The Third Tower [BBC - The Conspiracy Files(part4)

The BBC Conspiracy Files programme on the third tower was shown on the 6th July. On the surface it seemed to be a pretty fair, balanced programme but all the alternative stuff appeared at the beginning and most people would have forgotten about it by the end of the programme. The 'swiss cheese' comments about the holes in the steel was shown at the beginning to demonstrate something dodgy only to be dismissed at the end as nothing important.

Steven Jones's work wasn't given enough time and they showed a brief clip of his lecture in Boston). The positive thing about this is that the BBC have done us a huge favour by finally admitting there was a third building collapse.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• 9/11
• lies
• truth
• pentagon
• Bush
• Terrorism
• WTC
• World
• Trade
• Center

[APBriggs2009]

This video is ridiculous on one hand, fire which supposedly causes one column to fail, causes the entire building to collapse uniformly, but when asked if thermite could have caused the collapse: 5:51 "I can't see how you could get all the columns to melt through at the same time".

Controlled Demolition Inc - worked at ground zero and profited from 911 too.

[CecilyHeron]

6:20, yep, really trustworthy.

[simpsonmark]

mad laugh at 6:10

[COYI1895]

@sunlightblessing that is not proof, I've met very good liars that can look staright at you in the eyes and lie away without blinking or shifting.

[gtechie]

Unbelievable. Loiseauz makes the point of why this entire event needs an investigation at 6:00. He says thermite melts steel but could not guarantee that you could cut the columns all at precisely the same time. OK.......Even they have to sense the entire stupidity of their argument that fire would do a better job!!!! All I can say is WOW. Loiseauz never addresses the simultaneous global failure that he knows can only be controlled demo. Hes an expert and knows better but never addresses it.

[ddpsp]

@Hovercat636 - Much of my skepticism arose while watching the news during that time. I don't lend a lot of credence to the assertions made in Zeitgeist 1 or Loose Change. Both films raise pertinent questions, but damage the credibility of those asking in the process.

You are forgetting that there is a large body of experts who have opposing views to the large body of experts who accept the official story.

There is much to doubt on this subject, and that is itself telling.

[Hovercat636]

@ddpsp To you and all who doupt the official story.

If you ask questions, you should also look for the answers. Watch the critics of LC, Alex Jones and other. Put the story they put forward under the same critic view as you would for the official story and look what holds tight.

[Hovercat636]

@ddpsp What did you watch, LC? Zeitgeist?

The elite of those who doubt the official story mostly have no education in cd or constr., yet claim all the experts are wrong and/or lying, yet ignore and omit any evidence that disproves them.

It's not that they don't have sufficient evidence, it is that even the evidence they say proves them is inconsistent with a cd.

There are numbers of peer reviewed, some even independent sci. papers for the of. story, and NONE that concludes a cd.

[vm8444]

Dd the owner silverstein admitted he had it pulled ,( meaning bring it down)

Shut the f@&&&"@&k up fool!!

[ddpsp]

@Hovercat636 Nobody has conclusive proof that building seven was a controlled demolition. Neither is there conclusive proof that it wasn't. What those who doubt the official story are saying is that there are unanswered questions which carry disturbing ramifications, and that these questions require answers.