Google Video of BBC's 'Conspiracy Files' on 9/11


223MB XViD AVI - Requires XViD plug
217MB WMV | 252MB MP4 | 1.3GB AVI

Please note that there are currently torrents available here and here, and that we should be hosting a downloadable version of the show later this evening as well.

Update: Added downloadable XViD AVI version
Update: Added downloadable WMV and MP4 versions

Thanks BigBrother for the heads up!

I just skimmed it, but...

It doesn't look like they talked at all about the twin towers, explosions there, molten steel, speed of collapse, etc. Their treatment of building 7 was laughable. Basically just show it collapsing and have some random kid say "I can see how they may think it was, but it wasn't."

Then, they say the report still hasn't come out after 5 years but that "they expect"it will support their original (low probability of occurence" theory.

Hahahaa. Hahhh...

This thing will only help to comfort the holdouts. They will also be able to say "the BBC debunked everything". Just like they said "NOVA and Popular Mechanics debunked everything!"

Haa hee hee ho ho.

And like, the BBC is so credible! Just listen to the voice over! It's in British!

I can't wait til someone tries to use this to support their belief in the OCT, or to convince others. After an honest person watches this next to Improbable Collpase and 911 Mysteries, they will see what a hack job it is. I can see why the perps think it might help though. Uncle Fetzer, Alex Jones, and Dylan Avery are simply not the same as David Ray Griffin, Kevin Ryan, Willie Rodriguez, and Steven Jones.

The aforementioned are a discredited shill, a shrill showman, and an amateur sleuth/filmmaker. The fact that BBC selects them instead of the others I mentioned is very telling.

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

It is one thing to diss

It is one thing to diss Fetzer, but calling Alex Jones a "shrill showman"? That isn't cool.

Keep in mind these people have feelings too, the last thing we need is to discourage people like Alex Jones or Dylan Avery. Sure I personally have disagreements with them here and there, but nowhere near the level of Fetzer.

Shrill showman

kinda fits the bill. That doesn't mean Alex Jones' work isn't worthwhile - it is. It just means that you feel all-too negative connotations with "shrill" and "showman". Shrill gets attention, as does show.

And if Alex Jones would be the least bit discouraged by words like these, he certainly would have quit long ago, as would Dylan Avery.

Just my 0.2$...

Alex is sincere

I agree with your assessment that Alex is not a "shrill showman." I've listened to him enough now to believe he is extremely genuine about his desire to protect our country from becoming a police state. He runs the most professional news site, completely sourced from reputable news sources, of anybody in the 9/11 truth movement. He's on the air 17 hours a week, regularly produces many documentaries, runs several websites, and works harder doing that, for relatively little compensation, than anybody else I know. It seems absolutely crazy to me to attack Alex Jones for being a showman. He brought some much needed sanity to the BBC "documentary." I thought he came across very well, other than the shouting at the podium that the BBC intentionally took out of context. You can't blame Alex for being passionate about his work though. True Americans should be shouting about governmental abuses of power, regardless of whether it is politically or socially fashionable. In my humble opinion, the other guests would be wise to learn from the way Alex presented himself: humble, focused, and solemn.

The problem with Jones

is the problem with Dylan Avery: yes, he does promote 9/11 Truth, but he often stretches facts, or promotes insinuation as fact.

I think RT is right: I would prefer Griffin and Jones as spokespeople. There's a good reason the msm likes Alex Jones, Avery, Fetzer, Reynolds, even Kevin Barrett: While they all promote credible forms of 9/11 Truth, they also in one way or another tend to exaggerate on occasion, or, in the case of Fetzer & Co., simply make false claims.

An observation of that kind is not meant to demean their value as activists (at least not all of the ones I mentioned); rather, it's meant to acknowledge that the msm chooses to feature the advocates who offer the most fodder for debunking.

This movement would be nothing without Loose Change. But most of this movement's most obvious problems also emanate from Loose Change. The Final Cut is our last chance to make it right before Bush leaves office and no one cares anymore.

Alex Jones is also a culture

Alex Jones is also a culture warrior for the Christian right. He has toned this aspect of his work down lately to some degree. However he regularly posts articles by a misogynist who has a blog called "save the males". Feminazis anyone? Alex Jones supports the anti-abortion movement and is against civil rights for gays as well. Finally, check out Alex Jones website in the week prior to Halloween for some truly hysterical fundamentalist propaganda. He is literally a 21st century witch hunter.

I am glad that someone is teaching paleoconservatives about 9/11 truth. Certainly they are not going to be listening to liberals of any sort. However, to me, a world run by Alex Jones' flock would be even more bleak than the NWO, it would be a dark age indeed. Under the NWO, I might survive by avoiding buildings owned by Larry Silverstein. Under the theocracy Alex Jones wants, I would be hunted down and burnt alive as a heretic.

agreed, alek

I left that out, because I knew I was already in for a few down arrows with what I said... ;-)

Sure, Jones pretends to be neither liberal nor conservative, but he is a born again Christian and promotes some of the same nonsense.

I commend him for raging against the globalist elites, and some may say his occasional bending of fact is just "what it takes" to confront the NWO. Maybe. I guess I hope we can replace the globalist order without exploiting religious superstition the way it does now.

maybe AJ feels confronting the "New World Order"

is like being crucified.

;-)

/////////////////////
911dvds@gmail.com - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

ha.

Good on ya Alek! Its very important and a bit sobering to remember that we share this movement with extreme right-wing so-called "Christian" fundamentalists. I think that's a part of what gives the so-called left gatekeepers the shits about signing on. Right wing truthers do want conspiracy theory WITHOUT the analyses of institutionalized injustice that the radical left have forged in the wake of the critiques of capitalism of Marx and the Frankfurt School. I guess they must think that capitalism is just fine, right? As long as those at the upper echelons of capitalist political and economic institutions don't abuse their power and start conspiring to commit murder, everything is hunky dory. That must be the line, right? Otherwise in what sense are such people on the right? Who ever heard of a political conservative with a solid critique of the contradictions inherent in capitalist political economy? And if that's the line, leftist truthers are sharing the 9/11 truth bed with some very alien bedfellows! Chomsky and his ilk have some good reasons to be suspicious of a movement that throws together folks with such radically diverging visions of the good life (though that doesn't justify him in refusing to examine the evidence!) Commentators like Jones and Webster Tarpley very shrewdly and calculatedly play their political cards close to their chests in order to be stars of a bipartisan truth movement. They know if they started to flash their cards a good part of their audience would be instantly alienated. As if politics don't matter to the Truth!

These comments are bizarre

Alex Jones an "extreme right-wing so-called Christian fundamentalist?"

Do any of you listen to AJS?

'As if the truth doesn't matter to politics' is more like it

Continuing to flack for the official story doesn't say much for one's politics, however much merit these might seem to have otherwise.

Likewise, calling out the government and the media for their lies about 9/11 speaks well for one politically, however wrongheaded he/she may be on other matters.

This is especially so in view of the fact (which I hope I wouldn't have to persuade anyone of here!) that acceptance of the official 9/11 myth is what gives these bastards carte blanche to commit outrage after outrage. Take that away, their power would quickly unravel.

'Chomsky and his ilk have some good reasons to be suspicious of a movement that throws together folks with such radically diverging visions of the good life (though that doesn't justify him in refusing to examine the evidence!)'

But you see, all it really takes to be a part of this movement is to do that which Chomsky refuses to do--examine the evidence and cease believing in the Big Lie, and cease encouraging others to believe in it. It doesn't require you to exchange any of your other political beliefs for those which you do not agree with. So, no, I don't see that 'Chomsky and his ilk' have any 'good reasons' to be suspicious of a movement that emerged (it wasn't just 'throw[n] together', as you say!) through people of otherwise divergent political beliefs applying basic critical thought processes to the core myth of our time.

It is not uncommon for events and controversies that are of truly historic proportions to have effects like those we observe with respect to 9/11--former friends dividing bitterly from one another, and suddenly finding themselves in alliance with people they had been accustomed to thinking of as foes. Existing patterns of alliance that prevailed in quieter times crumble, and people get a chance to see who really means it when they say they hate injustice and crimes in high places, and who has simply been posturing to this effect. Basic personal qualities of honesty and integrity come to matter more than purported ideological affinities.

And regarding Alek Hiddell's comment:

'Under the NWO, I might survive by avoiding buildings owned by Larry Silverstein. Under the theocracy Alex Jones wants, I would be hunted down and burnt alive as a heretic.'

If you think buildings owned by Silverstein are all you have to worry about with this bunch, think again! The Neocons are acolytes of Leo Strauss, whose vision was dark and Orwellian indeed; makes Machiavelli look like a choirboy by comparison. These are people who, if they were to read O'Brien's remarks to Winston Smith in '1984' that the future will amount to 'a boot stamping on a human face, forever,' would likely pump their fist and go 'awwwrighttt!!'

I expect I would disagree with a lot of Alex Jones' opinions, but I have heard him speak forcefully in defense of the Bill of Rights, which is the exact opposite of what a 'theocrat,' properly understood, would do.

Well...

that all sounds good and nice and everything. And I agree that its an interesting and provocative experience for those of us who see unconstrained capitalism as THE monolithic obstacle to global justice to find ourselves in alliance with folks whose politics lean to the extreme right. But its also a suspicious and uncomfortable position to find ourselves in. After the 9/11 scandal is exposed and its perpetrators brought to justice, then we will be forced to realize very smartly that our right-wing former allies have a very different vision than we do of the path toward real global justice. At that point they'll be only too eager to show their political cards. And those cards emphatically won't include the reconstruction of a healthy welfare state, let alone the radical transformation of capitalist political economy toward some form of socialism with a human face (a socialism that has learnt the hard lessons of the Soviet misadventure). Rather, the rallying cry will be "less government, more freedom in the marketplace [the only sort of freedom imagined by the far right], more traditional [read repressive, patriarchal] values, ..." If we're not open-eyed now about the political vision of those we've made a pragmatic, tactical alliance with, we're in for a very rude awakening when it comes time to sit down together to imagine a better world!

So no civil rights for gays

So no civil rights for gays and not being able to kill fetuses is just as bad as a huge slave grid with elites ruling and watching over our every move?

Why do so many people knock on AJ? He's the best warrior we have. Who cares if he adds Christianity to his show? That's his choice, it's his show. I'm not religious whatsoever but I have ZERO problem with other people wanting to be.

Stop hating and start a radio show that you think you can do better than AJ.

I'm sure he wants you to start your own show and be better than his!

Alex Jones

Well said, Benthere.

I agree with you completely about your assessment of Jones. It sounds like he works his butt off with very little monetary return.

I can't believe people put him down. In my opinion he is at the fore front of 911 truth and at the front line in this war against the NWO.

I agree he is super intense. I see nothing wrong with this. I think it proves he is a human being.

Look at Guy Smith, BBC shill. I didn't hear one bit of frustration out of him or emotion in the 15 minutes I listened to him. I wondered if the guy was a robot or something. And Guy is a disinfo man. Smooth as they come. Just the kind of guy that sheeple would believe. Always retreating back to his main general shill point, escaping the factual hand grenades that Jones, Avery and Watson were throwing at him.

I give 100 thumbs up for Alex and think his radio broadcast is a great service to the citizens of the US and a definite thorn to the neo-cons/financiers/war for profit(pharmaceuticals bunch.

Keep up the excellent work Alex !!

C'mon RT...

The BBC probably realizes that if they don't attempt to directly discredit these particular person's because of their notariety that their hit piece would be wholey transparent to even the most loyal (lost?) adherents of the OTC. Heck, such transparency would even have the potential to convert even the gooniest in the goon squads.

One certainly has to wonder just who has been putting just what in Fetzer's water since last summer. But, Alex... a shrill showman? That's not a compliment RT.

I believe, no I know, that Alex has done more than any one individual to expose the globalist agenda. Sensational multimedia? You bet. It's a sensational story and one that has to compete with sensational non-news for attention. (Britney just shaved her head, y'know.) Sensationalism sells. It had better be sensational to drag Bubba away from NASCAR long enough for him to discover that he is a "tool of the government and industry, too."

And, unless some sleuth proves otherwise, Alex has done all of this with the resources he has been able to build from his own individual efforts alone. I don't see the Ford Foundation pumping money into his coffers for truth. Many choose to discredit Alex claiming his is just another get rich scheme. How do you get rich encouraging others to copy and redistribute the same material you have for sale?

I just watched Police State 2000 again last night. It's amazing what he was exposing in 2000 that is still hidden truth seven years later. If Alex were less "shrill" than he is, it is likely that you would still be more accepting of the 9/11 OTC than you are today and less aware of the globalist's agenda and their daily actions.

Dylan an amatuer sleuth? Well, what are you then? Or the rest of us, for that matter? How many of us ever envisioned our lives taking the path of a sleuth to the extent that we have before 9/11. Maybe you meant that as a compliment to Dylan, yourself, and the rest of us? At least Dylan is willing to re-edit his work to improve accuracy. LC wil never be perfect. However, I expect:

LCFC > LCSE > LC

LCFC to be "more perfect" than LCSE and LC, and will be very unhappy if not. We need the the boost LCFC has potential to offer. Heck, we need all we can get.

I appreciate what you have done at WTCdemolition.com. Really! I am being sincere. But, tell me, just who is/are WTCdemolition.com and why does WTCdemolition.com need "Whois Protection Service"? Who or what iz u afraid uv, anyway? Will you get kicked out of Haaahvad if discovered?

When you finish your first film that brings us more of the "Real Truth", please let me know. I anxiously await ALL new films that attempt to bring us the "Real Truth". And I'm sure that it will be a good one. After all, you've had all the mistakes and shortcomings of so many others before you to learn from by now. Should I assume that you will be proud enough to put your real name on it?

--
The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001

great discussion!

I knew "shrill showman" would spark some debate.

There are a few things I wish AJ would do differently, but that's beside the fact that he is not the best person to take the story of 9/11 to the mainstream. He has his style, and he is entitled to it. But if I had to pick someone to convince anygiven person it would be David Griffin. Period. Hands down.

As far as Loose Change goes, I give Dylan et al credit for making a cool film, the first I felt like showing to people as an introduction. That said, it received a lot more attention from the mainstream press than any previous effort, which I find interesting. To say that the movement would be nowhere without Loose Change is simply false. The movement would have produced other documentaries after Painful Deceptions, In Plane Site, and before 9/11 Mysteries: Demolitions. And "Screw Loose Change" would not exist.

As for me and my website, please note that I made it because I think everyone who can SHOULD lay out their position and opinions as part of a shared network of knowledge and information. This is in keeping with my faith in decentralization, in numbers, not individuals. In methods that are not easily coopted and/or set up to be knocked down. I can afford (its not hard) to run it without ads, and I don't believe in self-promotion--I don't want to be "the next Dylan Avery" or some such. What's important is my analysis as it fits into a broad and diverse effort. As for Harvard not liking what I do, it's a non-issue. I can't be fired for expressing my opinions on important issues. Nor do I make a secret of it. I have written Deans and Presidents on the subject of 9/11, and will continue to do so.

As for my work, you'd have to loof for it to see it, since I don't do much by way of marketing (my work is all non-commercial, file it under political art and agitprop if you will). Google boston AND antiwar in google video and the first two films you'll find are mine. Nothing special, just one guy's expression from inside the antiwar movement. I would be pickled tink if AJ were to take some time on his show to return the favor and critique my work. But I won't hold my breath. I'm a nobody, and would like to stay that way.

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

coming clean?

Are you saying that you didn't really mean what you said about AJ and DA?

I knew "shrill showman" would spark some debate.

So, you figured that 911blogger readers need to spend their time debating Alex Jones?

But if I had to pick someone to convince anygiven person it would be David Griffin. Period. Hands down.

So, when you do your next antiwar film, get DRG then. Guy Smith supposedly shot 20+ hours of video with AJ. Three minutes, maybe, were used. Maybe he shot X hours of interview(s) with DRG and 0 minutes were used. i dunno. do you? Al I know for sure is that it was a hit piece.

To say that the movement would be nowhere without Loose Change is simply false.

Who said that? Oh, that was in another thread. It is quite possible though, that 911truth might only be a short distance from nowhere if not for LC. I don't have a reverse crystal ball.

The movement would have produced other documentaries after Painful Deceptions, In Plane Site, and before 9/11 Mysteries: Demolitions.

OK, maybe. But we have what we have. So, deal with what is and quit speculating on what will never be. BTW: The movement doesn't produce videos, RT. Individuals do. Movements may provide impetus and momentum, however.

And "Screw Loose Change" would not exist.

Who cares?

I don't want to be "the next Dylan Avery" or some such.

Good. Just be RT. This ain't rock 'n roll in search of a big hit single with a bullet on the chart.

I can't be fired for expressing my opinions on important issues.

I'm sure that Steven Jones thought the same at one time, too.

I have written Deans and Presidents on the subject of 9/11, and will continue to do so.

Care to share the responses you've received from these deans and presidents?

As for my work, you'd have to loof for it to see it, since I don't do much by way of marketing (my work is all non-commercial, file it under political art and agitprop if you will). Google boston AND antiwar in google video and the first two films you'll find are mine. Nothing special, just one guy's expression from inside the antiwar movement.

Yeah, I can't wait til I get my own mini camcorder so I can make zoom zooms and be on google and youtube. I might even get lucky and get 50 or 60 views if I put "bikini" or "skateboard" or "owned" or "dude" in the description. kewl!

I would be pickled tink if AJ were to take some time on his show to return the favor and critique my work. But I won't hold my breath. I'm a nobody, and would like to stay that way.

Does AJ really owe you a favor? Frankly, I really hope that Alex just sticks to what he does already and keep bringing us the latest on the handywork of the NWO.

Pay it forward. Send him a complimentary set of you Real Evildoer cards. Maybe he'll place a big advance bulk order and sell them in the infowars shop.

--
The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001

Don't digg it but comment on this upcoming digg story !

It may become popular soon:
http://digg.com/world_news/9_11_Conspiracy_theories_debunked_by_the_BBC

You can use this site to debunk the BBC's hit piece:
http://debunking-bbc.blogspot.com/

Read the last genius on this Earth: http://www.notbored.org/debord.html

Debunker gets blown away by simple question

http://www.truthcult.com./goyette_coburn_interview.html

Here's a clip from a Charles Goyette interview with Davin Coburn of Popular Mechanics. The page then directs viewers to the 9/11 Press for Truth site.

We all need to take a deep breath and not be suprised that the Main Stream Media is going to portray us all as nuts (Ad Hominem attack meets the Strawman with the Red Herring).

The denial mechanism that protects us from the maddening reality of our fragility also sometimes blinds us to the lights of the oncoming train.

Peace!

Just commented...

These opportunities to present our case are valuable, take the time to comment and even more important vote on the comments lest the message gets buried by an organized effort.

priceless ;-)

priceless ;-)

that's one to bookmark

Thank you.

The topic is over 1000 diggs now, chime in! Meanwhile, my initial comment is at -14 diggs...chime in!^^

Who of you has heard the term "astroturfed"?

OT- Press for truth

This may be more for John Gold, but anyone who can feel free to answer.

I have a friend who would like to pass out DVD's for friends, I suggested PFT. He was asking me if there is a web site or how he would copy it to DVD.

Can anyone answer this?

Regards

Here's how:

1. You can download a version of it from video google that will look pretty good -- not quite dvd quality but more like vhs.

2. Then you need software to convert it into the right kind of file for dvds. Although there are some freeware programs, you can get the more professional ones from bittorrent sites. I use "TMPGEnc Plus 2.5".

3. Then you need software to create the dvd structure -- menus or whatever. This is kind of like making a PowerPoint presentation. I use "DVD-lab PRO", a semi-professional program I got from a bittorrent download.

4. Then you will need software to burn the results of step 3 to the disk. Probably you already have that -- it would have come with the DVD drive. "Nero", probably.

5. The softwares I mentioned for steps 2 and 3 have a bit of a learning curve. There are also "1 step" solutions, but they don't give much control over menus, file size and quality, etc. I use the ones I mentioned because I like to put several movies on one dvd, and you pretty much have to have a menu, at least. A widely available on bittorrent "one step" program is "WinAVI", which has the advantage of being able to convert many types of video files as well as making a "quick and dirty" DVD structure. I just tested it with an avi file of PFT from video.google and it worked fine.

6. An alternative method, which will give you all the original menus that come with the "store bought" version of the movie with almost the same quality as the original, is to:

a) actually buy a copy of the DVD.

b) Then use software to copy the whole DVD to your computer while cracking the anti-copy protection. I use "DVDDecrypter" for this. It was freeware, but is now only available, I think, on bittorrent.

c) You may have to "shrink" the DVD down to single layer size, because many professionally made dvds are so long, what with 'extras', etc., that they take up so much room that they use a technology called "double layer." The "shrinking" software makes smaller files with hardly a noticeable loss in quallity. Certainly it will be better than a dvd made from video google's file. I use "CloneDVD2" for this, again from bittorrent.

d) Then you just need to burn the "shrunk" dvd. The second method is much easier, although it still takes a while to get the hang of it, and some dvds are harder to "crack" than others.

You can see that I haven't found a completely non-pirated way to use either method, although I think there are probably some freeware programs to do the first method.

The "Step 5" method above is probably the easiest. Here are some links to get you going:

PFT: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250
Download video google as "avi" file: http://keepvid.com/
good bittorrent program: http://www.utorrent.com/
WinAVI torrent: http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3594382/WinAVI_7.7_with_Keygen

Good luck and have fun!

Fred W

All Truth Passes Thoough 4 stages

First, they ignore you.
Second, the laugh at you.
Third, they attack you.
Fourth, we win.

This is a variation from a quote by Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 - 1860) who said:

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

These attack pieces should be seen for what they are: Evidence that we are having a tremendous effect. Keep up the hard work everyone!

I think we are in the

I think we are in the process of moving from the 2nd phase to the 3rd phase.

News editor at The Watchman Report, www.watchmanreport.com, delivering 9/11 truth to the Christian community

The MSM still hasn't come to

The MSM still hasn't come to grips with the power of the internet. The biggest democratizing force since the printing press and they're still up to the same old hackneyed tricks. These "debunking" exercises can themselves be debunked within a matter of hours, making the mediawhores appear ridiculous or even complicit (which of course they are). With every attempt at quashing the truth they simply dig thesmelves into a deeper pit. An intelligent propagandinst would, at this point, realize how precarious his situation is and at least offer a semblance of objectivity. No one looked kindly on Goebbels when the Nazis fell.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

I can't understand...

Why they are helping to supress the truth. Don't they get that a story as big as what really happened on 9/11 can not be covered up forever? Can't they imagine what will happen to them as a result of their role in the cover-up?
The Eleventh Day of Every Month

I believe

they simply caved in to current pressure instead of considering future pressure. Human nature...

this is KEY, Zach!

People and groups are making decisions based on what they think they can get away with. The producers of this garbage must think that either the truth will never become common knowledge, or that even if it does, they won't be held accountable for their role. They may claim that for all they knew, they made a fair documentary. As long as they have PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY, i.e. the ability to realistically deny that they knew what they were doing (trying to suppress the truth) they think they are protected, legally at least.

Part of our job as truthers should be to a) warn people that we will not forget who said and did what to help the coverup and b) to follow up those warnings by holding people to account.

This approach will hopefully encourage people to think carefully before they author a hit piece, and of course ensure that justice is done when the time comes. Even if we can't nail them legally, we can make sure that the shame of having conspired to deny the truth and obstruct justice will follow and taint them for the rest of their lives.

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

It's OK

It's obvious that BBC can't say "Bush killed 3000 U.S. citizens".
This program advertised name of "Loose Change" and "Alex Jones".
Now, people can start own research by them self.

They don't have to say anything.

Just present the facts in an honest, unbiased manner. Like pointing out that not all the 911 Families buy the 'official conspiracy theory' and throwing in a few PFT clips. Picking on Alex Jones will get them no where fast. Say what you will about Alex, he's been nothing but an inspiration & huge benefit to the truth.

2nd to 3rd phase indeed...

Check these out:
==========================================
Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Limited
All Rights Reserved
The Times (London)

February 19, 2007, Monday

SECTION: FEATURES; Times2; Pg. 23

LENGTH: 771 words

HEADLINE: How to sidekick a man when he's down

BYLINE: Tim Teeman

BODY:
(....)
Now, did a plane really crash into the Pentagon? Was the World Trade Centre primed to explode? Did Flight 93 not really crash but land somewhere else and its passengers were abducted as part of a sinister plot? Yes? Believe all that? Then The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 (BBC Two, Sunday) was a real treat. Immediate signs that this was going to support slavishly all the outlandish conspiracy theories around 9/11 were dismissed by the documentary's cogent, and well-researched, deconstruction of each bonkers supposition.

Maybe one of the contributors, a former X Files writer, had a point when he said conspiracy theories flourished because we cannot bear the fact that a small group of maniacs could be responsible for such devastation. Yet, hmmm, that crater in the ground Flight 93 made was a little shallow for such a big plane...and the hole in the Pentagon was quite small...and the World Trade Centre did collapse very cleanly. The programme seemed to suggest that the truth is not as wild as the conspiracy theorists would have us believe, though significantly more complex than the official version.
(....)
LOAD-DATE: February 19, 2007
==========================================
Copyright 2007 Guardian Newspapers Limited
All Rights Reserved
The Guardian (London)

February 19, 2007 Monday

SECTION: GUARDIAN FEATURES PAGES; Pg. 31

LENGTH: 795 words

HEADLINE: Nancy Banks-Smith Morse's old sidekick flounders badly in this tale of murder, stolen glands and phone sex

BODY:
(....)
At half past two in the morning I heard Guy Smith, the producer of 9/11: The Conspiracy Files (Sunday, BBC2), patiently explaining his programme on a phone-in show. If you are looking for conspiracy theorists, half past two in the morning is certainly the time to find them.

It is remarkable how many conspiracy theories have flourished in the smoking ruins of the World Trade Centre like fireweed growing rampantly on bomb sites. This programme was scrupulously researched and patient, to the point of saintliness. For instance, when Flight 93, the only one not to reach its target, nosedived into Shanksville, Wally Miller, the local coroner, said there were no bodies. He should know. He is the local undertaker. However, the conspiracy theory grew that the plane never crashed and the passengers had been abducted. The programme had a word with Wally. Flanked by coffins, he was phlegmatic about his unsought notoriety. "There's not a lot you can do about it. I'm not gonna get coronary heart disease over it."

The truly disconcerting thing is how readily people believe that their government is lying. Frank Spotnitz, who wrote the archetypal conspiracy theory series, The X-Files, and, six months before the attack, a television drama about a government plot to fly a plane into the World Trade Centre, said, "One of our first instincts is that we are being lied to." Mark you, this is nothing new. Claude Cockburn, or some equally venerable journalist, said he approached any politician with the proviso, "Why is this bastard lying to me?"
(....)
LOAD-DATE: February 18, 2007
==========================================
Copyright 2007 Newspaper Publishing PLC
All Rights Reserved
Independent Extra

February 19, 2007 Monday
First Edition

SECTION: EXTRA; Pg. 22

LENGTH: 832 words

HEADLINE: The truth movement is losing the plot;
The Weekend's TV;
9/11: THE CONSPIRACY FILES BBC2;
WAKING THE DEAD BBC1

BYLINE: Thomas Sutcliffe

BODY:

It's intriguing to compare the conversational tone of conspirators and their opponents. The latter tend to adopt a faintly bemused tone when discussing the wilder theories of the former, sometimes shrugging haplessly, often rueful at the folly of their fellow man but rarely angry - even when they've actually been accused of complicity in mass murder themselves. They know there's little point losing their temper and, indeed, not much point in contradicting nonsense with plain fact. They understand that the world is an imperfect place, and that the lunatic fringe is one of its drawbacks.

The conspirators on the other hand - represented in strength in 9/11: the Conspiracy Files - get absolutely furious at the thought of contradiction. For them the world is not messy - it is an occult piece of clockwork. There is no historical equivalent of the stepped-on garden rake, there are only plots, and those who fail to acknowledge them will always fall under suspicion of being in on it from the beginning. Point out a gaping hole in their pet theory and they simply spot a site ripe for future development. "That's a very intriguing question," said one of the 9/11 nutjobs in Guy Smith's film, when asked where the passengers from United 93 had actually ended up if it wasn't in a smoking crater in the Pennsylvania woods. And those poignant last phone calls from doomed relatives? Faked by the government using stolen voice samples, apparently.

The internet, that Petri dish for lunacy, has provided the perfect growth medium for this kind of nonsense, allowing the instant promulgation of the half-truths on which conspirators thrive. In the case of Dylan Avery, the creator of the internet documentary Loose Change, it has also made him a celebrity, no longer an anonymous dropout but a man who can lead a television crew through the office where he is currently re-editing Loose Change for cinema release. In classic conspiracy style, his film takes the loose ends and frayed edges that are characteristic of all unexpected events and, with a deft bit of lap-top macramé, shapes them into a scandal. He does not take kindly to having the defects in his argument pointed out. Told that a study by Popular Mechanics had concluded that the official report on the collapse of the Twin Towers was consistent with both the facts and the physics he got very waspish: "Their authority is tractors, right? They should stick to what they know." Dylan, in common with many of his colleagues in the conspiracy world, knows less than nothing and, in fact, their approach to technical matters is so sloppily indifferent to elementary science that you wouldn't even trust them to wire a plug for you. But that doesn't dent their serene conviction that only they understand the cogs and linkages that truly work the world.

Some of these beliefs are merely sad and are driven by the desire that the true perpetrators didn't actually immolate themselves in the attacks but are still out there somewhere, accessible to justice. Other theories, though, are straightforwardly bad, such as the often repeated assertion that 4,000 Jewish employees stayed away from the World Trade Center on the day of the attacks. The origin of this fiction was instructive about how such rumours get started. A Jerusalem newspaper reported that it was estimated that 4,000 Israelis had been in the New York and Washington areas on the day of the attack. This was repeated as 4,000 Israelis surviving and then as 4,000 Jews from the World Trade Center surviving. That fantasy then spread on Middle Eastern websites and has ever since remained impervious to the verifiable fact that many Jewish people died in the Twin Towers. You'd call it Chinese whispers, but for the fact that the distortions are often deliberate. Blood libel would come closer to the truth.

I did think that Waking the Dead might offer an antidote to such dangerous delusions, trading, as it does, in the entirely candid paranoia of the detective story, where there always is more than meets the eye. The story this week concerned the murder of a young Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany in London in 1945, apparently by a woman who had worked as Josef Mengele's pilot and had escaped to Britain as the war ended. Curious about whether this woman had actually existed (since her notional employer certainly did) I looked up "Mengele's pilot" on Google, only to discover a website uncovering the fact that the CIA and the FBI are part of Hitler's Fourth Reich, that George Bush Senior is in on the plot and that Mengele himself was San Francisco's notorious Zodiac killer. Even worse, Barbara Bush is sitting on the patents for an energy-saving electric car designed by Nikola Tesla and, in some way I didn't fully understand, all this is connected to the Curious George children's books. It is, quite obviously, the work of an utterly deranged mind. I think the 9/11 truth movement should check it out. There might be something there they could stir into the mix.

LOAD-DATE: February 19, 2007
==========================================

Wow they're really running

Wow they're really running with it in the British press. Amazing they'd hatch their wagons to such a shoddy piece of disinformation. Smell that? It's desperation. There's no excuse at this point for any "journalist" to be ignorant of the basic facts of the day. Methinks this is gonna blow up in their faces big time and give yet another boost to the truth movement. This kind of garbage may have had some marginal effect a few years ago in suppressing the truth but the cat is already out of the bag. You can't label half of your readership "nuts". We sholud use this documentary as a case study of propaganda techniques. I hope Alex Jones or someone else makes a film of it.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

And there's another one...

Copyright 2007 EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS
All Rights Reserved
The Express

February 19, 2007 Monday
U.K. 1st Edition

SECTION: TV1; 41

LENGTH: 552 words

HEADLINE: Conspiracy of nonsense;
TV EXPRESS Matt Baylis on the weekend's TV

BYLINE: TV EXPRESS EDITED BY CHARLOTTE CIVIL Matt Baylis

BODY:

I'VE always mistrusted drugs - ever since I shared a flat with a man who believed they expanded his consciousness.

He also believed that The Magic Roundabout contained subliminal messages, that if you turned a certain brand of cigarettes upside down it revealed an anti-semitic slogan, and that all the Moon landings were faked. He saw, by the way, no connection at all between the various bits of hogwash he believed and all the drugs he'd taken.

But perhaps, as 9/11: THE CONSPIRACY FILES (Sunday, BBC2) suggested, some people just love to believe anything. There exists, in the US, a sizeable body of people who believe the 9/11 attacks were not the work of Al-Qaeda, but were staged by the American government in order to justify steaming into the Middle East and nicking all the oil. They say that the hole made as a jet plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon was not big enough to have been made by a jet plane.

And they claim that one of the hijacked planes was shot down by the US Air Force.

Interestingly, they also manage to believe that the same air force deliberately ignored the hijacked jet planes - in other words, they believe two completely contradictory things at the same time, which is quite a feat.

This programme did a splendid job of dismissing the conspiracy theorists' arguments, and also of explaining how the rumours on which their case rests ever came to be. In the matter of United Airlines flight 93, for example, the conspiracy-types claim debris was found up to 6.9 miles from the crash site, suggesting the aircraft had been attacked while it was still in the air.

But this 6.9 figure comes from typing the two locations into an internet route-finder. The real distance is about a mile, and completely consistent with a crash landing. Just as the rumour is completely consistent with what happens when people believe things they read on the internet.

But perhaps the real motives behind the conspiracy movement are as murky as the skulduggery they claim to have unearthed.

Many of the interviewees felt it was just impossible that some bearded bloke in a cave could have inspired 19 fanatics to blast a hole in the heart of the most powerful nation on Earth. Something on such a grand scale, they believe, could only be done by Americans.

Maybe it's that sort of blinkered arrogance that made the US a target in the first place.
(....)
LOAD-DATE: February 19, 2007

Distance to Indian Lake?

I found that part of the piece the height of painful idiocy. They say everyone who's looked into this typed the info into some "Expedia" type webiste to get the distance from the crash site to Indian Lake, and didn't notive they were looking at driving miles. Jesus, that is stupid. I got the distance from the articles in the local papers. You can also Google "flight 93 crash sute map" to find RoadsideAmerica.com's website dedicated to the Flight 93 Memorial. Here's a link to THEIR map, showing the crash site about, oh say, 6.9 miles from Indian Lake.

http://www.roadsideamerica.com/geo/showMap.php?attractionNo=9596

They are desperate.

I didn't get that part

Is it really that important how far indian lake is to the crash site? None of that really seems important to me. Where are all the plane parts? Body parts? They didn't even cover that!

It's important because...

the 'official theory' says that 9 MPH wind carried debris up to eight miles.

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/attack/flight93.html

Indian lake is 1.55 miles from the fake crater

according to Google Earth.

--------------------------------------------------------

Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.

Did anyone else notice...

the emotional music suddenly start up when they interviewed the Jewish widow about the anti-semetic conspiracy theories? I thought they really gave away what they were trying to do when they played that music. Note that I'm not saying they are part of the conspiracy, but they're quite obviously irresponsible journalists. That "Jews didn't die in the WTC" theory is way out on the fringe, so much that I rarely/never even hear it anymore. It was never that significant. I do put Mossad's involvement at just as likely as CIA's or ISI's involvement though, based on shared interests. That has nothing to do with the Jews. Just like potential CIA involvement has nothing to do with Christianity. More investigation is still necessary to figure out exactly which intelligence agencies were involved, by following the money and investigating political ties.

Also, I found it interesting that instead of looking at claims from various websites that parts of United 93 landed several miles away from the crash site, which were sourced from mainstream news articles, instead they generalized and said that they somehow knew that the "CTs" used google maps incorrectly. How did they know that, exactly? Who did they ask? Or, more likely, did the BBC just make it up? Again, irresponsible journalism.

But you can't expect much when they interview the X-Files producer as one of their "experts." What would you expect the opinion of someone who produces fictional conspiracies to be consumed by the American people to believe? His job is to make stuff up that the American public will believe. Is it really necessary to even ask what his opinion will be of conspiracies based on facts? No, you already know what his answer will be. How convenient.

Why was Amy Goodman standing about 1/2 mile north of WTC-7

at about 5:20 pm on 9/11/01? Who told Goodman & the other people to stand there facing WTC-7??? Does Goodman not wonder about this FOREKNOWLEDGE regarding WTC-7?
(Please go to this post for brief video of Goodman watching WTC-7 implode: http://www.911blogger.com/node/6306#comment-117644

Outraged truth community

Outraged truth community demands answers from Guy Smith, immediate retractions and apologies urged, savage agenda driven yellow journalism an insult to the truth

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/190207tissueoflies.htm

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

The first image of the

The first image of the deflagration on the pentagon reveals a very important white zone, to see:

http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/jpg/Pentagate_page2-2.jpg

http://video.google.fr/videoplay?docid=1226300829441750126&q=painful+dec...

http://www.voltairenet.org/article139203.html

I did not find, while doing research on internet, of kerosene detonation originating of an airplane crash that be comparable to the detonation on the pentagon. The only deflagration that I found who show the same very important zone white is that of a weapon anti-bunker, to see:

http://video.google.fr/videoplay?docid=-6358824457869316582&q=bunker+buster

Keep it simple

Alex works very hard and views his efforts as nothing less than trying to save US Constitution aka our republic.

Fetzer is a founding father of the movement and should be held in high regard. As I've said before, the space laser energy beam concept is parked in my "agnostic zone" awaiting further evidence.

Interesting that the Chinese are flexing their anti-satellite technology. Maybe there's something up there they know about that we don't.

It makes me angry when ever I see movement cannabalism and I'm always suspicous of the motives behind these tacky attacks on people trying to find their way through the fog of the official deception.

Put yourself out there and let people take shots at you and then you'll know what Jones/Fetzer/Barrett et . . . are going through.

Dr Fetzer

has betrayed this movement. Not only does he front absurdist theories on 'sapce beams' - his strong arm tactics to take over Scholars for 911 Truth are well documented - including threats. Emails were made public on this subject.

His smears against Steven Jones are unforgivable. His working with Morgan Reynolds (Mr. Cartoon planes) and Judy Woods is unforgivable. His inclusion of a link to WINGTV on the Scholars website is unforgivable. The destruction he sewed in the JFK movement is also well documented. His refusal to removed debunked eviidence from his presentations is unforgiveable.

and lastly - the idea that Space Beams is still debatable based upon the absurd paper that Just Woods published is laughable. Simply reviewing Woods' interview with Greg jenkins reveals that Woods is unable to answer even the most fundamental questions regarding her own theory.

And lastly - your claim that Fetzer is one of the founding fathers of this movement is either a sign of profound dishonesty - or stupidity. Fetzer is a johnny-come-lately to this movement - who only made his fat appearance once the movement started picking up steam and garnering attention fromthe media. He has since been destroying and discrediting the hard work of 911 activists who worked for the last 6 years to get this issue on the map. Fetzer has done NOTHING for this movement but disrupt it.

The founding fathers of this movement include Paul Thompson and Michael Ruppert and Barrie Zwicker and 911Truth.org and others. Not Fetzer. And soon, we will be confronted with legitimate legal questions regarding his true identity.

Anyone who claims Fetzer is

Anyone who claims Fetzer is a "founding father" of this movement has only been around 13 months tops.

Go to www.911busters.com and watch some of the public commissions to see some of the real founders of this movement.

Sam Seder Show Auction

Off topic, but has anyone seen this? You can bid on ebay for a 1 min spot where you (or Mr. Seder) can read anything you choose to write. I see this as a pretty good oportunity for 911 truth. Think we can raise enough in 9hrs?

Check it out:
http://cgi.ebay.com/One-Minute-On-Air-Rant-on-the-Sam-Seder-Show_W0QQite...

we are going to try to win

we are going to try to win this with the money we have raised, keep your fingers crossed.

Looks like you get away with it dz...

Looks like you get away with it dz... Keep us posted on this one. Can't wait to heard that whole fat minute of hard truth on the air!

I don't know if I can

I don't know if I can stomach watching this debunking documentary that focuses on Jim Fetzer, Loose Change, and Alex Jones. Fetzer is clearly disreputable, Loose Change is an evolving documentary project put together by younger people who are too easy to dismiss and Alex Jones is bombastic and also easy to dismiss.

On the other hand there are bound to be things we can learn from this. For instance, it's probably time to stop focussing on the Pentagon.

Guy Smith will be on Alex

Guy Smith will be on Alex Jones today; third hour.

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

They would never

shine light on the legitimate wing of this movement - Griffin - Thompson- Press for the Truth. Its just too dangerous for them.

Show "13 month comment" by Bozo

i can't read your comment

because it was voted down.

but- again - Dr Fetzer is not a founding father of this movement. that's just a fact.

furthermore - anyone who would set themselves up as an authority on 911 - such as he has - yet ignores the vehement pleas and protests of those in the movement who are begging him to PLEASE - FOR THE LOVE OF GOD - STOP TALKING ABOUT SPACE BEAMS - is either an intentional disruptor or a moron.

further - those who insist in continuing to insert this nonproductive subject into the dialogue (such as your attempts to link it to the recent Chinese satellite killer tests) is FURTHER denegrating the quality of discourse in this movement.

"shine light on the

"shine light on the legitimate wing of this movement - Griffin - Thompson- Press for the Truth. Its just too dangerous for them."

john im usually always in agreement with you here, but i honestly dont think the documentary would have turned out any differently if they chose these guys to be the stars.
The BBC producers/directors obviously already chose what conspiracy theory strawmen to go after. They already set out to do a debunk piece and even if say Griffin was on the BBC program, they would make light of the fact that he is a Myth expert and has no structural credentials and just edit together some nonsene of a debunker following up Griffin's comments.

Paul thompson they would never get to begin with because the only thing that concerns these assholes is the far-out easy to pigeonhole in the "ridiculous" category conspiracies.

they would never touch the ISI connection because its impossible to discredit. just like they would never touch the hijackers training at military bases or extreme foreknowledge or warnings.

Then you'll be happy to hear...

that they don't give any of them much time, at all. Instead they attack straw men arguments & (weakly) prop up the 'official conspiracy theory' . They curiously make the case, in the end, that the "real conspiracy started AFTER 911". Do you smell 'limited hangout? I do.

Here's a better version on

Here's a better version on google video: http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=8331629640228117189.

Avery Fetzer Jones

I cant believe anyone of you guys expected anything out of this joke of a documentary. It was poorly done and it was made for the person on the fence. You have to face it this is what were up against. The banks and the media run the whole show if you haven't figure this out by now you will never. Alex Jones? sellout Fetzer and Dylan Avery were all bought in for a reason by the media elite.

Fetzer: Just look at the guy he looks like a freaky troll, and he is about as numb as a fence post this dumb ass promotes mini nukes space beams and all that nonsense very very easily discredit.

Dylan Avery: Good looking young guy college dropout who bought a laptop from Radio Shack in 2003 and made the whole movie(Loose change) from that laptop(BBC). He was good intentions but he doesn't know enough to debate the issues with a seasoned manipulators (popular mechanics) also and that's why they always use him because he very easily plus his movie has way to many theories and not enough facts which makes him easily discredited sorry Dylan

Alex Jones: He never gives names but Bush and Cheney He always says NWO the Mysterious Globalist the Elites Lucifarians and CFR Who started the CFR? They have names. The globalist are people just like you and me whats there names and plus he promotes fear of the government terror storm he wants you to be scared of everything And that's what these people want so Alex we need more solution and less fear and all truth Alex .

"Fetzer: Just look at the

"Fetzer: Just look at the guy he looks like a freaky troll, and he is about as numb as a fence post this dumb ass promotes mini nukes space beams and all that nonsense very very easily discredit."

cant argue with you there. the guy is a joke.

"Dylan Avery: Good looking young guy college dropout who bought a laptop from Radio Shack in 2003 and made the whole movie(Loose change) from that laptop(BBC). He was good intentions but he doesn't know enough to debate the issues with a seasoned manipulators (popular mechanics) also and that's why they always use him because he very easily plus his movie has way to many theories and not enough facts which makes him easily discredited sorry Dylan"

this is a cheap shot, do you realize how much footage they probably filmed of both Dylan and Alex that they did not use?
A friend and I were interviewed on 20/20 special about the beheading hoax video we made. ... The 20/20 crew LITERALLY was at our house filming for over 3 hours total, not to include the extra 4 hours they spent setting up sophisticated lighting equipment and "friendly" pre interview questions. I knew as soon as they started rolling that it would be cleverly edited to match whatever agenda they had. You can be the most intelligent scholar in the world explaining a subject and the editors can manipulate it to make you look like a total idiot. and i disagree with your assumption that Alex or Dylan appeared stupid or kooky in this documentary. Dylan especially did a fantastic job!! give him some fing credit!

"Alex Jones: He never gives names but Bush and Cheney He always says NWO the Mysterious Globalist the Elites Lucifarians and CFR Who started the CFR? They have names. The globalist are people just like you and me whats there names and plus he promotes fear of the government terror storm he wants you to be scared of everything And that's what these people want so Alex we need more solution and less fear and all truth Alex ."

alex jones said he tried to bring up northwoods, play them tapes of emts saying building 7 was going to blow, show them Steven Jones' research, and even handed them stacks of news articles pertaining to the hijackers getting trained at military bases. Notice how they didnt include any of this? Do you think Alex could have changed the outcome? Yes alex does loose a lot of credibility when he talks about lucifierians (especially with non christians) , but 95% of the stuff he says about 9/11 is very credible and he is great at firing off facts boom boom boom right after one another. The Cspan clip thing he did at the 2004 RNC convention was a glowing example of what Alex jone is good at.

i think you are chasing after the wrong thing here, you need to understand that no matter who they chose, lets assume it was KEvin Ryan, David Griffin, and Steven jones instead of dyln, alex and fetzer. The documentary would still meet the same end, they could edit out the most compelling arguments and only include the more speculative parts.

i dont think Dylan and Alex are to blame for this mess, they did the best job they could.

my props go to Dylan especially, he handled himself great and this was his best public mainstream TV appearence yet. I give him an A++

people who help make hit pieces

by agreeing to be used, interviewed, made fun of, etcetera with no protection from such, are either eager to get on TV no matter what harm it does to the movement or maybe have other motives. I'm sorry, but "we were deceived" is no better when used as an excuse by the Bush admin and the New York Times than it is when used by truthseekers when they yet again become part of a bullshit disinfo hit piece.

There's no need to accuse people of bad intentions here--even if it's just out of carelessness, we know that appearances by certain people don't seem to help our cause much. The best approach therefore is to not help catapult propaganda like this BBC hit piece. We should talk about Griffin, Ryan, Jones, Rodriguez (assuming he tones down the showmanship and stops worrying about his relationship with future politicians), and others who either have a direct connection to the events OR have a solid body of written work on the subject.

That's IF we want to crack the "mainstream" consciousness...

____

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

 

Alex is right

You asked who started the CFR. Try googling Philip Dru. Learn about the CFR's beginnings and the CFR's intentions. They're not pretty and communism and one-world government is the best way to describe them.

Childish, inane programming...

I've watched seven minutes of this childish, inane programming and will finish it later.  Do these people behind this broadcast really think citizens of this planet are that dumb?

This piece will probably do even MORE good for the movement to bring accountability to the criminals behind 9/11.  The condescending, boorish voice of that female narrator is enough to make the simplist mind realize this piece is full of omissions and falsehoods.

Ironically, it was the foolish film UNITED 93 that piqued my interest, inspired my investigations, and helped me see that what the American goverment has espoused about 9/11 is lie after lie after lie.

Let's see...

Do I want to watch a shit piece? Decisions, decisions...


"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

Ok...

"Many simply don't accept the official conclusion, however distressing that may be for the relatives of those that died."

I've seen all I have to see.


"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

just added a downloadable

just added a downloadable XViD AVI version.

B- as a disinformation propaganda hit piece

film narrator quote:

"But many simply don't accept the official conclusion — however distressing that may be for the relatives of those who died."

Is this a seemingly benign "simple comment of fact"? Or a subconscious-inflicting comment and attack against the non-accepters (for being so mean as to do that to the poor victims), the latter of which would be pure propaganda.

I would also disagree with the video's suggestion/statement that Dylan Avery is "the most prominent voice" in our, as they state it, "self-styled 9/11 Truth Movement". What are they trying to do? Give him a big head? (the latter meant as humor)

It's pretty funny that they went with the "WTC 7 building was a 'raging inferno' " reason for collapse, and especially only showing the one small fire on one or two floors. What a joke.

I've also always found it interesting that 'their' claim was that the reason why the Pentagon's exterior wall had limited damage was because it was "reinforced". Well, if it was SO reinforced, how come more of the plane didn't hit it and bounce off and end up on the pristine lawn where simple common sense says it should be, if that were true?

I haven't seen the whole thing yet, but I notice that as of halfway through, they conveniently neglect to mention anything about William Rodriguez, just like the 9/11 Commission Report.

I give it a B- as a disinformation propaganda hit piece.

----
Ad hominem per factum, beyotch!
You are undeservedly egotistical.... often laughably so.
Pseudo-intellectuality does not behoove you.

What a despicable load of vomit.

You just want to smack that announcer bitch.

Could be the worst that the BBC has ever done.

I'm a bit sickened at their arrogance and blatant manipulation of the viewers.

That said, Michael Scheuer CIA (who was supposed to actually catch bin Laden for years, but never did) let slip an interesting soundbite:

"You can't have an intelligence failure when you have information and you refuse to act on it, and that's what Americans should understand."

54:00

The rest of what he says is bullshit. Refusing to act, however, is evidence of criminal intent and is yet more prima facie evidence for the treason trials.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

am i mistaken or didnt the

am i mistaken or didnt the BBC do one of the first debunking 9/11 conspiracy things over 4 years ago? I remember when i first got into 9/11 i kept finding the same bbc documentary in all my 9/11 movie searches, it was a film i think titled 9/11 conspiracies and it had interviews with many of the family members who scoffed at such conspiracies including the wife of pilot chip burlingame. I remember it vividly because the narrator was acting almost identical to the one in this doc and also made wild accusations such as "most conpsiracy theories rely on the idea that the passengers were taken to a secret location and either killed or collectively agreed to dissapear from the public eye" its like wtf?!?

thoughts

The doc exploits the weakest parts of the problems with the official story. It asks "what hit the Pentagon?" and not "How could anything at all hit the Pentagon?" What about the Mineta testimony? What about the Pentagon's own defenses? What about Andrews air base?
And so on.
And why do they use Alex Jones and Fetzer as the main voices questioning the offiical story, and not David Ray Griffin? Both Jones and Fetzer talk in bulldog tones, turning off people who are in the middle, and Griffin doesn't.

thoughts

The doc exploits the weakest parts of the problems with the official story. It asks "what hit the Pentagon?" and not "How could anything at all hit the Pentagon?" What about the Mineta testimony? What about the Pentagon's own defenses? What about Andrews air base?
And so on.
And why do they use Alex Jones and Fetzer as the main voices questioning the offiical story, and not David Ray Griffin? Both Jones and Fetzer talk in bulldog tones, turning off people who are in the middle, and Griffin doesn't.

[quote]And why do they use

[quote]And why do they use Alex Jones and Fetzer as the main voices questioning the offiical story, and not David Ray Griffin?[/quote]

It's obvious, isn't it? If people decide to do a little more research on their own, they'll find stories about "space beams", "illuminati", "New World Order", "Prison Planets" and a host of other level-headed-person-repelling, sensationalist jargon. This is not a coincidence. It's carefully planned and orchestrated.

And it's for this same reason that they used LC as their target for debunking. It contains deliberate nonsense precisely so it can be used for these hit pieces. Beware LCFC.

Cue the shill attacks...

Personal flip-flop

In my last post I cast aspersions on Alex Jones, but then I found myself linked to a new article on Prison Planet that is one of the best I've read in a long time:

http://www.infowars.net/articles/february2007/210207Monbiot_ineffectual.htm