• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged BBC WTC7 Programme

cludgie said:
Interesting that Jennings account is fit in so that the WTC collapses precede the explosions he claimed to have heard, whereas I thought the troofer version was that he claimed the explosions happened before the towers came down.
Click to expand...

Poor Barry Jennings. All this time regarded as someone who believes in this conspiracy, and then called a flip-flopper on dead bodies.
 
Oh crikey (i'm watching a recording of it as I was out when it was broadcast), I can't believe Gage is running the 'pull it' argument.
 
Sigh. I did notes for the full programme, but most of them seem to have gone missing. Presumably because the thread got moved part way through and I was replying to the old one?

Anyway, interesting bits: Barry Jennings saying he didn't "see" dead bodies in WTC7. He felt like he was walking over them, but didn't see any.

Missed opportunity though, no discussion of timelines. His heard explosions were tied to the collapse, that's all.

Good quotes from Frank Papalia on how he didn't hear any explosions or charges when WTC7 collapsed.

Daniel Nigro saying he'd have no part of a conspiracy, it would be obscene.

Richard Sisson, who analysed the "evaporated" steel, pointing out that it was eroded rather than melted. And that he didn't find it particularly mysterious.

They needed to spend more time on the "speed of collapse" issue, though: we got barely anything on that. I'd like to see them talk about Indira Singh, too. But there's always version 2 in September... Time to email the producer, I think.
 
UW:

I think it'll do the opposite to be honest.
The started the tone "spooky" and ended it with "still unanswered questions."

It's inviting the average guy with a spare half hour to google "conspiracy" and be bombared with unverified tripe, imo.
Just clean their mess up.

I mean Gage was getting maximum air time to talk ultra-woo. Everything from freefalls to Silverstein supposedly saying "we made the decision to pull it", and the BBC are letting this go out to their audience completely uncorrected.
 
The Loizeaux interview adds a bit of balance, with him explaining how long the biggest job he did took to plan and prepare for, and how much of the building they had to knock out inside the building to do it.

Interviewer: Could a fully occupied building be wired for demolition without anyone noticing?

Loizeaux: Sure, in a screenplay, in a movie, with Bruce Willis in it.

Then you get Gage suggesting explosives planted during remodelling or construction itself (although interesting to see he always qualifies what he says with 'this is only speculation but...')

Loizeaux then get this put to him and says 3 year lifespan of most explosives used for demolition.
 
Lopakhin said:
Hmmm, Dylan swears about Richard Clarke: "He's in the ***** system ... Of course he's going to defend his former bosses and deny that there was a conspiracy ..."

... seemingly unaware that Mr Clarke has spent the last few years doing little other than *attacking* those same bosses over their decision to invade Iraq ...

/facepalm
Click to expand...

Actually Dylan said "ex-bosses", which makes even less sense. Why defend your boss when he's no longer your boss? Tellingly, his little spat came after a clip of a (clean shaven) Gravy describing Truthers as having what amounts to religious beliefs in their conspiracy.

Undesired, the first 20 mins were establishing the Truther's conspiracies about what happened. Too much credence given to AE911's membership (395 experts my ****!) for my liking, but after that it counterposes the conspiracies with actual investigations, eyewitnesses, film and photography - all of which blew the Truthers out of the water. It was mischievous of the makers to have Gage stating that smoke from WTC7 must have been from 5 and 6, then play film that showed enormous amounts of smoke pouring, undeniably, from WTC7. And back it up with film and photography showing the raging fires and enormous structural damage inflicted. Chief Nigro's obvious loathing for those alleging the FDNY was "in on it" shone through.

Overall, not bad. Dylan comes out of it badly thanks to his rant, and Mr Jennings telling them not to include him in LCFC. Which was being shown in a little cinema in Denver, and the staff either didn't have the appropriate lettering or couldn't spell, as on one side of the signage the film was "Loose Chang".
 
Hyper,

Well, first of all, remember it is only an hour long.

The simple fact of the matter is, people love woo and the documentary team need their commission. Gage supplies that woo, but gets shown up when he comically states that explosives must have been planted some time in the 80's, before cutting back to the demolition expert looking bemused.

Given the trailers, I'd say this was designed at the 'Hey, what about that building? I reckon it was a conspiracy' kind of person. That much was clear. The documentary needs to lull you into a false sense of security, confirming your emotionally satisfying beliefs before picking under the fingernails at some of their major flaws.

Examples: The media makes mistakes, they are not nearly as slick as they present themselves.
The amount of explosives it takes to bring down a tower, shown in video and described by experts.
Nigro, reality V fantasy

The general impression it will give is that 'the world is complicated' and that silent explosives and infalible media simply do not exist.

The real world contains far more 'ums' and 'ers' than the movie script allows, if any. That was what the documentary achieved, and that is what some people will walk away with.

People like Dylan Avery will watch this and be completely unaffected. But remember, he was someone who is so utterly delusional that he spun an alternate reality where the South Park episode was supportive of his ventures in inanity.

BTW, was no-one else hooked on the tennis? It was Avery blabbering away or the last set of a three-hour game in which Federer came back from two sets behind, so I knew where my priorities lay..
 
Last edited:
Jones' microsphere thing comes up and then the documentary puts forward the cutting equipment/existing contamination argument as counter. The red chip thing comes up with Jones claiming it might be unreacted thermite but this isn't challenged particularly.

Jones then starts running with nanothermite, then Loizeaux wades back in with saying basically if you want to make things up you can come up with anything. Gage then tries discrediting him (Loizeaux) by saying hes done Government work so hes obviously biased.
 
I liked it. I think the producers gave the twoofers an awful lot of rope with which to hang themselves, some of it was done very subtly. For example, allowing Steven Jones so much airtime to present his rather feeble thermite experiments and babble about nanothermite was self-debunking with hardly any outside correction needed.

Gage came over as a hippy moron. Dylan was as priceless as ever. Steve Jones has a weird glint in his eye and an unhinged laugh.

One thing twoofers cannot say is that their gurus were not given enough time to present their case or that a representative sample was not picked. No Fetzer, for example.

Good lines and kudos to
- Richard Clarke, for the obvious points about government incompetence and leakiness, to which twoofers have evidently no response other than breaches of the MA here.
- Gravy, for the line about how we keep asking them for a coherent explanation and it never comes
- Mark Loizeaux, especially for his refutation of Gage's loony line that explosives might have been implanted during remodelling or even when the building went up (in the 1980s!), pointing out that CD-type explosives have a shelf life of three years or so.

The footage of inside a building before a real CD refutes the entire CD theory straight away.

The Jowenko footage I'd not seen; I tend to avoid twoofer docs. I honestly have to scratch my head and wonder why they think it's worth including this. 'Then they worked fast' was his final line, and yeah right, people were wiring up a burning building?

Nigro and the NYFD lieutenant, as well as Barry Jennings, were all the essential refutation needed.

The BBC found the tapes! Har har har har har har.

The analysis of the steelframe chunk was also telling. It got flashed up again in comparison when they discussed the beams failing due to overheating.

The overhead IR temperature reading from five days after the collapse was very interesting.

Footage from before the collapse was also pretty conclusive. Watching the windows break and fall to the ground because of the fire - duuuuh, it's goin' down....
 
Well I'm watching it on iPlayer now... but from what people say I feel I may RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGE!!!!
*puts tie in order*
>_>
Anyway.
Onwards
 
cludgie said:
Loizeaux then get this put to him and says 3 year lifespan of most explosives used for demolition.
Click to expand...

That was a reality kicker moment. That is the kind of thing that will get make most people unsteady on that fence.
 
Last edited:
Gage then trying to claim the smoke from WTC7 wasn't from WTC7 (although he doesn't appear to say where it came from). Knocked back by Steve Spak (who photographed alot of WTC7) and a NYFD firefighter (can't recall name right now) who said he saw what he saw and didn't see/hear explosions.

Then a bit about the BBC and the early report of the BBC collapse. All with the Avery bit where he claims he never wanted to put in that bit into Loose Change.
 
Now we're into a short clip of fat Alex Jones broadcasting about Jennings' dead people story and then cuts to Avery claiming much the same. Then Jennings denying he said anything of the sort about seeing dead people. Then Avery presents a recording of his original interview with Jennings where he says 'we were stepping over people, you know when you can feel you're stepping over people'. Jennings then says he never actually saw any bodies, just how it felt. Then said he told them (presumably the LC mob) they couldn't use his interview as he didn't like how they were twisting it.
 
cludgie said:
Now we're into a short clip of fat Alex Jones broadcasting about Jennings' dead people story and then cuts to Avery claiming much the same. Then Jennings denying he said anything of the sort about seeing dead people. Then Avery presents a recording of his original interview with Jennings where he says 'we were stepping over people, you know when you can feel you're stepping over people'. Jennings then says he never actually saw any bodies, just how it felt. Then said he told them (presumably the LC mob) they couldn't use his interview as he didn't like how they were twisting it.
Click to expand...

You mean Dylan Avery lied to us? I am shocked, shocked I say! :jaw-dropp
 
Comsat Angel said:
It was mischievous of the makers to have Gage stating that smoke from WTC7 must have been from 5 and 6, then play film that showed enormous amounts of smoke pouring, undeniably, from WTC7.
Click to expand...

A comical moment. Perhaps there were vacuums (On every floor) inside 7, sucking it into the side? Or smoke velcro?

Oh! And the Stephen Jones laugh (7-10 seconds long)! A creepy moment for an already creepy guy.
 
Last edited:
Then onto Prof Sisson and the mysterious 'melted' piece from WTC7. Sissons says the steel was actually eroded in the high temperature fires in the rubble pile and wasn't the least bit suspect.
 
Heh, from what I am reading here, it sounds like the twoofers got a hit on the head. Can't wait for prisonplanet reporting about a NEW HIT PIECE!
 
cludgie said:
Then a bit about the BBC and the early report of the BBC collapse. All with the Avery bit where he claims he never wanted to put in that bit into Loose Change.
Click to expand...

What was that? He then finishes it off with 'Remember, I'm not the only one on the team' as if he realised his mistake and was trying to flap off the self-inflicted flame.
 
JamesB said:
You mean Dylan Avery lied to us? I am shocked, shocked I say! :jaw-dropp
Click to expand...

In fairness if the clip he played from his Jennings interview isn't that huge a distortion. Although it is consistent with what Jennings says when challenged about what he said (firemen telling him to not look down and how it 'felt like stepping over bodies' rather than he actually saw them with his own eyes)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom