that Jane Standley was
in New York, not London, on 9-11. The explanation from BBC doesn't even make sense, does it?
"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.
Why, pray tell, would someone in New York be relying on feeds from LONDON to know what the hell was going on in New York??? Please explain *that* to me in a way that makes sense....
The BBC Bombshell
On February 26, 2007, it was publicized that the BBC had reported the collapse of the building at 4:57 PM on 9/11, 23 minutes before the actual collapse time of 5:20 PM, using excerpts which were apparently extracted from one of 417 streaming video files discovered on Archive.org just four days earlier.
The report is found in the following 1-gigabyte mpeg, which covers the time span from 4:54 PM through 5:36 PM:
http://ia311517.us.archive.org/2/items/bbc200109111654-1736/V08591-16.mpg Portions of the report are transcribed below. The numbers in bold indicate times, in minutes and seconds, from the beginning of the mpeg recording.
03:15 ~4:57 PM: The anchor states:
We'll leave it there for a moment. We've got some news just coming in actually, that the Solomon Brothers' Building in New York, right in the heart of Manhattan, has also collapsed. This does fit in with a warning from the British Foreign Office a couple of hours ago to British Citizens that there is a real risk -- ah let me get the exact words -- the British Foreign Office -- the foreign part of the British government -- said it was a strong risk of further atrocities in the United States, and it does seem as if there now is another one with the Solomon Brothers' Building collapsing. We've got no word yet on casualities. One assumes that the building would have been virtually deserted. Whether this latest collapse is going to influence the President, who we heard about a few moments ago, who was expected to be heading from Nebraska back to Washington, we don't know.
06:31 ~5:00 PM: The anchor states:
The 47-story Solomon Brothers', situated very close to the World Trade Center, has also just collapsed.
13:20 ~5:07 PM: The anchor states:
Now more on the latest building collapse in New York ... you may have heard a few moments ago we were talking about the Solomon Brothers Building collapsing and indeed it has, and apparently it's only a few hundred yards away from where the World Trade Center Towers were. And it seems that this was not the result of a new attack; it was because the building had been weakened during this morning's attacks. We'll probably find out more about that from our correspondent Jane Standley. Jane, what more can you tell us about the Solomon Brothers' Building and its collapse?
14:00 ~5:08 PM: The screen is filled by correspondent Jane Standley standing in front of a window framing smoke rising from Ground Zero and a clearly erect WTC 7.
15:35 ~5:09 PM: The caption on the bottom of the screen reads:
The 47 storey Salomon Brothers building close to the World Trade Centre has also collapsed.
20:15 ~5:14 PM: The image of Jane Standley begins to break up and the anchor, remarking that they'd "lost the line" with Jane Standley, shifts to another report.
http://wtc7.net/bbc.html So... from 4:57 until 5:14 - 17 whole minutes, NO ONE could tell this reporter that she was wrong so they could retract the statement?? I just don't buy that at all... sorry. Especially when she could look out the window and SEE the building still standing from where she was.