Lessons in reasoned debate from the mainstream media #WTC7

When you gonna learn? What you gonna do?

The Middle Class Proletariat
The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.

Source: The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Progamme 2007-2036 [PDF, 7MB]
Published by the Ministry of Defence

So mote it be.

On the seventh anniversary of 9/11 the New York Metro newspaper published the headline: Global Survey says 'U.S. behind 9/11". The survey results reflect a growing level of awareness and understanding throughout the world, including America, about the way in which the intrinsically enmeshed worlds of empire, imperialism and capitalism operate. This awareness and understanding of the activities of the military financial and industrial complex has been building ever apace among ever greater numbers of people since the stakes were raised somewhat after the start of the war of terror.

In many ways 9/11 was the day on which the murderous machinations of the new empire builders began again in earnest, but that is not to deny that murderous machinations of ruling class interests have always manifested themselves to varying degrees.

Some claimed that 9/11 was the day the world changed but in fact the world hadn't changed at all.

9/11 was the point at which the U.S. State began to respond in earnest and with barely a challenge to the Project for the New American Century's largely rhetorical question: "Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?" The illusion of Western democracy became an even less consensual illusion than it was previously as aggressive yet pre-ordained modifications were rapidly instituted to U.S. conservative, "neo-conservative" and "neo-liberal" ruling class ideologies. The seemingly knee-jerk but long pre-planned response to the Project for the New American Century's clarion call saw the wheels of the Military Financial Industrial Complex set in motion to cement for private interests the foundations for what State actors in various States and acting roles had themselves repeatedly termed a New World Order. Now Obama promises change so everything can stay the same.

The endless "long war", the origins of which can be traced back through as many years of human history as you are prepared to devote minutes to undertaking the research, became non-negotiable and manifested itself predominantly as U.S. / U.K. led imperialist warmongering and mass murdering in the Middle East. The irony, if not also the truth of the matter, was that the changes were driven by the sufferance of what private ruling class interests had long hoped and in all likelihood prayed for; a "catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor" that would leave no option but to force their hand into a "process of transformation" at all costs, "even if it brings revolutionary change" in the quest for the "exercise of American leadership around the globe."

With the genetically modified imperialist carrot rejected in favour of a plethora of history's most lethal phallus-shaped exploding sticks, NATO's coalition of the killing set about systematically slaughtering first Afghanistan's poor, then Iraq's poor, simultaneously decimating beyond repair each country's core infrastructure. The death toll may now be running undeniably in the millions but, when the NATO Circus of Death is in town with its unholy trinity of creation, destruction and rebirth, the clowns who are the destructors -- who also happen to be the self-appointed creationists and rebirthers -- always profit handsomely. The smartest guys in the room or, more accurately, the most organised and the most heavily armed guys in the room. The dead can't count, the bottom line always does. Even if it is rock bottom.

As the war without end got underway, the humanity collective began with renewed vigour its voyage of discovery, armed with little more than the innate curiosity with which it was born, a desire to start making sense of an increasingly insane looking world and a hyper-linked connection to a world in which the kaleidoscope had been shaken and the pieces were in flux.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the path to wisdom is beset with political dead-ends, diversions and other nefarious but carefully crafted and deliberately placed distractions. Despite all this the kaleidoscopic pieces are starting to settle and they are settling in altogether new and different ways. Ways in which projections and contingencies have long existed among our rulers, decreed as statutes by State bodies, quangos and think tanks in the event that their long-feared hypothetical scenarios are brought to life. When such chaos is brought by the greater mass of humanity to the hotly pursued ruling class order, States historically appear to favour incarnating as their ultimate brutal manifestations, naked emperors of aggression, unleashed by bodies of armed men and brought to bear against all comers, brother and sister alike.

The ride along the geopolitical learning curve has not been particularly smooth or pleasant for anyone, irrespective of race, colour or creed, but this is not to deny that some have suffered more than others. The way has been marked by many important milestones, notable specifically for the way in which they expose the gargantuan lies of ruling class ideology and propaganda. These milestones have appeared in many places, some expected but many more quite unexpected, that are more notable for the added element of surprise that they pack and the way in which they force irrevocable paradigm shifts in the political analysis, thinking and consciousness of everyone.

On 11th March 2004 the same Al Qaeda who bombed New York in 2001 attacked Madrid with a series of blasts across the city's train network. Months later it was announced:

The basic truth is that Al Qaeda does not exist and never has. Al Qaeda is a manufactured enemy who was created by the Bush Administration in order to have an excuse to wage a war for the control of the world’s oil resources. || Al Qaeda does not exist nor has it ever.

-- Joseph John Hrevnack
Pravda, 19th August 2004

Such nonsense as "“Al Qaeda” does not exist nor has it ever" is to be expected of the tool of Communist, Red Pinko propaganda that is Pravda. Therefore the statement should immediately be dismissed and forgotten. No doubt such things are also to be expected of the tools of Communist, Red, Pinko propaganda that are the Daily Mirror, the BBC and Adam Curtis.

But a more insidious and even more lethal menace lurks behind the victory of Ole Cross-Eyes. The Republicans mobilised as never before the politics of fear. They convinced a majority of US citizens that their homes and families were under immediate threat from al-Qaeda. They are not.

In fact, the BBC's admirable Power Of Nightmares series showed al-Qaeda does not exist as the world-wide conspiracy presented by US policy-makers, with commanders, cells and "sleepers" in 60 countries. In that sense, al-Qaeda is a figment of the imagination of Pentagon and CIA war gamers - but it is a mightily useful weapon for war. Not the war against terrorists but the real war against the common sense of voters - the shock and awe campaign against us.

They seek to dupe you and me into a state of permanent panic about the fantasy threat of terror striking on the Tube, or in my backyard in North Yorkshire. ONLY when we have been so convinced will we vote for the politicians who peddle these monstrous nightmares. That is the true menace of the Bush-Blair axis of evil.

-- Paul Routledge
Daily Mirror, 5th November 2004

As yet another poke in the eye for the likes of the Communist, Red, Pinko propagandists like Paul Routledge, Adam Curtis, the BBC, anti-war activists, global justice movements, the left, anarchists, the working class, anyone that cared and any other similar tools of Communist, Red, Pinko propaganda, it wasn't long before the "fantasy threat of terror striking on the Tube" -- which itself may well have been based on the BBC's own invented "fantasy threat of terror striking on the Tube" -- did indeed strike on London's Tube.

Immediately news began to break of explosions on London's underground system so too did the hysterical cries of ten-a-penny terror pundits with loose talk of the devastatingly deadly Al Qaeda terror network striking in the heart of London.

The as yet unidentified bombers had obviously forgotten that all the world's leaders against whom they might have held any number of legitimate grievances would be congregating at Gleneagles in Scotland for the opening day of the 2005 G8 summit. The still unidentified bombers apparently decided that, rather than hold those directly responsible for global injustices to account -- and with logic so perverse that it bears not even the scantest of passing scrutiny -- it would be more politically expedient to attack innocent commuters to achieve their hitherto unidentified aims.

Despite the ensuing media hysteria that followed the London bombings pertinent questions were being asked by many who had been through the mill before: How could the "figment of the imagination of Pentagon and CIA war gamers" manage to materially blow up three Underground trains and a bus? Moreover, how could they do so without the Pentagon or the CIA? Just a day later Robin Cook was to provide a few answers and leave an informational milestone as his legacy in The Guardian:

Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.

-- Robin Cook (R.I.P.)
The Guardian, Friday 8th July 2005

According to Cook Al Qaeda did exist, but only as a grouping of mercenaries that had previously been trained and armed by the C.I.A. in what is a still ongoing battle against Communism. Yet just eight days later as the Al Qaeda suicide bomber myth was emerging to be the hugely amplified white noise to drown out all other signals The Mirror asked in an exclusive report about the London bombings: Was It Suicide?

Such questions persisted across a variety of newspaper reports, albeit mainly in the foreign press, right up until the timely release of the Mohammed Sidique Khan 'suicide video'. In the video Khan makes no mention of suicide, attacking London, trains, buses nor anything else that might incriminate him as a candidate for suicide or bombing. In fact, Khan says nothing that would distinguish him from anyone else who opposes the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or the Palestinian holocaust perpetrated by Israel and it is this facet of the video that is the cleverest of all. Suddenly, by extension, anyone with anti-war sentiments founded on "perceived inustices" is an extremist, a radical and, potentially, a suicide bomber. Patent, palpable nonsense which is only subliminal if you don't notice it.

In 2005 the Al Qaeda that barely anyone had heard of prior to 9/11 was then either a "figment of the imagination of Pentagon and CIA war gamers" and "[did] not exist nor [had] it ever", or a "computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA".

Three days after the seventh anniversary of 11th September 2001 on which the New York Metro published its Global Survey says 'U.S. behind 9/11' story, the notoriously right-wing tool of Communist, Red, Pinko propaganda, Peter Hitchens, undermined years of hearty propaganda work by his new-neocon-left brother Christopher when he wrote in the Daily Mail:

It's the creepy plotters who rule us we should really be scared of

There is no such organisation as ‘Al Qaeda’. The spooks know this, Cabinet Ministers know this and so do the ‘security correspondents’ who so readily trot out the spooks’ point of view on our broadcasting networks.

-- Peter Hitchens
Daily Mail, 14th September 2008

Hitchens' words marked yet another milestone along the tortuous path to figuring out how the world really works. His words as with those of Robin Cook and Joseph John Hrevnack warrant considerable further contemplation. So too do the explicit implications of those words.

Line 1: "There is no such organisation as ‘Al Qaeda’."

Al Qaeda does not exist. Nor has it ever. The Al Qaeda that attacked, killed and maimed innocent civilians and pulverised WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 with military precision on 11th September 2001 does not exist, nor has it ever. Explicitly: Some actually existing group of terrorists organised and coordinated 9/11, a group not called Al Qaeda. The group actually responsible for this atrocity has never been held to account for its actions.

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. The Al Qaeda that attacked, killed and maimed innocent civilians in Madrid on 11th March 2004 does not exist, nor has it ever. Explicitly: Some actually existing group of terrorists organised and coordinated the Madrid bombings, a group not called Al Qaeda. The group actually responsible for this atrocity has never been held to account for its actions.

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. The Al Qaeda that attacked, killed and maimed innocent civilians in London on 7th July 2005 does not exist, nor has it ever. Explicitly: Some actually existing group of terrorists organised and coordinated the London bombings, a group not called Al Qaeda. The group actually responsible for this atrocity has never been held to account for its actions.

The list goes on and the pattern and message is clear. The list of terrorist atrocities throughout history for which no one has ever been justly held accountable and for which the real, true and actual perpetrators have never been identified, much less held accountable, is a long one and it is getting longer by the day. In the recent history of terrorist activity on mainland Britain this list includes at least the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes whose inquest is just getting underway three years after his execution by State operatives, the 7/7 London bombings, the Manchester Arndale bombing, the Guildford pub bombings, the Birmingham pub bombings, the M62 coach bombing, and the Hyde Park explosion, among others.

Line 2: "The spooks know this, Cabinet Ministers know this and so do the ‘security correspondents’ who so readily trot out the spooks’ point of view on our broadcasting networks."

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. More to the point politicians who profess to be our servants know that Al Qaeda does not exist, yet non-references to the grave threats presented by an entity which they know does not exist, are few and far between. That makes all politicians who talk of the chilling threat that doesn't exist little more than outright liars. They are deliberate and witting liars, fearmongers and propagandists. So great is the deception perpetrated and so long has it continued to be parroted as standard fare that the liars and propagandists are completely devoid of credibility and absolutely cannot be afforded any degree of trust any longer.

Al Qaeda does not exist, nor has it ever. Those spooky media security correspondents whose number is legion know this, yet nary a day passes when they cannot be seen touting their non-existent terror wares on TV or Dead Trees for all to see. Reports of airline terror plots planned by a fictional organisation with fictional and chemically impossible chemistry wreaking havoc and carnage on an unimaginable scale that someone managed to imagine for the purposes of propaganda and fear-mongering. All media security correspondents pushing the non-existent Al Qaeda as reality are deliberate and witting liars, fearmongers and propagandists. So great is the deception perpetrated and so long has it continued to be parroted as standard fare that the liars and propagandists are completely devoid of credibility and absolutely cannot be afforded any trust any longer.

The world of fear as everyone previously knew it is ended. All bets are off. Everything is now officially its opposite. All is lie. Now is a new beginning. The ills of the world are not directly attributable to a bearded man in a cave somewhere on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border, nor the non-existent group over which he is reported to preside, their source(s) instead lie elsewhere and are now more exposed than ever before in history. Osama didn't bust the banks, the terrorists did.

The traditional power structures and institutions of authority with their received wisdom, victor-centric historical record and world-view have yet again proven themselves to be nothing more than self-serving liars who are not fit for any other purpose. They had little credibility to start with, now they have absolutely no credibility. The media we relied on for too long to hold the rulers to account had little credibility to start with, now it has absolutely none and it cannot be trusted to do anything other than pollute the world with mindless brain-rotting 'entertainment' wrapped in the tumescent glow of the imperial powers' red, white and blue tricolor.

The terrorists are running the show. The mass media lies, covers-up and misleads the masses to allow them to get away with it. Basta!

Future history awaits the results of how it all plays out from here-on in. A few seconds thought devoted to a comparison between the resources that States command and can mobilise on a whim, and those resources over which the rest of humanity can exercise a similar degree of precise and sustained control, may provide some indication of the way in which the odds are currently stacked.

It has been largely this way since time immemorial.

When you gonna learn?

The Middle Class Proletariat
The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.

Source: The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Progamme 2007-2036 [PDF, 7MB]
Published by the Ministry of Defence

What you gonna do?

Global Survey says 'U.S. behind 9/11'

Survey proves global warming has fried brains the world over

The explanation for the shocking, stunning and, frankly, chilling-to-the-marrow headline which, it almost goes without saying, has absolutely no basis in any sort of reality that any sane individual would want any part of is, of course, that everyone surveyed for the poll is a wild-eyed yelling Conspiraloon™ who should immediately be tasered and "taken to one of those secret prisons in Eastern Europe, never to be heard from again".

WTC7 & Dutch demolition expert Danny Jowenko

While we're on the subject of September 11th and WTC7, a building that wasn't hit by a plane but just happened to be the third ever steel-framed structure to allegedly collapse owing to fire(s) -- the first two being WTC1 and WTC2 on the day that the laws of physics were inexplicably changed -- here's a video of one of Holland's foremost demolition experts, Danny Jowenko -- who didn't know of WTC7 -- and his observations when shown footage of its collapse on 11th September 2001. The clip is in Dutch with English subtitles.

His reaction is says it all and his credentials appear to be impeccable.

A brief recap of the military thinkers' guide to modern [information] warfare....

Jane Standley, Jane Stanley, Richard Porter, BBC World News, Saloman Brothers, 47 WTC7 Stor(e)ys & the number 23

As regular readers will know, The Antagonist doesn't have a huge amount of time for the pursuit of 11/9 truth in the UK as, simply put, 11/9 is an issue to which the American people need to find some solutions. Furthermore, we have far more pressing issues of domestic terrorism in the UK to deal with. However, where 11/9 can be of use to anyone anywhere other than America is as an event that informs and advises, and from which lessons can be learned.

On that basis, here's some thoughts on Richard Porter's (head of BBC World news) considered response to the questions that surround how BBC World News managed to report the collapse of the Saloman Brothers WTC7 building almost half an hour before it happened, complete with rolling footage of the 'collapsed' WTC7 building still standing in the background. Porter quoted, responses follow:

Part of the conspiracy?
Richard Porter
27 Feb 07, 05:12 PM

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are pretty well known by now. The BBC addressed them earlier this month with a documentary, The Conspiracy Files, shown within the UK.

Not true, merely one interpretation of what happened. The programme was under an hour long and a large portion of the programme was dedicated to utter nonsense including looking around Dylan Avery and Jim Fetzer's homes, talking about Dylan Avery's first Radio Shack laptop on which the film Loose Change was born, along with a good unhealthy dose of anti-semitic nonsense to which nobody with any credibility gives any credence, none of which have anything much to do with the events of 11/9, how they happened or who made them happen. The final product is hardly what anyone would call a balanced piece of investigative journalism that 'addressed' alternatives to the official 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Until now, I don't think we've been accused of being part of the conspiracy. But now some websites are using news footage from BBC World on September 11th 2001 to suggest we were actively participating in some sort of attempt to manipulate the audience. As a result, we're now getting lots of emails asking us to clarify our position.

While some people may be using the footage to suggest that the BBC were actively participating in some sort of attempt to manipulate the audience, the point is irrelevant. What is relevant is the simple fact that BBC World News was reporting the collapse of a building that hadn't collapsed, hadn't been hit by a plane and that didn't collapse until half an hour after BBC World said it had, while the building was fully visible in the report about its collapse.

So here goes:

1. We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.

Press releases and scripts are irrelevant. If nobody fed BBC World the news about a collapsed WTC7, where did the news come from before the event happened? Who came up with the idea of announcing a building that was still standing had collapsed? Jane Standley? A BBC World source? Another news wire? Where was the notion born prior to the event happening? Is the ridiculousness of a BBC World reporter describing an event that hadn't happened somehow lost on Mr Porter? Was it a guess? A premonition? A bit of avant-garde reporting from 23 minutes into the future, going three minutes better than the favoured technique of Network 23's Edison Carter? Was it a first hand account? From a blind man, maybe?

Simply: What was the source for the BBC World News report that WTC7 had collapsed?

2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I'm quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate - but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did - sourced our reports, used qualifying words like "apparently" or "it's reported" or "we're hearing" and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

No such use of the terms "apparently", "it's reported" or "we're hearing" were used in connection with the reported collapse of the uncollapsed WTC7 building. Even the caption stated the building had collapsed. Past tense. But, if BBC World checked and double checked the information they were receiving, as Mr Porter tells us, this means there will be an audit trail leading directly back to the original source of the information about the collapsed building that was still standing. Then again, if the BBC "no longer have the original tapes" of "the day that changed the world", perhaps not.

3. Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I've spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn't remember minute-by-minute what she said or did - like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing; what she was being told; and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

Maybe Jane Standley could use her high-speed BBC Internet connection to have a little dig around the web and see for herself what she said even though she can't quite recall now. Despite efforts to 'pull' copies of the video, it can still be found. The core issue here is not what Jane Standley said, but as highlighted above, the source of the information that gave rise to her fabricated report about an event that hadn't happened. It's not as if there weren't plenty of other 9/11 spectaculars upon which to report - say, for example, how two 110 storey steel and concrete buildings had been pulverised into what Jane Standley calls "snow" after having reportedly been hit by a couple of lightweight aluminium planes.

4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I'd love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don't help clear up the issue one way or another.

No further comment required. Oh, fuck it.... why not - the day that changed the world, the new Pearl Harbour, the attack on America, not one but four hijacked planes and the BBC has lost the tapes? For the record, the BBC's own policy statement on archiving material requires the retention of, "Two broadcast standard copies of all transmitted/published TV, Radio and BBCi output - one to be stored on a separate site as a master". Some going to lose both copies.

5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today "so the guy in the studio didn't quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy... "

Of course it was an error. What a great line to end on -- especially given his job title -- an offhand comment from a YouTube video. Shouldn't a little more be expected from the BBC than a trashy anonymous quote in response to serious questions about the provenance of the information that led to BBC World's amazing foresight with regard to their reporting of the collapse of WTC7, 23 minutes before it did?

Richard Porter is head of news, BBC World

Oh dear.

On the subject of the BBC's Conspiracy Files addressing of 11/9, it should be noted that the series producer for the Conspiracy Files, Mike Rudin, openly admitted about his research into the mysterious death of Diana, "I was right away impressed with just how little I knew". In what other profession is it possible to openly admit one's ignorance, much less how impressed one is by one's own ignorance, and still manage to hold down the job?

For the beleaguered BBC journalist floundering away in similar ignorance, The Antagonist recommends you take the time to watch one or two of your own TV series -- series from back in the day when the BBC wasn't afear'd to do something that vaguely resembled proper investigative journalism --and get up to speed on something that closer resembles the nature of the real world in which you live.

The story of the 23-minutes premature announcement of WTC7's collapse -- the original source for which is still unknown -- continues....

BBC World News and the 9/11 Smoking Gun? UPDATED!

The following snap is from a BBC World News stream supplied by the BBC to archive.org. It features BBC World news coverage from 11th September 2001, circa 5pm.


Notice the caption at the bottom of the picture which states "TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US" and "The 47 storey Salomon Brothers building close to the World Trade Centre has also collapsed." The caption, however, is not the interesting bit. The interesting bit is that just over the reporter Jane Standley's left shoulder is - wait for it - the 47 storey Salomon Brothers building close to the World Trade Centre which, according to the news report from which the still image came, is the building that BBC World is announcing has collapsed and no longer exists. Something which BBC World News reported as much as 23 minutes before it actually did collapse.

The original footage stream has disappared from where it was once hosted on Google Video and also from YouTube, but the original BBC News stream is still available from its original source on Archive.org (warning 1Gb file size):

http://ia311517.us.archive.org/2/items/bbc200109111654-1736/V08591-16.mpg

An edited version of the footage, including some caption overlays detailing the sequence of events, the original broadcast times and the timing of the WTC7 collapse can be found as a BitTorrent file: 911 - WTC7 Collapse - 23 Minute Warning! Below is a transcript of the 23 Minute Warning BBC World footage (note the transcript refers to on-the-scene-reporter 'Jane Stanley', without a 'd'):

Segment Broadcast

11-Sep-2001 16:54 to 17:36 (Eastern Daylight Time; GMT -04:00)

0:14:50 [START TRANSCRIPT]

BBC Banner [TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US - World Trade Centre destroyed by hijacked planes. Pentagon hit and burning]

PRESENTER: Now more on the latest building collapse in New York. You might of heard a few moments ago that was talking about the Saloman Brothers building collapsing and indeed it has,

Editor's Comment [WTC7 Collapsed? - It's only 5:07pm EST [EDT]]

apparently that's only a few hundred yards away from where the World Trade Centre towers were and it seems this was not a result of a new attack, it was because the building had been weakened during this morning's attacks. We'll probably find out more now about that from our correspondent Jane Stanley. Jane, what more can you tell us about the Salomon Brothers' building and its collapse?

BBC Banner [LIVE - TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US - World Trade Centre destroyed by hijacked planes. Pentagon hit and burning]

STANLEY: Well, only really what you already know. Details are very, very sketchy. There's almost a sense, downtown in New York behind me, down by the World Trade Centre of a .. just an area completely closed off as the rescue workers try to do their job. But, this isn't the first building that ...erm... has suffered as a result. We know that part of the Marriott Hotel next to the World Trade Centre also collapsed as a result of this huge amount of falling debris from a 110 floors of two ... the two Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre. As you can see behind me the Trade Centre appears to be still burning,

Editor's Comment [ooops it's still there. Someone Press Released too early]

we see these huge clouds of smoke and ash. We know that behind that there's an empty piece of what was a very familiar New York skyline, a symbol of the financial prosperity of this city, but ... er... completely disappeared now

BBC Banner [LIVE - TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US - JANE STANLEY. New York]

and New York is still unable to take on board what has happened to them today.

BBC Banner [TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US - World Trade Centre destroyed by hijacked planes. Pentagon hit and burning]

PRESENTER: Presumably there were very few people in Salomon building when it collapsed, there were I suppose fears of possible further collapses around the area.

BBC Banner [LIVE - TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US - World Trade Centre destroyed by hijacked planes. Pentagon hit and burning]

STANLEY: That's what you would hope because this whole downtown area behind me has been completely sealed off and evacuated, apart from the emergency workers, that was done by the Mayor Ruidi Gulliani, much earlier today, because of ... of course the dreadful collapse of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centre. But ... er ...

BBC Banner [LIVE - TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US - The 47 storey Salomon Brothers building close to the World Trade Centre has also collapsed.]

New York very much a city still in chaos, the phones are not working properly, the subway lines are not working properly, and we know that down there near the World Trade Centre there are three schoools that are being turned into triage centres for emergency treatment and I know that over in New York Harbour where the famous Statue of Liberty is, there's a field hospital where 1500 people are being treated and we have heard, though it's unconfirmed as yet that a hundred New York City police officers have been taken there as well for treatment but we do need to confirm those figures for the officers.

BBC Banner [TERRORISM ATTACKS IN US - The 47 storey Salomon Brothers building close to the World Trade Centre has also collapsed.]

PRESENTER: It's now what some eight hours since the attacks, is there any estimate yet available of the number of casualties in the World Trade Centre.

0:17:40 [END TRANSCRIPT]

And, some 23 minutes after BBC World first announced that WTC7 had collapsed, sure enough, it collapsed:



It very much appears as though someone (a senior Al Qaeda leader, of course) press-released the WTC7 collapse about an hour too early. And, of course, there's nothing suspect about the fact that the live-link between studio and on-the-scene reporter Jane Standley fizzled out and broke five minutes before WTC7 was due to collapse on-screen and right behind her.

So, now what?

Update: The BBC responds - Richard Porter - DOG ATE MY TAPES OF THE DAY THAT CHANGED THE WORLD! In a shock revelation the BBC says: We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down but we still managed to report WTC7 had collapsed 23 minutes before it happened!