So, you just watched the BBC 9/11 doc?

[fixuplooksharp]

Looking at some of the junk on this forum I think it is imperative that after people watch the BBC 9/11 conspiracy files documentary however pro/anti reinvestigation it is,they go to reputable sources to go and get their information. The reason for this is even the BBC does point out some pertinent points they will be but a few. They cannot fit all the evidence contrary to the official story into one television programme. So whatever they 'debunk' there will be a list of hundereds of other reports that will not have had the same BBC treatment. In this situation i will reccomend:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/

with the comlete 9/11 timeline being here:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

The thing you must remember is that in order to be able to make a sound decision you need to take into account all of the evidence. And remember this has never been done before. The 9/11 commission report, in actuality is a poor report consisting of numerous ommissions.

One thing you will probably not have seen tonight, unless the BBC goes against the grain and surprises me is this video with John Gross, he was the lead engineer of NIST who were charged with investigating why the towers collapsed.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-7180303712325092501&q=john+ gross[/GVideo]

[Fred Jones II]

Just watching now - this is bad

[SHERITON HOTEL]

Just missing this, will it be available on google video or youtube d'ya think?

[markwm]

Total white wash

[conspiracy analyst]

BBC has to admit certain truths like WTC7 had CIA offices in it.
That the buildings fell down like a controlled demolition.

But they forgot to talk about the speed of the demolition ie freefall speed and the fact that no resistance occurred yet they show resistance in the computer image of the steel beams falling. Apparently they melt at half the total burn amount of 1500 degrees. So by that logic even if the steel beams were weakened by half how does freefall speed occur? Halfburning now equals freefall speed?

No mention of the BBC interview of alive hijackers afte the event or the fact that Larry Silverstein said 'pull down' WTC7. No mention as well of the fact that so-called Al Quaeda 5 years after and almost 700,000 deaths later no other 'terrorist' attack has occured on US soil.

In my eyes they are trying to control the lies they have propagated by doing a controled demolition of Loose Change by omitting so many parts of it that they may be accused of 'guerilla marketing' ie promoting the programme to those who haven't seen it.

In a nutshell whilst the US military can run and operate wars on the other side of the earth it cant destroy 3 buildings in New York. A man in a cave had to pull that one off...

[Fred Jones II]

This could be the best thing to happen yet!. It was so obviously a hit piece and they still had to admit a conspiracy hehehehe.
Smart move from the beeb I think

[conspiracy analyst]

the fallout by making new lies in as old tactic.

It took them at least 10 years after the defeat in Vietnam to produce the Rambo movies (where they won the war).

Its now taken the BBC 5 years to admit what most people have known already that there are gaping holes in the official conspiracy theory.

But a lie still remains a lie even if you re-package it.

There is 'no man in a cave' organising any of this. There are cavemen though. The Bush neo-cons and their 'war on terror'.

The biggest casualty of war is truth. In the Americans case the biggest casualty of truth is war. The 9/11 Oil Wars.

[fixuplooksharp]

Oh deary deary me. That was appalling. Truely appalling. Is this what passes for investigative journalism these days? I thought the BBC might have slightly more credibility than that. The majority of that doc was all opinion and very little fact. The amount of times they said 'some people say' etc was ridiculous. there was no sourcing of anything really. They also decided to pick the worst people to interview. Fetzer was a freek. Avery looked naive and Jones came across as crazy.

They also stated that all of the military exercises were 'routine' and made it sound like there was only one exercise going on when we know there were more. They also brought up some number of 4500 blips on the radar, i swear it was less than that?

Faliure to look in depth at the evidence was obvious. they literally used all the fringe/theroy stuff there is.

There was some guy who said there was molten metal at the pentagon. This is news to me.. Did anyone lese know this?

They also just cut and paste from their old documentary 'why the towers fell' that BS about the floor trusses being the cause of the collapse. What absolute tosh.

I think we should just be glad that they did not include the beam theory!

[Busker]

Not a balanced documentary by any stretch of the word:

"the self style" 9/11 Truth, the references about questioning the truth hurts the families of the victims etc. The subtle scenary of Dylan Avery working out of his bedroom, compared to Popular Mechanics corporate offices etc.

I got the impression they struggled with Fetzner.

There was no mention of why Bush sat like a lemon reading about a goat, when the SOP for the protection team would be immediate extraction. Nor was there any attempt to explain, why the anti aircraft batteries at the Pentagon did not activate.

I remain unclear as to how / why small six inch strips from United 93 would be found over a mile away if the plane hit the ground intact. If the USAF came forward and said they had shot it down, I would have found some logic in that being a sensible course of action.

Bottom line, the programme had its faults, but it could have been a lot worse.

[mason-free party]

well i hope the march on saturday makes a diversion to the BBC studios...i can't take much more of this propaganda..Geobbels would have been proud of it...heil BBC!

[Snowygrouch]

Certain people are going to REALLY REALLY regret putting that nonsense out......mark my words.

[Carlos]

totally skirted the meaty issues.

But as others have said - was so one sided I'm sure it'll backfire.

[James C]

Amazing that the BBC sees fit to make people's minds up in 60 minutes of poor journalism. It's official, the conspiracy theories are just theories now that the BBC claims the facts prove them to be wrong (as stated by the narrator towards the end).

Erm....excuse me....where were the facts?

Of course, they did have to repeat several times how hurtful these theories must be to the families of the victims.

Overall, this was pure propaganda and sickening stuff. It was almost identical to the lame documentary aired on Channel 5 (or was it 4) a couple of years ago.

[landless peasant]

it could have been worse. no set back really, just a bit one sided. it's still good to hear that sotta * and the type of argument used. it's not like we gunna win without a long hard fight. so fuk bring it on scum BBC. glad i anit paying for that * tho!

[marky 54]

on the upside it confirmed that either they lied or critics were lieing.

they said no large debris landed in the lake from flight 93 like wing sections engines ect.

very differant story to what critics told me. ive been told by critics on numerous ocassions an engine landed in the lake.

[Fred Jones II]

And now the good news.
Tonights program has started to hit the political blogs.
If we open our eyes a bit and look around us, we might see that this program was a good thing and not get so angry (directed at noone in particular).

Just posted:Failed State [ 18-Feb-07 10:14pm ] [ T ] [View Website]

In defence of conspiracy theorists [ 18-Feb-07 7:06pm ] [ T ] [ G ] [ N ] [ L ]

Tonight, on BBC 2 There is a programme on 911 Conspiracy Theories. It will go through the conspiracies ranging from ligitimate scientific questions (why did the towers collapse so quick) to the ridiculous (were New York's Jewish Community forewarned). There are many people who believe both of the above and much more.

I don't believe the anti-Semitic one, few normal people in the UK do. That is because many of the 911 Conspiracy theorists come from the left wing, where racism is not tolerated. I also don't tolerate racism but I discount this conspiracy theory for one important reason and one reason only: no evidence exists to suggest that it is true.

Taking the former theory mentioned above, that of the behaviour of the falling tower, there are more questions to answer. That doesn't mean that I think it was all a CIA plot, that means I think some questions have been posed, by independent experts, that require answers. Answers which as yet are not fourthcoming.

I won't go deep into individual theories as a cursory Internet search will provide sites where they are explained in detail. All I will say is that questions need answers.

Question: Did any Jews die on 911?

Answer: Yes, look at the roll-call of the names of the dead, look at the official records.

Conspiracy Theory: Disproved.

Compared with...

Question: Why did the towers fall at the speed of gravity, and within their own footprint?

Answer: ????

Conspiracy: Neither proven nor disproven

So instead of jumping to conclusions and saying we have the answers, we need to have a proper investigation into the question which are out there.

Conspiracies have happened. All of us of any intelligence at all know that the evidence for WMD in Iraq was cooked up. The invasion of Iraq was a conspiracy. That is beyond doubt.

Some say people like conspiracy theories because the truth doesn't provide comfort. They of course have forgotten that not all conspiracy theorists are the same, and not all theories are the same. If the evidence for the Iraq war was faked that doesn't mean that Diana was murdered in Paris, the two are completely separate. So why talk about conspiracy theories as if they are one?

I hate the term conspiracy theory as much as I hate the term junk science. It is a term used to pour scorn on critics. We should, rather than relying on these sound bite phrases, argue about the facts.

From uk political blog feed.

[GEFBASS]

Boulderdash Broadcasting Channel !

However, In their defence have just read my TV licence,

In the section "Conditions of this licence" it says, and I quote....

* Your TV Licence does not guarantee a good picture.

Can`t say fairer than that.

[Emmanuel]

I have already written my response the the programme int he whitewash thread.
But wait! I am extremely encouraged how many people are looking at this thread right now now. Lets use our numbers!
Let use this momentum to accomplish great things.
Time to plaster, email ,major truth websites all over our neighbourhoods now before its too late! Who will join me? Just pm

[Justin]

This programme, whilst very poorly researched and put together, can only be good for us! This afternoon I made my elderly parents (poor devils) sit through '9/11 Mysteries' in preparation for tonight's offering from the BBC. They are both perfect representatives of Middle England reading as they do The Daily Telegraph and who vote, without fail, for the Conservatives. They were appalled that so few details about the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 were mentioned by this pathetic effort of tele-journalism compared to the much more detailed and compelling '9/11 Mysteries'. They are now both convinced that 9/11 was an inside job - and their eldest son is not barking!

With a few million people having seen this, we are now able to raise the issue of 9/11 truth in 'polite society'. People will start to do their own research and if '9/11 Mysteries' (which I have to say is bloody good) is sent to all decisionmakers, journalists and opinionmakers, along with this BBC effort, they will see that the tide is very much turning in our favour. And when Loose Change 3 comes out, with the content checked by David Ray Griffin, into our cinemas later in the year, we will be well and truly in the driving seat.

Tonight, I feel, is a real turning point in our campaign. Churchill said after El Alamein in 1942, "This is not the end, nor is it the beginning of the end....but perhaps it is the end of the beginning!" I feel this is the stage the 9/11 Truth Movement has reached.......the real hard work to end this nightmare begins now!

[Emmanuel]

I have already written my response of the programme in the whitewash thread.
But wait! I am extremely encouraged how many people are looking at this thread right now. Lets use our numbers!
Let use this momentum to accomplish great things.
Time to plaster, email ,major truth websites all over our neighbourhoods now before its too late! Who will join me? Just pm

[xmasdale]

[hatsoff]

The message below has just been sent to Guy Smith producer of the documentary just aired on BBC2

Here's his email address guy.smith@bbc.co.uk

Lets give him a busy night


Just watched the 9/11 Conspiracy Files and it just confirms that the BBC is still under the control of the masters of war when it is us the licence payers who supply the money to keep this rotten establishment going.
The programme makers and the journalists involved in this programme should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. We are not journalists, but if we had had the access to BBC type resources and other mainstream media outlets, we would have produced a programme that would have at least told the truth, and presented the overwhelming scientific evidence that is available to any freethinking person with the aptitude to use a computer.
Hopefully, one day journalism will get back on track and someone will have the balls to speak the truth.

I am going to have to spend a lot of my time now joining the many groups that are around dedicated to bring about the end of the licence fee and get rid of the outrage that is the BBC.


look at some proper investigative journalism. Watch 9/11 Mysteries on ON TV - Ourspace and learn.

www.ourspace.webeden.co.uk

[andrewwatson]

Here are my notes.

Omissions: no eyewitness reports of explosions. No FDNY testimonies. No quotes from anchors. No mention of FAA records being destroyed. No sustained shots of the WTC1 & 2 'collapses' showing explosive force . No mention of debris hurled 400 feet sideways. No molten metal. No Thermite. No Steven Jones. No David Ray Griffin. No mention of 4,000,000 views of Loose Change. No 85 confiscated videos at Pentagon. No Minetta testimony. No skeptic eyewitnesses at pentagon or Shanksville. No no-planes. No DEWs. No free-fall speed. No clear clip of WTC7. No toxic dust. No dying responders. No big-names ( Bowman, Paul Craig Roberts, Von Buelow, Meacher, Sheen, Lynch etc etc). No polls. No BBC report that 5 of hijackers still alive. No UBL denial . No insider dealing . No Giuliani, No Silverstein
No Marvin Bush. No 'Pull it' No Danny Jowenko. No Bush at Booker. No CIA funding of Al-Qaeda. No Northwoods. No power-downs at WTC. No sniffer dogs.
No Willy Rodriguez. No Rick Siegel . No 911truth.org.

Distortions: WTC7 shown four times in weakest shot (the one used for Berger CNN interview where 7 is half hidden). Impression of scientists v. isolated fanatical individuals. Alex Jones as cult-leader at quasi- evangelical 'rally'. Fetzer in close-up moving his head around a lot . Only Dylan held his cool and in one classic scene when interviewed about Wally Miller he exuded seething if controlled anger. Strawmen like '4,000 Jews' used to discredit whole range of 911 skepticism. Presented 'evidence' of UA93 crash as Bandana and Passport, then said , "In the face of ALL THIS,some still believe it was a conspiracy."

Lies: "WTC 7 was a raging inferno". "Flight 11 took off that morning". OGCT presented as fact.
X-files writer-"To think that the US government contains mass-murderers is preposterous". Popular Mechanics given credibility as ordinary down to-earth magazine.

Ended by trying to boil down the whole movement to FBI's admission of failure to act on intelligence supplied to CIA. ''The American people were failed" .
Concluding words of V/O: "The other conspiracy theories are just that - theories.
The evidence doesn't support them.''

We were never shown that evidence.

[kookomula]

For those who may be convinced by the planes which looked like airliners remember the Bush/Blair Iraq war memo:

"The note cites Mr Bush suggesting three ways in which Iraq could be provoked into confrontation.

The US "was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours", Mr Bush said.

If Saddam fired on them, the Iraqis would be in breach of UN resolutions, he suggested."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4849744.stm

[numeral]

[andrewwatson]

The only good to be got out this is that it was on at all. Other than that it was about as dishonest and as glib as it could be.

It seems to me that the Beeb are in clear breach of their charter. What if anything can we as a movement do about it?

If we do not make a definite unified protest now, we will have admitted defeat.

If anyone wants to stand outside TV Centre I'll come up on the train and join them.

[Andrew Johnson]

I have "conspiritis". Don't you?

Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again - WE'RE THE MEDIA NOW folks!

But, it was interesting to compare it with "The 9/11 Conspiracies" on channel 4 - which actually discussed more evidence.

[telecasterisation]

I actually thought the first 30 minutes were essentially quite balanced, it did little to destroy or even challenge the main LC issues raised. I also found the use of a female narrator to be quiet pointed in that it made the listener sympathise with the latter half of the programme's more biased elements. The 'hole' in The Pentagon post impact was highly misleading though.

Dylan initially came across well but was made to look like a CT geek when the coroner's quote was put to him.

All in all, one couldn't expect too much and it did exactly what it said on the tin. You can expect very little interest to be generated by it, I'd simply forget it.

[Linda]

I was not impressed at all by this programe.

No mention of the firemen and the boom boom boom footage.

No mention of Willie Rodriguez talking about explosives going of in the basement.

No mention of Georgie boy reading a story about a PET GOAT which was more important than saving the USA after being under attack.

I spoke to Guy Smith on Friday evening, he was on Adrien Allen on LBC.

I asked him about the WTC7 coming down in it's own footprint after being demolished by explosives and a small fire at the top of the building.

He said this was not a controlled demolition, and the raging fires brought down the WTC7 building. What a Plonker.

He did admit to not knowing about the WTC7 building until he started to research the 911 conspiracy sites.

Adrian Allen said he will be discussing the program on his radio show on Monday evening at 1am.

Adian Allen had seen the program in advance on friday afternoon, and had Guy Smith on as his guest friday evening. There was a great response to the 911 conspiracy theorists phone in. It was an amazing program and went on for nearly 2hrs.

www.lbc.co.uk.

adrian@lbc.co.uk

[andrewwatson]

It's not important , huh?

People believe the BBC. It has a reputation for integrity. It is supping with criminals and fascist thugs who want to contol us with a combination of high-technology and simple psy-ops. And we shoujld just forget it?

I understand your weariness, Andrew. You've tried so hard to get sense from the BBC and few here seem to be aware of that fact. You are allowed to pass on this one. But - you're younger than me!