Monday, November 12, 2007

BBC in for more flak over 9/11 ‘documentary’

As the 9/11 Truth Movement’s message on both sides of the Atlantic gathers apace, news comes today of a British physicist and mechanical engineer, John A Blacker, who is calling the BBC to account for its shameful display of ‘yellow journalism’ in the form of the Conspiracy Files on 9/11 which was aired last February.

In a letter to the BBC, he cites a whole catalogue of distortions, omissions and bias in the hour-long documentary, which, to any conscientious 9/11 researcher, was a gross insult. I posted a blog shortly after its airing outlining my objections, relaying them by email to the BBC and was not alone as it enraged many.

Blacker has raised a pre-action protocol with the BBC in an attempt to settle out of court and at the same time get an assurance from the corporation that the programme will never be aired again and that the BBC might produce a redactive account of the documentary in which due creedance is paid to the whole gamut of inconsistencies in the 9/11 Commission’s report and the irrefutable evidence which exists that the buildings underwent pre-planned demolition with government knowledge and - indeed - involvement.

Having refused to set a date to meet with Mr Blacker to discuss the issue, a date has now been set by the BBC for a dialogue later this month. We await to see if the BBC issues an apology.

Given the high political importance that 9/11 had and continues to have on geopolitical decision making, resulting in our loss of freedoms, the Iraq and Afghan wars and the smoking gun of government collusion and outright lying that followed this seminal event, it is hardly likely that a straight-jacketed state-controlled BBC will do much more than grudgingly apologise.

To see the correspondence which Blacker sent to the BBC go to

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I don't go to the BBC for my news any more. What saddened me more than anything about the BBC Conspiracy Files doc. was not the biased nature of the report so much as the inherent cruelty of the tone ( describing Dylan Avery as a drop-out,for example ). If the BBC producers thought that this crude ad hominem attack would have people cheering in their seats, I think they are mistaken. All it does is bring the reputation of the BBC down. I now get my news from the internet.