Russian TV Holds Debate on Controversial 9/11 Film
Russian TV Holds Debate on Controversial 9/11 Film
Posted on: Monday, 15 September 2008, 15:00 CDT
To mark the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist acts, on 12 September Russian Channel One TV showed a controversial documentary, "Zero", which questions the official version of events. The screening of the film, made by prominent Italian journalist and MEP Giulietto Chiesa, was followed by a studio discussion, in which two groups of experts - those who agree with Chiesa's version and those who disagree - expressed their views.
"The film, justifiably or not - we'll be discussing this tonight - questions the official version of events, but the film - and I've watched it with great attention almost twice over - never directly accuses the US government or Congress, or some dark forces in America, or the [American] Foreign [Policy] Council, of masterminding and organizing the terrorist acts. So, I am asking you: who did it?" moderator Aleksandr Gordon said at the beginning of the debate.
According to Aleksey Pushkov, author and presenter of the "Postscript" current affairs programme on Russian Centre TV and director of the Strategic Studies Institute under the Diplomatic Academy, the terrorist acts in New York in September 2001 were organized by a "very influential group of people who needed them".
Vitaliy Tretyakov, editor-in-chief of the Political Class magazine and former editor-in-chief of the Nezavisimaya Gazeta heavyweight daily, described the US official report as "fiction". He said he could not believe that a small group of terrorists could have masterminded the attacks.
On the other hand, Vladimir Rubanov, former head of the KGB's analytical department, said he could not see anything extraordinary in what happened and it was plausible.
Mikhail Leontyev, Channel One TV presenter and editor-in-chief of the Profil magazine, said he did not believe the official version of events for three reasons. The first, he said, "is that it was a one- off [terrorist] act. A certain organization committed a totally extraordinary act from the point of view of its coordination. Allegedly, this organization still exists, it continues fighting and killing people; it is keeping the US army in two countries in the world and, at the same time, there has not been a single [terrorist] act on the territory of the United States since.""The fact that there has not been a single repetition of this terrorist act proves that the first one was false," he added.
Leontyev continued: "Secondly, why [was the 11 September terrorist act committed]? The United States stood to gain so much from it. Certain circles that are certainly linked to the current administration stood to gain from it. It was so much in their interests that the terrorist act became inevitable."
"Thirdly, all the people who are regarded as the fictitious or real organizers of this [terrorist] act, all these people were controlled by the American special services."
Aleksandr Sharavin, director of the Institute of Political and Military Studies, said he found many of the arguments used in Chiesa's film unconvincing.
Aleksey Vvedenskiy, a spokesman for special construction projects in Moscow, said he supported the official version. He said the twin towers had collapsed because they had been hit by the aircraft, not because they had been blown up. He explained in technical detail how it could have happened.
Another construction specialist, director of the Risks and Security of Buildings research centre, Ashot Tamrazyan, said his organization had created a model and carried out many tests that had shown that the twin towers could not have collapsed unless there had been other contributing factors."
Architect Mikhail Khazanov could not explain the collapse of the third building.
Film Director Vladimir Khotinenko praised the film for raising questions but not delivering verdicts. He also said the collapse of the towers was very "cinematic" in the spirit of the best Hollywood blockbusters.
Channel One correspondent Vladimir Sukhoy was near the twin towers when they collapsed. He said he had witnessed the tragedy and he believed the official version.
Robert Bridge, editor-in-chief of The Moscow News English- language newspaper, doubted that a civilian Boeing aircraft had crashed into the Pentagon building. He said: "In any plane crash there are remains left. There is luggage, there are seats, etc.": "Why did this plane crash so differently from any other crash we have seen?" he asked.
Cosmonaut Vladimir Dezhurov, who was on the International Space Station at the time and saw the 9/11 events from space, also said an air crash always left debris behind.
Another eye-witness, ITAR-TASS correspondent Yuriy Kirilchenko, said the film had proved that a serious investigation of the tragedy was still needed because many questions remained unanswered.
No-one in the audience raised their hands when they were asked to do so by the moderator if they believed the US official version of events.
Originally published by Channel One TV, Moscow, in Russian 1725 12 Sep 08.
(c) 2008 BBC Monitoring Former Soviet Union. Provided by ProQuest LLC. All rights Reserved.
- Login to post comments
It should be obvious
It should be obvious that these so-called "superpowers" are playing both sides of the fence here.
When the MSM reports that Putin has named the Georgia conflict as exactly what it is; e.g., a state-sponsored false flag terror act, then the controversy is "doubled." Putin is quoted as saying that "[t]he suspicion arises that someone in the United States especially created this conflict with the aim of making the situation more tense and creating a competitive advantage for one of the candidates fighting for the post of US president." Clearly this "suspicion" is on both sides, and these superpowers are blatantly fear-mongering to the people of both nations. It's not only clever, but even more diabolical than it appears (I'll explain why in a moment).
Medvedev actually throws the situation into quick relief by exclaiming [again, to the MSM] that "[t]he world has changed and it occurred to me that 8 August 2008 has become for Russia as 11 September 2001 for the United States. This is an accurate comparison corresponding to Russian realities. Humankind has drawn lessons from 11 September tragedy and other tragic events. I would like the world to draw lessons also from these events [in South Ossetia]."
And this begs the question: what lessons might a former world superpower draw from a brutal PSYOP/false flag attack that was as devastating, iconic, and "successful" as 9/11?
Might one lesson be that the state gains to benefit greatly through terrorizing its citizens? That a copy-cat crime might yield just as many miles as the original? That one might even get "round trip miles" if one were to link the two, using the original as a springboard to the other? I'm quite sure there are many lessons to be learned, and I can only imagine how those lessons will be recorded in the history books 50 years from now. After all, these same history books have shown us that 2+2 really can equal 5.
But for today, false flags attack are useful to our keepers by furthering their goals of global conquest: juxtaposing these events to one another amplifies their power: these threats to global peace can be used to push us a little closer towards our keepers' more grandiose plans of one world government.
How you ask?
If the US were to ever expose 9/11 for the myth that it is, you can be sure that the wolves would be waiting in the wings to pounce on an opportunity "to protect us from another 9/11-like event from ever happening again"... they'd try to sell the myth of a secure "global democracy" one with "checks and balances" where nations could not terrorize its peoples, or prop up puppet regimes in other nations, or conduct "bloodless coups", or illegally invade and occupy less technologically advanced nations. In other words, check mate, and hello New World Order.
We need to be vigilant and aware... really think these scenarios through. Put all the chess pieces on the board and imagine them in play at the same time -- likely being pushed around the squares by the same set of hands. Most of us already see the nation-states of this world as illusions. We know that the world is controlled by corporate interests.... that political ideologies are a thing of the past and a simple formula--with a cheap energy source as the primary unit in the equation--is what governs the world. We've also seen the republicans shamelessly peddle the myth of 9/11 at the RNC just days before its seventh anniversary.
Let's not play into their hands if we can help it.
Great observation!
If the US were to ever expose 9/11 for the myth that it is, you can be sure that the wolves would be waiting in the wings to pounce on an opportunity "to protect us from another 9/11-like event from ever happening again"... they'd try to sell the myth of a secure "global democracy" one with "checks and balances" where nations could not terrorize its peoples, or prop up puppet regimes in other nations, or conduct "bloodless coups", or illegally invade and occupy less technologically advanced nations. In other words, check mate, and hello New World Order.
I have been pondering about that possibility myself. From one side, 9-11 was a successful operation (buildings came down flawlessly, unlike in Oklahoma), but from another side -- it was an extraordinarily sloppy operation, leaving thousands of loose ends for any rational observer to find.
Therefore, it begs the question -- was it so on purpose?
I am afraid, you are right -- if 9-11 will ever be exposed as an inside job, it will be a checkmate by the NWO. I don't think that even majority of truthers can resist it if CNN suddenly begins to sing praises to the Truth Movement. They will sweep up pretty much everybody then, even such bright minds as DRG who has also been advocating a "global democracy".
Under that scenario, I am afraid, the line btw the "right kind" of "checks and balances" (the kind DRG probably has in mind), and the NWO get so fine and blurred as to become incomprehensible to most ordinary people. Just look at what we are dealing with now -- trying to convince somebody of 9-11 having been an inside job is such an uphill battle even with so many hard, cold facts! Trying to convince people to turn down a "helping hand" who can't be implicated in mass murder becomes an order of magnitude harder.
Wow !
And our country said their news was controlled.
It is... but by different special interests
The timing of this discussion is probably linked to current East / West tensions... elements of the Russian govt are trying to stir the debate up....
Having said that, who cares about their motives? It gets this material onto mainstream news channels, so this is positive anyway.
There may be a limit as to how far this will go, though. It's not in their interests to have the world awaken to false-flag events, since the finger will point at them also for some questionable events which fed their Chechen campaign.
An "A" for everyone in that audience!
"No-one in the audience raised their hands when they were asked to do so by the moderator if they believed the US official version of events." That fact says it all.
The corp. media in this country has to be held accountable for deliberately keeping information like this from it's citizens. Russia Rocks!
"On the other hand, Vladimir Rubanov,
former head of the KGB's analytical department, said he could not see anything extraordinary in what happened and it was plausible."
Perhaps, because of his former occupation he is hesitant to admit the existence of False Flag operations, seeing as the KGB has perpetrated them on the Russian people.
Just imagine such a debate on CNN or PBS!
The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.
Such as the bombings...
... of the blocks of flats near Moscow in 1999, which were blamed on the soon-to-be-attacked Chechens. Alas, the one unexploded bomb was traced to the secret service, at which points that bomb was declared to have been part of an anti-terrorism exercise to test the vigilance of the local authorities.
Yes
that was Putin's mini coup.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it
This, my friends, is what's
This, my friends, is what's so sad about the whole uphill battle.
No matter HOW mainstream, and loud, this issue becomes, there will ALWAYS be "experts" supporting how the "official" version of events does not contain "anything extraordinary" and is "plausible." And these experts will explain this "in great technical detail."
We're seeing it with JFK. Vincent Bugliosi recently wrote a book, around 1500 pages long, proving "in great technical detail" how Oswald acted alone.
Ultimately, the lay person with no expertise will acknowledge that many experts support both sides, and he will give up, not knowing what or who to truly believe. And if he can't make up his mind one way or another for sure, how can he spread the word and be an activist?
This is what the PSYOPS people want.
...However...
The fact that no one in the audience supported the official story gives me hope.
And even Vincent Bugliosi's thousand-page book does not convince upwards of 70% of Americans that Oswald acted alone.
They get "Zero" and we in OZ get the "BBC's The Third Tower" lol
This is "fantastic" only because of the irony of it all :)
The KGB is no worry as the Russian people will be more inclined to disbelieve the official story if they support it....this was a definite plus!
Great news all round!
Regards John
9/11 24/7 UNTIL JUSTICE!!
You don't know how lucky you are
Russ Hallberg
Back in the USSR!
(John Lennon)