TV Forum Watch News and Information Board

User avatar
Pete
Posts: 7203
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.36
Location: Dundee

Jamesypoo wrote:
Fri 01 May, 2020 10.58
Hey guys if anyone is interested in how badly my local station WTAF butchers BBC World News, have a look at these 57 YouTube videos I've linked below. Like all the O&O stations they recently had an amazing new set installed featuring all the latest fake brick wall and blue perspex. Check it out!
Thanks mouseboy, hadn't realised you were posting here now
"He has to be larger than bacon"
tightrope78
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri 27 Feb, 2015 15.35

all new Phil wrote:
Fri 01 May, 2020 10.32
I have to admit, I’m almost impressed at the usual suspects trying to derail the Election 2010 thread with posts about US elections, and the NBC / Sky thread with completely unrelated Spanish-language news channel videos.
I’m the guilty party regarding US elections. I did think it may have been of interest in a thread about election presentation, especially considering how different things are done over there. Ah well.
JetixFann450
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon 15 Oct, 2018 00.50

I guess people got so bored of complaining about Oneness that they're now talking about whatever else other broadcasters have as idents.
I'm that guy from that forum. No, not this one.
all new Phil
Posts: 1598
Joined: Sun 13 Feb, 2005 00.04
Location: Next door to Hell

The favourite itv region thread has certainly taken a dull turn.
Thought this was a nice forum, clearly not.
User avatar
dosxuk
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu 07 Feb, 2008 21.37
Location: Sheffield

I didn't have Riaz down as a conspiracy theorist, but apparently he is, since he's after evidence the met have tampered with the CCTV from 7/7.
Jason
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu 29 Dec, 2005 17.22

dosxuk wrote:
Sun 03 May, 2020 17.42
I didn't have Riaz down as a conspiracy theorist, but apparently he is, since he's after evidence the met have tampered with the CCTV from 7/7.
Perhaps he's realised the TVS archive cannot be resolved he's moved on to something else.

And that thread is now locked.
Jason aka JasonB @TVF
User avatar
Beep
Posts: 686
Joined: Sat 24 Mar, 2007 23.53
Location: That London

Riaz wrote:Many thanks for your replies.

You have answered my question about the serial number although nothing turns up about a Holmes exhibit number in a Google search. Do you have any further information about what it is; how it was incorporated into the CCTV footage; and whether it was British Transport Police or Metropolitan Police which added it?

You mentioned that the master would be intact and secured elsewhere for trial of there was one.

To the best of my knowledge according to information provided by the Metropolitan Police is that the VHS tapes were returned to their owner although I have not been able to determine whether it was Thameslink or First Capital Connect as there was a franchise change between the time they were taken and returned.

You also mentioned that the full previous 24 hours and the 24 hours after were preserved. I can confirm that as I spent 3 days helping with cataloguing each exhibit for archiving. Luton was on a hard drive, as were the on board stuff which was never released, as was the KX Thameslink stuff.

There has not been all that much public discussion about CCTV footage released in 2008, and further footage released in 2009, and it has largely been ignored by the mainstream media. One thing that has been noted by myself, and a few others, is that footage from camera 26, covering the eastern side of the car park, starts at 06:48:42 and finishes at 07:21:46 but contains a number of missing segments – most notably 06:51:12 to 06:51:38 and 06:52:39 to 06:53:53. There doesn't appear to be any logical reason why these segments are missing (such as a system fault) but are you able to enlighten me as to why there are missing segments?

Do you have any idea who is the owner of the hard drive with the CCTV footage? When I enquired with the Metropolitan Police several years ago they claimed that they only possess the footage from the Coroner's Inquest and that's all in the public domain because it no longer is an open case.
PM I received after the topic was closed. While I could give him reasons why the points he makes aren't that important or 'worrying'.

It's like he thinks a composite released to the wider public would contain every second of footage - it's exactly that.

I don't think he gets that the CCTV is MOPI1 and will be retained for 100 years from 2005 - and the Met don't own it, it's owned by another public body and is archived with their contractor...
User avatar
dosxuk
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu 07 Feb, 2008 21.37
Location: Sheffield

Beep wrote:
Mon 04 May, 2020 00.03
Riaz wrote:Many thanks for your replies.

You have answered my question about the serial number although nothing turns up about a Holmes exhibit number in a Google search. Do you have any further information about what it is; how it was incorporated into the CCTV footage; and whether it was British Transport Police or Metropolitan Police which added it?

You mentioned that the master would be intact and secured elsewhere for trial of there was one.

To the best of my knowledge according to information provided by the Metropolitan Police is that the VHS tapes were returned to their owner although I have not been able to determine whether it was Thameslink or First Capital Connect as there was a franchise change between the time they were taken and returned.

You also mentioned that the full previous 24 hours and the 24 hours after were preserved. I can confirm that as I spent 3 days helping with cataloguing each exhibit for archiving. Luton was on a hard drive, as were the on board stuff which was never released, as was the KX Thameslink stuff.

There has not been all that much public discussion about CCTV footage released in 2008, and further footage released in 2009, and it has largely been ignored by the mainstream media. One thing that has been noted by myself, and a few others, is that footage from camera 26, covering the eastern side of the car park, starts at 06:48:42 and finishes at 07:21:46 but contains a number of missing segments – most notably 06:51:12 to 06:51:38 and 06:52:39 to 06:53:53. There doesn't appear to be any logical reason why these segments are missing (such as a system fault) but are you able to enlighten me as to why there are missing segments?

Do you have any idea who is the owner of the hard drive with the CCTV footage? When I enquired with the Metropolitan Police several years ago they claimed that they only possess the footage from the Coroner's Inquest and that's all in the public domain because it no longer is an open case.
PM I received after the topic was closed. While I could give him reasons why the points he makes aren't that important or 'worrying'.

It's like he thinks a composite released to the wider public would contain every second of footage - it's exactly that.

I don't think he gets that the CCTV is MOPI1 and will be retained for 100 years from 2005 - and the Met don't own it, it's owned by another public body and is archived with their contractor...
Years ago, on a completely different forum, I (and a few others) got in to a long "discussion" with a couple of people who were convinced that the whole of 7/7 was a false flag event. The CCTV coverage was one of their key points, with the "missing" footage, distortions in the pictures, potholes that were actually puddles and so on. There was outrage amongst their group that the full CCTV from on board the tube train wasn't released to the public, along with other footage that identified other individuals moving around on that day. That said, my favourite bit though was the "key evidence" that several of the bombers were shot and put into a police van in the middle of Canary Wharf, yet no actual photographic, video or even witness evidence has ever come to light. They managed to find the truth though because of a random breaking news headline on the day in a newspaper or something saying that people in Canary Wharf should stay away from windows.

It's funny, but when he asked how to find out how a video had been digitised in 2005, this was the exact thing I was thinking of when I asked why he wanted to know.
User avatar
Beep
Posts: 686
Joined: Sat 24 Mar, 2007 23.53
Location: That London

I could see it coming as well. I spent weeks in 2015 with all these hard drives of CCTV - some where VHS transfers granted - but nothing on (an LUL) train was ever retained or seized as it simply didn't exist. The signs on the pic line were added in 1999 as a deterrent for crime and ASB. It's public knowledge there's no CCTV on those services hence why they're a hotbed of petty crime.

There is more footage of the bombers carrying out their dry runs and whatnot that's still used for CT training today, it's just not public because it doesn't need to be. It's similar for the Manchester Arena and LBG attacks - the footage has and won't see the light of day because why should people's brutal deaths be broadcast for all to see just to silence people that don't believe the government's account?

The 'J7 Tr(((ers' - just to stop them googling and finding this place as often they'll join on mass to attack those who disagree - are a bunch of nutters imho, who seek to find a conspiracy in 7/7 because they want to disbelieve the government.

Fake victims is one of my favourite discussions, it's a day that still affects many of my colleagues - and ex colleagues who've now retired. They saw things nobody should and it's far too many crisis actors to give false stories and careers to.
User avatar
rob
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat 06 Sep, 2003 12.01
Location: Overton, Hampshire
Contact:

I think NeilC needs a tutorial on how not to ask for a tutorial in every mock thread.
User avatar
Beep
Posts: 686
Joined: Sat 24 Mar, 2007 23.53
Location: That London

rob wrote:
Tue 05 May, 2020 14.22
I think NeilC needs a tutorial on how not to ask for a tutorial in every mock thread.
I think DeMarkay needs a tutorial on how not to be ungrateful while we're at it.
Post Reply