Editorial Guidelines

Court case involving the BBC's alleged support of terrorism and cover-up of 9/11

Here is an update on the UK court case regarding the BBC's coverage of 9/11 that I wrote about in a recent post here, "Historic Case to Challenge BBC’s 9/11 Coverage".  The court date was Monday, February 25, 2013.

In short, it was a huge victory for the 9/11 Truth community because a court finally had to face the facts and couldn't do it.  Rather than having a 3 hour hearing full of evidence including testimony by Prof. Niels Harrit the judge took the easy way out as described in the letter. 

Join the AE911Truth campaign to "Hold the BBC Accountable" for its inaccurate and biased reporting on the 9/11 attacks

Dear Friends of 9/11 Truth,

You have the opportunity to write to the Committee in the British Parliament that provides oversight to the British Broadcasting Corporation and ask it to conduct its own inquiry into biased reporting on the 9/11 attacks by the BBC and meet with 3 9/11 Truth activists to allow them to present 9/11 Truth evidence.

As you may remember, three Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition signers in the UK have filed separate and formal complaints with the British Broadcasting Corporation over two documentaries it aired last year around the 10th anniversary of 9/11, namely ‘Conspiracy Files: 9/11 ten years on', and '9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip'.  The BBC has breached its Royal Charter and its Agreement and Editorial Guidelines, which include Editorial Values that promise truth, accuracy, impartiality, editorial integrity and independence, fairness, transparency and accountability in all the BBC’s programs.