ABC denies censoring the truth about 9/11

I recently wrote to several departments of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, requesting a response to six questions.

The letter read:

Dear ABC,

I am writing to respectfully request a response to the following questions:

1) Why does the ABC refuse to permit any discussion or debate about the controversy surrounding 9/11 and the diverse array of alternative commentaries on the subject?

2) Why does the ABC refuse to report on any of the independent investigations and publications that have been produced by individuals and citizen groups over the last nine years, regarding the events of 9/11?

3) Is there any formal or informal arrangement between the ABC and the Government or IC (Intelligence Community) with regard to reporting on the issues surrounding 9/11?

4) Is the ABC cognisant of the widespread, public scepticism, doubt and distrust about the official explanation for the events of 9/11?

5) Does the ABC believe it is immoral, inappropriate or impermissible to scrutinize or question the veracity of conventional wisdom and official dogma regarding momentous, historical events?

6) Does the ABC consider the controversy surrounding 9/11 to be inconsequential, insignificant, irrelevant or simply not newsworthy?

I look forward to your response.


To date, the only response I've recieved from the ABC was a glib, dismissive remark from an unidentified individual at Radio Current Affairs. It read:

Dear John Scrivener,

The ABC does not censor coverage of the events of 11 September 2001. However the ABC does not subscribe to conspiracy theories.

Yours sincerely,

ABC News


To which I replied:

Dear ABC,

Thank you for your reply.

However, you did not respond to the questions I asked.

You claim that the ABC does not censor coverage of the events of 11 September, 2001.

Could you perhaps give me an example of an ABC program in the last nine years that has addressed any of the issues raised by architect, Richard Gage, regarding the collapse of WTC Building 7, or any of the issues raised by David Ray Griffin in his numerous books on the subject of 9/11.

You state that the ABC does not subscribe to "conspiracy theories", however, from my experience of ABC reports and other presentations on the issue of 9/11, it is obvious that the ABC does, in fact, subscribe to the official 9/11 conspiracy theory, that 19 Arab hijackers were solely responsible for the attacks of 9/11.

Does the ABC have a reasonable explanation for its biased presentations on the subject of 9/11?

Does the ABC consider the official 9/11 conspiracy theory to be completely valid, totally proven and beyond reproof, while all other theories about the events of 9/11 are perforce, bizarre and unfounded?

Has anyone at the ABC actually bothered to review any of the books or articles about 9/11 that have been published by David Ray Griffin, Peter Dale Scott, Barry Zwicker, Nafeez Ahmed or Paul Craig Roberts?

Has anyone at the ABC actually bothered to review any of the material that has been presented by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth?

If the ABC is not actively censoring the discussion and debate about 9/11, how do you explain the complete absence of coverage, the obstinate refusal to present any information at all about the controversy surrounding the events of September 11, 2001?

I would appreciate a reasonably intelligent response to my questions.

Your sincerely, John Scrivener


More of my opinion on the ABC's treatment of 9/11 ... Apathy, bias and cant at the ABC

Wow, how pathetic.

The ABC does not censor coverage of the events of 11 September 2001. However the ABC does not subscribe to conspiracy theories.

Wow, how pathetic.

It is much worse than the media under the Soviets.

At least during the Soviet era, the Russians KNEW they were being lied to.
Americans really think that if there was anything to 9/11 truth, it would be in the headlines.
We are FAR more propagandized than the Russians were. Our propagandists are far slicker, studied in the techniques, and our population far more naive.

Shame on ALL journalists. They are truly a despicable lot.
Ever see any website called "Journalists for 9/11 truth"?
No, There ARE no journalists interested in any truth.
They are interested in their jobs.
And the more "respected" they are, the more highly paid they are, the less likely that any truth will come from any of them.

And journalists in the "alternative" media? The worst of all. They are making a living ostensibly by bringing the truth where the mainstream press will not.
But they DO NOT BRING US THE TRUTH. They MUST know that the official 9/11 story is a lie. They KNOW the government lies and covers up. But they will not even mention any of the solid evidence.

Democracy Now is just as bad as ABC News (and to think I used to contribute!)

How can journalists be so universally immoral and unethical?
I think all of them who have had the opportunity to present 9/11 truth and have not done so are every bit as criminal as those who actually planned 9/11. We should start listing the names of all journalists today, all who have had the evidence of 9/11 at their doorstep, in their hands, in front of their eyes. And keep this list just in case this whole thing breaks open one day.

There actually is a journalist truth group ...

but I don't know anything about their origins or their activities to date.

Just a government propaganda department now

The rising tide of truth will sweep them away. I can see them mouthing the Official Line all the way into the bottomless pit of their own irrelevance. Goodbye ABC, once upon a time, I used to think you had value, but now I know better.