BBC Pressured to Air 9/11 Hit Piece?

BBC Pressured to Air 9/11 Hit Piece?

digg_url = '';

Crane claims two different versions exist, former Fox exec demanding attack dogs released to prevent harm to American market
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, February 16, 2007

The BBC has produced two versions of its documentary on 9/11, one being a balanced example of investigative journalism and the other a sophisticated hit piece. According to a leading UK 9/11 truth activist, recently appointed US chief Garth Ancier is pressuring the corporation to air the version that portrays the 9/11 truth movement as a fringe cult of mythology in a bid to protect BBC's American market.

Yesterday we reported on the allegations of those interviewed for the show that the documentary was set to be a debunking effort, with the intention of relegating important questions in favor of nebulous and damaging theories. This story garnered massive readership after being featured on the front page of Digg, a user generated content phenomenon that gets more traffic than the Drudge Report.

In a follow up story, we highlighted how the BBC was using promotional material, including a psychological conspiracy test and an interview with X Files producer Frank Spotnitz, to imply that 9/11 truthers were borderline cult members with psychological problems.

In a new development, Ian R. Crane, Chairman of the 9/11 Truth Campaign for the UK and Ireland, claims a source told him that producers Mike Rodin and Guy Smith have edited two different versions of the show and are in a quandary as to whether to air the balanced piece or the hit piece.

Crane's claims are printed in full at the Cremation of Care website.

It appears that the dilemma is a direct result of the phenomenal reaction to the recent flurry of 9/11 related items appearing in the National Media," writes Crane. "The debate kicked off with the publication of George Monbiot’s ill-researched hit-piece on Loose Change, the most downloaded video in the history of Google Video. Any casual observer perusing the responses posted on the Guardian website, could not fail to notice that the remarkable difference in style between those who leapt to the defence of the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) and those were seeking answers to the glaring anomalies between the OCT and the physical evidence. The vapid vitriol from the defenders of orthodoxy was no match for the measured curiosity of the Truth seekers."

In addition, Crane cites the UK Daily Mail article as another example of a fair hearing for 9/11 truth and one that angered those with a stake in maintaining the official myth. Yet another large British newspaper, Scotland's Herald, also today featured a positive write up of the 9/11 truth movement.

Crane claims that the new head of the BBC's commercial operations in the US, former Fox senior executive Garth Ancier (pictured above), is the point man in persuading program directors to air the hit piece, fearing that a more balanced appraisal would anger corporate partners and sales across the Atlantic.

"Newly responsible for the marketing of BBC productions in the US, Ancier is no doubt claiming that he will not be able to maximize revenues if the BBC is seen to be running programmes, however balanced, intimating that 9/11 might have been an inside job. From personal experience of operating within the US industrial complex, it is not beyond the realms of probability that Ancier is waving mega$ incentives if the Beeb agrees to run the hit-piece. As Princeton graduate and an initiate of the Phi Beta Kappa fraternity, serious pressure will be being put on Ancier to get the Beeb to ‘play ball’," writes Crane.

If past examples are anything to go by, it's likely that the hit piece will be chosen because the previous installment in the series, an investigation into questions surrounding the death of Princess Diana, was widely acknowledged as a whitewash that toed the official line.

Besides the X Files interview and the psychological test, BBC's promotional material for the show has been both extensive and reasonably balanced. A summary article of the 9/11 truth movement lent implicit credibility to 9/11 skeptics, and an online unedited clip of Alex Jones and Jim Marrs at Dealy Plaza was absent the usual condemnation and ridicule seen in mainstream coverage many times before.

The fact that the promotional trailers do not prominently feature any debunkers (besides a poorly spoken woman who is presumably used to rubbish the Jewish conspiracy angle), suggests that the show will either be a fair representation or the more likely scenario, that the BBC will employ the familiar tactic of using a sneering female narrator to arrogantly attack the carefully edited words of the skeptics and obsessively focus on tenuous issues while ignoring the hardcore evidence.

GET ACTIVE: Populate the BBC's Conspiracy Files blog and encourage the BBC to represent real investigative journalism and air the balanced version. Click here and leave your comments.

Isn't the answer obvious?

Tell the truth. Report the facts. That is, after all, the media's job isn' t it?

"So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies."

Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton


Uped in three sentences........AMEN

Find out if two versions exist first...

This I believe was first mentioned [ HERE ]


Bit of news for you all;
A contact of mine in C4, tells me that there are TWO DIFFERENT EDITS of this program!!!

He says the BBC still have not decided which one to air

If there are two versions, then obviously something is seriously wrong, but I have given up on knee-jerk reactions and think we need to know the state of play before we burn them at the stake.

If you do call / email them, keep it simple and to the point, just ask them to "confirm or deny" the existence of two edits of this weekends 9/11 Conspiracy Files.

Best wishes and good luck


Link to Editor's BLOG... [ HERE ]

Proposed Timeline... [ HERE ]

Hopefully, a BBC insider will...

....leak the "balanced" (it remains to be seen that it is) version to the Internet....

BBC Editor might be on Alex Jones' Radio Show (3rd hr)

Alex has expanded on the "Two versions"...

Might be one version for UK audience and a watered down version for North American audience...

If I hear anything on AJ's show will post it...

Best wishes

Can listen to AJ show by "File / Open" in your media player (real player works fine) on
(might need to "right click / copy shortcut")

UPDATE: From Alex Jones...

Alex has just spoken to the Producer: Guy Smith...

There is only "ONE" version !!!

He will be on Alex's show on Monday for 1 hour.

Best wishes and fingers crossed !!!

He will be on Today after 2pm EST

On the Alex Jones radio show. After 2pm EST

Not from what I am hearing...

and that's LIVE on AJ's show in the last few minutes !!!

So I guess that means Ian

So I guess that means Ian Crane made up the two versions story then?

Email from Guy Smith...

Thank you for your email about 9/11: The Conspiracy Files.

I would like to assure you that reports on the internet that we have made two alternative versions of this documentary for broadcast on BBC TV are not true.

There is only one version – and that will be broadcast this coming Sunday, 18th February, at 9:00pm on BBC Two.

I do hope you find the programme of interest.

Yours sincerely

Guy Smith


9/11 The Conspiracy Files

Great job man! These clowns

Great job man! These clowns like Shayler and Ian Crane who've manage to associate themselves with UK 9/11 Truth should'nt be in "leadership" positions. It's a nightmare when you work so hard to build credibility for the issue, only to have some imbecilic individual start talking about “no planes and holograms”, “crop circles”, “mankind being made by aliens”, “lizard men running the planet” and all the other mad bullshit. Enough is enough.

I'm so sick of this crap,

I'm so sick of this crap, this guy Ian Crane, the quote "leader of the 9/11 Truth Campaign for the UK and Ireland", is WORSE THAN DAVID ICKE!

Look at this crazy shit;

I am so disheartened by these complete credibility destroying fools calling themselves "leaders", where are the people who understand how difficult it is already to convince people without lumping in a bunch of insane bullshit.

Who elected Ian Crane?

What's going on over there?

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

all must be

eternally vigilant and sharp as knives. Competent and irresistable. Credibility (as DBLS identified), must be our shibboleth. ?