johndoraemi's blog

DEAR BBC (3)

WHY IS RICHARD PORTER ALLOWED TO CONTINUE COVERING UP THIS WTC7 DEBACLE?

We are demanding the OMBUDSMAN investigate this. Mr. Porter's responses are deliberately vague, hostile and untrrustworthy. No attempt has been made to get the documented evidence which was the source of the broadcast announcement.

Instead, we are to believe that because CNN said somethinhg SIMILAR, though not the same thing at all, that it is okay, and that we should just trust Mr. Porter.

CNN said that the building may have collapsed, and qualified the statement. BBC did not qualify the statement, instead repeating it multiple times as an authoritative statement of fact.

If CNN did it is an excuse, then why do we need a BBC at all? Is CNN the source for all of your reportage?

"Because three BBC channels were saying this in quick succession, I am inclined to believe that one or more of the news agencies was reporting this, or at least reporting someone saying this." -Richard Porter

BBC RESPONDS (with arrogance) Send another complaint.

BBC World wrote:

Hello and thank you for your email in reaction to claims made in an article published online.

The notion, as suggested on such websites, that the BBC has been part of any conspiracy is patently ludicrous. We reported the situation as accurately as we could, based on the best information available. We cannot be categorical about the exact timing of events that day - this is the first time it has been brought to our attention and it was more than five years ago. If in the chaos and confusion of that day our correspondent reported that the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been a genuine error.

With regards
BBC World Customer Relations

=========================================

http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/contact/index.html#email

http://www.bbcworld.com/Pages/ContactUsDepartments.aspx

BBC:

Your response is ludicrous.

1. The "collapse" of the building in question exhibits 11 characteristics of controlled demolition. Not least of which, it ended up in its own footprint in a neat pile. Other collapses are not so neat and precise.

Dear BBC

Contact BBC World here:
http://www.bbcworld.com/Pages/ContactUsDepartments.aspx

Dear BBC,

The head of your division, Richard Porter has just given the world a disgraceful response to a matter of enormous importance and seriousness.

The fact that your New York reporter said that the Salomon Brothers Building (WTC7) had collapsed a full 20 minutes before it had, with accompanying graphic, should be cause for a thorough investigation of how that information came to be in the heads of your personnel. This investigation does not appear to be in evidence. No serious effort, apart from allegedly asking the reporter to recall, seems to have taken place.

Next, in the realm of absurdity beyond belief, your department head claims that the BBC has LOST the tapes of September 11th coverage!

George Monbiot gets an open mic to libel us.

katherine@ commondreams.org, editor@commondreams.org

Commondreams has devolved into yellow journalism. You guys don't care much for honest debate or real demonstrable facts.

Even Monbiot has the gall to admit: "I believe that they were criminally negligent..."

When more than one person is involved in a crime that is conspiracy by definition. Even Monbiot, even Commondreams admits in black and white there was a conspiracy involved by the US government on 9/11. Then we are supposed to accept your pig ignorant excuses for why it's not important!!!

Here are the facts of 9/11, and there are plenty more. So far your magazine has shown no interest in them.

Full article: No George Monbiot, These Are The Facts of September 11th 2001

Response to The UK Guardian Hit Piece...

(Link to article)

No George Monbiot, These Are The Facts of September 11th 2001

Response to The UK Guardian Hit Piece

Crimes of the State

Mr. Monbiot has taken the standard media attack approach: conflate the internet film "Loose Change" with the subject of September 11th US government complicity. How brave to redo the same smear that has gone around for several years now focusing on the easily challenged claims, and ignoring the full breadth (and breathtaking amount) of evidence.

DISTURBING FACTS ABOUT THE 9/11 ATTACKS

1. The president of the United States, when informed that a second plane had struck the World Trade Center, continued to read about a pet goat.

Tales of 9/11 Truthiness

Crimes of the State

Stephen Colbert coined the term "truthiness."

 

It's pretty damned near impossible to get to the bottom of the September 11th lies we have been told by the United States federal government. This is not an easy task, and conflicting stories abound. Given that, there remain some serious deficiencies within the self-proclaimed "9/11 Truth Movement," as I will explain.

Tenet told 9/11 panel that he warned Rice of Al Qaeda

This article should be saved. It contains more than the headline suggests. Not only did Tenet inform Rice, who denied being informed of imminent attacks on US soil. It goes on:

"Despite this, [State Department Spokesman] McCormack said, Rice asked that Tenet provide the same briefing to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and then-US Attorney General John D. Ashcroft. The two men received it by July 17, he said."

Can you say prima facie evidence of high treason?

Ashcroft ALSO denied that it ever happened.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/10/03/tenet_told_911_panel_that_he_warned_rice_of_al_qaeda/

Tenet told 9/11 panel that he warned Rice of Al Qaeda Former CIA head said she took threat seriously

By Dan Eggen and Robin Wright, Washington Post | October 3, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Former CIA director George Tenet told the 9/11 Commission that he had warned of an imminent threat from Al Qaeda in a July 2001 meeting with Condoleezza Rice, adding that he believed Rice took the warning seriously, according to a transcript of the interview and the recollection of a commissioner who was there.

Operation 9/11 and General Musharraf's counter-blackmailing

I wish to promote this article because it's the first article I have seen that puts forth the following idea: Musharaf and ISI didn't know about the 9-11 wire transfers until AFTER the attacks of 9-11. Omar Saeed Sheikh implicated Pakistan on behalf of British MI6, for whom he was working...

http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/40040

Operation 9/11 and General Musharraf's counter-blackmailing
by Abid Ullah Jan
(Saturday January 20 2007)

However, by telling the whole truth about all that Musharraf knows about the ways in which ISI and its assets were used to facilitate frame-ups for 9/11, will not only be a great favour to Pakistan but will also save the rest of the humanity from the scourge of totalitarians in Washington who are out to physically re-colonize the Muslim world in particular under the pretext of war on terrorism.