BBC World - FULL TV coverage - September 11, 2001 - Part 2

[RebeccaDeVoyd]

2:56 to 3:06 there is a strange quick flying plane or helicopter briefing past the buildings. 

[badcompany1215]

@RebeccaDeVoyd That object is a bird the camera taking these images are across the river in New Jersey a good distance so any object passing in front of the lens is gonna look huge

[bobsilby]

It took them 6 minutes after the second crash before they stopped calling it an accident!

[pcjhappystation]

Unless something is confirmed you can't report on it. The anchor in the studio only knows what is being fed to her. Even if people saw it happen live at home, she would see nothing. This is the industry. Now the control room would have, but before it went on and she was informed they would have confirmed it.

[JoeFuckingTorre1]

jfc, if the male host hadnt been there then the stupid cunt never had a clue about terror, stupid bitch still thought it was an accident, hopefully it was her last day on TV otherwise BBC is more fucked up than all other stations.

[cbphillyguy]

A double plane accident at the world trade center? I swear she has no clue how to spot news when it happens.

[tammyscotland]

@cbphillyguy You've got the benefit of hindsight. She's trying to make sense of what's going on and doesn't have the benefit of being able to panic or to stop and think about it. She's got to stay calm and just report the news as she gets it so she's not starting a panic anywhere. Double plane accident is frightening enough at this point in the day.

[LongLiveOx]

And she mentioned people flying to Boston and Washington, before anyone had any news of where the planes originated from. Very, very suspicious.

[toomanysam]

@LongLiveOx Do you think the US government would be letting the BBC in on the crime? Your deluded man

[LongLiveOx]

Interesting how Jane Standley was the first one who brought up the missle theory, and then quickly dismissed it. She also immediately remembered that the WTC bombing occurred in February of 1993, that 6 people died and thousands were injured. Strange how she would have that information readily available. She's the first one to label this as a terrorist attack, and of couse she was the one who created the whole Building 7 debacle. This woman needs to be investigated, for real.

[emilylouisechurchos]

9/11 was an inside job. Google 'architects and engineers for 9/11 truth'. Open your minds, help us get a new investigation into the events of 9/11.

[SelectiveTweet]

@emilylouisechurchos I did google that and all I found is absolute bullshit

[UDflyer04]

@emilylouisechurchos i saw yuor picture - you're fat - worry about getting into shape not stupid conspiracy theories.....enjoy your donuts

[sianisit]

@antistar1000

What the fuck was she supposed to do? Most of the people watching this in Britain were still at work or school. My dad's sixth form college came to a stand-still from this coverage alone, can you imagine what it would have been like if she'd been more "emotive"?

Considering the way Fox "News" covered the 7/7 bombings, I find it difficult to be too sympathetic.

[macroevolve]

"unfortunate"

"Quite a number of serious injuries"

Are they serious?

[L0ND0NITE]

@macroevolve

never heard of 'BBC English'

stiff upper lip keep buggering on! S'very British

i'm sure they were as shocked as anyone else

British people are famous for keeping calm! Whereas American's are well known for going hysterical

[macroevolve]

@macroevolve Well, when 3000 people die at once, it's more than unfortunate. It's unfortunate if you lose 100 dollars. Will you keep that "stiff upper lip" when the Muslims take over your country, which you Wankers (whatever that means) are at complete fault for.....too accepting of zealots that want to kill everyone.

[madmike2957]

wow they were slow

[samm605]

@thedude1325 A little bit more enthusiasm in her voice would of emphasised the seriousness of the situation abit more. A news reporter who adds abit of character to there auto que is a lot better than being a robot

[DanielCampbell4]

No word of fatalities....Why does she work at the BBC? A Plane went into the building....I dont understand how people get away with it...seriously...

[bluedog454]

@DanielCampbell4 well there was actually one guy who survived the impact of the plane. he was in the south tower, and he saw the plane coming right at the building, so he ducked behind his desk and he actually lived. he was badly hurt and burned, though.

[samm605]

the women speaking is such a deuch.. sounds so bored... love to hear her with a cock up her arse

[thedude1325]

@samm605 What would you like her to be? Excited? Overwhelmed? Crying her eyes out?

Her job as a BBC presenter is to report the news calmly, regardless of the event, to keep the audience themselves as calm as possible. She acted very professionally.

[antistar1000]

''a most unfortunate event''

The English are still so reserved even when the biggest terrorist atrocity is unfolding before them.

[dm18876]

@antistar1000 Its called professionalism and reporting the facts - not to resorting propaganda, hearsay and excessive emotiveness. If I had a loved one trapped in the building, this is EXACTLY how I'd want this story reported. Moreover, all UK media organisations reported the 7/7 London tragedy in the same calm, yet authoritative, manner.

[wesleyjones]

Also, greenscreenn00ber; in what way is 'sabotage' an understatement? Do you know what sabotage means?

[wesleyjones]

It does seem slow in hindsight, but then speculation is not considered a virtue in BBC broadcasting. It's hard for some Americans to understand this, unless they often watch non-American broadcasters.

Strange watching this though isn't it? It feels very different to watching it live, knowing just how disruptive it would end up making things; world wide not just in America .

[greenscreenn00bster]

"sabotage" is an understatement.

[faithoffaith]

& they were not small planes by the way...

[simplystreeptacular]

Shame on all of you!!! Calling each other names over a tragedy. You're the idiots.

[robcordi]

I couldnt agree with you more , youtube is full of idiotic comments ~ alongside the idiots who post them !!

[THthefirst]

@simplystreeptacular Er, haven't you just done the same thing by calling everyone idiots?

[simplystreeptacular]

@THthefirst Um. No. Because you all ARE being idiots. That's not namecalling, that's fact.

[THthefirst]

@simplystreeptacular So it's OK to abuse people then, even on this video which as you say is a tragedy, if you think they are an idiot?

Pretty twisted logic. And I have not abused anyone by the way, just pointed out your hypocritical position.

[simplystreeptacular]

@THthefirst I'm not abusing anyone, I'm pointing out that tearing each other to pieces over an event that changed the history of the world is idiotic, ergo, you are idiots. My remarks have nothing to do with anyone's opinion - mine, yours, or anyone else's - on this tragedy. I'm not passing judgment on what you think, I'm passing judgment on your immature and juvenile behavior. There's a difference.

[THthefirst]

@simplystreeptacular That doesn't make sense. Passing judgment is an opinion by definition. So that's another contradiction. I agree that tearing each other to pieces is childish and immature. However, had you checked you would see I haven't done this, but simply replied once (now three times) pointing out that you branding others idiots is simply allowing yourself to enter into the same juvenile behaviour your ostensibly reject, by trading insults and personal attacks. Just rise above it.

[simplystreeptacular]

@THthefirst I am sorry if I accidentally lumped you in with the group firing insults at each other. But they are being stupid, and that's not opinion, it's fact. And what I meant to say is that it has nothing to do with opinions about the tragedy - mine or anyone else's. That being said they're idiots. I think so, and I have a right to say so.

[Eterna1Soldier]

"It raises the question wether or not it was a deliberate attack"

Noooooo. Who would have thought?

[faithoffaith]

@Eterna1Soldier yeah lol I no the news are so slow!

[flupmakintosh]

@Eterna1Soldier what if it had of been a freak accident? how would it look then. they only present the FACTS when they KNOW them on the bbc, unlike some american news channels

[Eterna1Soldier]

@flupmakintosh

One plane hitting a building could be a freak accident. Two planes hitting both towers within an hour - two towers that have been specifically targeted by terrorists before, is no freak accident. The moment that second plane hit, everyone knew what it was - except for the people at BBC I guess.

And how nice of you to inject nationalism into your comment. It's a freaking news channel.

[AJice1980]

@Eterna1Soldier Bullshit, they're a major news organization and a not allowed to say what you're thinking. The same goes for CBS, NBC, and ABC. Watch the live footage from their stations as well and you won't see them mentioning terrorism at first either.

[xScarfacex09x]

the manhattan bride moved

[hotlips296]

What inept newsreading by the BBC. This lady is a fool!!!

[dbhma7]

what was hilarious was the fact that I watched the 2nd plane crash into the 2nd building and she didn't even see it!

[robcordi]

@ 4:32 the camera isnt zooming out , yet in the distance their ia a bridge still moving wtf ... something is definitely not right here , correct me if i'm wrong ...

[fentooozler]

you cunt the helicopter is flying to the east, that is why the bridge angle moves, as it is in the distance. don't act smart, you're a dick.

[robcordi]

Let me get this right ,the tower angles dont change but the bridge in the distance is moving hmmmmm you're the Ture dick dont ack soo dumb !!!

[fentooozler]

fuckoff mate it's because they're so much closer, don't try and act smart with me you're just a little kid

[robcordi]

Then explain why @ 6:07 eveything is perfect as it should be , camera zooms in towers are stationary and funny enough so is the bridge in the fore ground ...... go play with ur barbie dolls :P

[Brinwhite182]

because it's closer, you're an idiot, don't you know anything about it? things closer up don't move as much, when a camera moves, as they are larger in the picture than the things in the background, and don't start acting like mr smart guy towards me mate.

[robcordi]

lol you & fentooozler must have the same dumb ass brain compacity , it is not possible if the object that is in focus , being close shouldnt change how the foreground moves , the objects up close hasnt change angles , any retard knows this is a magical illusion trick , theres no way in hell this is a live stream , this vid was edited ( poorly )before it was aired ... You're dumb comment just show how little you know XD

[chrisruler105]

um no, they are the ones making sence, can you just shut the hell up

[2404PaulW]

You're a twat!

[robcordi]

using language like that just shows how much little intelligence you have , go smoke another joint !!!

[ljp753]

Clearly the important thing to find out is where the BBC were getting these feeds and data from, somthing somwhere is either very incorrect.or the BBC are just plain fools but somthings off.