as the bombings over here gave our government the same green light to do what they have.

... concentrate on ensuring people in higher places do not use events like 9/11 as an excuse to carry out their actions in our names, the dead of 9/11 names.........

How exactly are people to do that? The public as a group react to the events around them and demand a response from the political and military leaders which is equal to those events. If the people in control manipulate the events to suit themselves and thereby gain the desired demands from the public, how exactly can we stop them?

Aside from future actions it is already too late to stop the governments involved. They have already taken us to war on the back of these events and look very much like they're up for another war with Iran. If a small nuke goes off somewhere and the powers in charge tell us it was Iranian, just how many people do you think will want to stop them from having another war? The people will react in exactly the same way as they did after 9/11. They will demand action and they will accept almost anything as long as they think they are getting that action.

With regard to the question of whether I think the US g-men would deliberately kill some of there own people to achieve the desired result, I say just look at the history books. See how many men could have been saved during WWII had America not wanted to use the attack on Pearl Harbor as an excuse to join the war. Also look at our history books and see how many times the UK government used false flag attacks when dealing with the IRA - we faked a number of bombings and blamed them so we could come down hard on them again and again and again. Just look at the trouble makers that Maggie had sent into to stir things up in the miners strike as an excuse to equip the police with riot gear and allow the to use heavier handed tactics.

Governments, or sections within governments, do whatever they think it will take to achieve their desired results.

[Hip Chick]

I wish that I had not read this thread as it has deeply upset me.

I was on the phone to a friend at time time the first tower was hit. I heard the noise and then the line went dead. Lucky enough she got out alive and unhurt and so did her work associates.

I went to ground zero 5 weeks after the towers came down. I did not go as a tourist, I went out of respect for the people that died and wanted to lay flowers there.

I done this because not only do I love New York and the wonderful sights to be seen, but I went up the Towers two years before when I just found out I was pregnant with my first child.

Also I would like to think that if such a terrible, terbbile thing happened here in the UK, that maybe two girls from the US would feel the same and want to pay their respects to us in the uk.

Four things really upset me about my visit that will always stay in my mind. (aside from the terrible tragic scenes)

You could taste and smell the smoke as you got off the plane. The fires were out, but they were still smouldering.

When I was down as ground zero, I looked up and at one window (missing) there was someones desk plant and the leaves were moving around in the breeze.

All the banners that were written by friends and family looking for their family and loved ones - had be written over saying "Bill from Las Vegas, Colin from Texas....."

These banners were made by the families not for tourist to put their mark on and then take a photo to prove they were there.

I never took a single photo as I did not think it was right. The sight I saw will stay with me for the rest of my life. I do not need a photo to remember.

The forth was the amount to lookie, lookie sellers. I know everyone has to make money but I found it very up-setting seeing T-Shirts being sold sayin "I've been to ground zero" and a photo of the towers.

As said a couple of time earlier. The film of the first tower being hit was screened about 18.00 on Sky News. It was taken from a tourist who was on the Stanton Island Ferry. No smart camera tricks, just footage.

I feel that its sad that everything that happens, even if you see it with your own eyes, that it has to be a conspiracy.

I do not believe for one single moment that the Americans would do that to their own, regardless of previous wars etc and what happened.

9/11 was a terrible, terrrible day. We should all remember those who lost their lives including the one from the UK and not try to see something that is not there.

[emma5721]

I just wrote a LOOOOONG reply to this thread....and it's gone

And we currently have 20 guests viewing it. Watch what you say, chaps

why?????

dont really know what you are on about

[mobymatt]

Aside from the fact that there is no difference between the two points in your last sentence, we "know" because scientifically qualified people who have undertaken quite thorough investigations tell us so. These experts have, in many cases, conducted experiments of their own, have cited reference works, have pointed out well established scientific fact, have pointed out the fact that in none of the cases from all over the world, ever, has a building of a similar structure been destroyed in such a manner, even in similar circumstances - and yes, buildings have been hit by planes before.

But it's not just the fact that the buildings collapsed, it's all the other stuff that goes with it; the huge and sudden insurance policies that were taken out shortly before, the free-fall dropping of the building itself, the number of qualified people who stated that they heard multiple explosions prior to the buildings falling, the footage of smoke plumes coming out of the buildings, the fact that the second tower to be hit actually fell before the tower which had been burning longer (and therefore should have been weaker), the collapse of building 7 even though it was not hit by the planes - building 7 being the third building owned by the same guy who owned the twin towers which also happened to contain much of the evidence of numerous on-going investigations into multi-billions dollar frauds amongst other things. And so on, almost ad infinitum.

What source/sources are you getting this information from?

If, as you state "...scientifically qualified people who have undertaken quite thorough investigations tell us so..." you will presumably be able to provide links or further information about this research?

Yes, it did change the world. It changed the will of the people to allow the governments to do what they have - just as those who planned it knew it would. Just as the bombings over here gave our government the same green light to do what they have.

Damian, are you suggesting the London Tube bombings were contrived too or am I misunderstanding your point?

Also look at our history books and see how many times the UK government used false flag attacks when dealing with the IRA - we faked a number of bombings and blamed them so we could come down hard on them again and again and again.

Source please?

Just look at the trouble makers that Maggie had sent into to stir things up in the miners strike as an excuse to equip the police with riot gear and allow the to use heavier handed tactics.

Source please?