BBC Conspiracy Files Takes on 7/7 Troofers

Been looking for this one for the last week or so. They did a bang-up job on WTC-7, and I am confident they've done the same here, although I'll admit I'm just watching it now. Based on past episodes, expect the first half of the show to present fairly and in a reasonably attractive light the conspiracy theories. The second half is generally where the solid debunking will be found.

Part II etc., can be found here.

Update: Terrific! As predicted, about halfway through the segment you'll be saying that they have been far too generous to the 7/7 Troofers. And then in the second half they come through with a scythe and cut them off at the knees. Just awesome!

My only criticism? I do wish they'd been a bit more definitive on the Peter Power segment. If, as they say, Power really only was close on two of the three locations, why not show us the one that he got wrong, and where it was on the London Tube map compared to the actual location of the third subway bomb?

I was thrilled to see Rachel North featured prominently in the show; she is truly a survivor. They do make an interesting point towards the end; that Britain is much more susceptible to 7/7 Trooferism, and that it is simultaneously more dangerous, because there is a large Muslim minority in the UK and unlike US Muslims, they have not been generally integrated into society.

BBC WTC 7 Documentary Hits The Mark

Wow. What a terrific job they did on this episode of Conspiracy Files; I'm thoroughly blown away. In the first half I thought they were almost too sympathetic to the Troofers, giving them a lot of airtime. But this decision to be more rigorously fair than most shows on the movement actually turned out to be justified by the incredible amount of evidence they presented to debunk the loons.

There are so many good moments in the show that I know I'm going to miss a couple but here are a few favorites:

1. The footage of WTC 7 and the lobby after the first tower collapsed. It's one thing to read Peruggia's account; it's quite another to see it firsthand. Remember, WTC-7 was at least partially shielded from the South Tower by the North Tower. An amazing amount of damage and unbelieveable amount of dust and debris.

2. Chief Nigro's statement that the conspiracy theories are obscene. Amen.

3. Mark Loiseaux noting that thermite is far too unpredictable in timing for his demolitions.

4. The explanation for the building's collapse. I had leaned towards the diesel fuel being pumped into the building and the transfer trusses. Of course the Troofers will go nuts on this because they will continue to deny that there were significant fires in the buildings.

5. Hearing the Hardfire "Live Free or Die" song starting up in the background. That got a laugh from me. Good point by Mark about how the Truthers never put their nonsense into a coherent account.

Terrific production! I have heard that this program will be airing in the US at some point in September. I highly recommend it. I commented that the History Channel special was Hiroshima for the Truthers; this was more like letting the air slowly out of their balloon.

BBC WTC-7 Conspiracy Files on Google Video

Watching it now, will post my thoughts later.

Hat Tip: Walter Ego.

The Independent on the BBC WTC7 Special

A short but excellent article, the author of which is very familiar with the truther mindset, so he obviously is in on the conspiracy.

Imagine an infection that actually feeds on the only antibiotic available to counter it and you have some measure of the problem in dealing with conspiracy theories. When conspiracists encounter solid evidence against their favoured scenario, they have only two options available to them. They can compromise their religious belief in the narrative they've constructed, or they can simply enlarge it, extending the conspiracy so that, amoeba-like, it absorbs this irritating foreign body and digests it whole. Almost invariably, they choose the latter, and The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – the Third Tower, a film about the collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7, offered several choice examples of the process. What conspiracists believe about Building 7 is that it was deliberately destroyed, brought down by a pre-planned explosion so that the evidence proving government complicity in the events of 9/11 would be shredded. They base their conviction on footage of the collapse, in which it does indeed look as if the building has been brought down by controlled demolition. They then shore up this ill-informed impression with oddities picked from the rubble of that day – passing remarks, inaccuracies in the news coverage, fragments of debris – all of them carefully sifted and separated from their context so that their larger meaning is obscured. And woe betide you if you suggest that the resulting collage is implausible in any way.

And he obviously is aware of what their response is going to be, with this parting comment:

Incidentally, if you're minded to send me a long email denouncing my gullibility and directing me to websites offering incontrovertible proof that Dick Cheney did it, don't bother. As you may already have guessed, I'm in on it, too.

BBC Producer: There Was No Sympathetic Piece on the Deniers

In the week or so before the BBC aired their wonderful show on the 9-11 conspiracy theorists, Alex Jones tried to convince people that the Beeb had prepared two versions of the show; one sympathetic and balanced, and the other a "hit piece". Of course, according to Jones, the NWO insisted that the "hit piece" be aired.

According to the producer, there was no sympathetic piece and the one that aired was balanced.

Only trouble is there weren’t two versions, no-one bothered to check with us and, what's more, we worked very hard to make sure the programme was fair and balanced.

We didn’t find anything conclusive proving the conspiracy theories. Instead we found a lot of evidence which supported the official version and contradicted the various conspiracy theories.

Where there was some evidence of a conspiracy after the event to cover-up intelligence failures, we included that in the programme, together with an interview with Senator Bob Graham, who co-chaired a Congressional Inquiry into 9/11.

Hat Tip to an emailer who will remain anonymous for now.

BBC Show

Excellent stuff.

Can't seem to get the first part up but here are parts 2-7. A little too focused on failures rather than a system-wide failure of imagination perhaps, but otherwise rather solid. I love Dylan Avery telling Popular Mechanics to go back to reviewing tractors.

BBC 9-11 CT Show

Reports are starting to come in on the BBC's new show, 9/11: The Conspiracy Files. The Deniers have been waging pre-emptive warfare against the show by claiming it was a hit piece. Our fellow debunkers at 9-11 Cultwatch, which now has a blog seems to like the debunking section:

Several of the key issues to 9/11 "Truth activists" were debated - the attack on the Pentagon, the collapse of WTC 7 and the fate of the fourth plane, Flight 93. Anyone who has tried to debunk some of the dafter 9/11 theories will have some sympathy for the Indiana academic who expressed his shock at the abuse received when he published his findings into the Pentagon attack. We know how he feels! The dangers of web based research were suggested by the anomalies concerning Flight 93 wreckage - many "researchers" had calculated the mileage from crash site to debris by road mileage, using the Internet, not how the crowd flies. Some people really do need to get out more beyond their computer screens.

But they were not pleased with other parts:

Due to the safe old image of the BBC, the need to reach a nice fluffy middle of the road conclusion was hardly a surprise. Yes there was a conspiracy, but it was of the arse-covering, don't question Capitol Hill variety. Perhaps so - but also being the BBC no hard questions were raised about some of the biggest 9/11 issues. Not what did the Americans knew before hand - what did Saudi Arabia know? What did Pakistan know?

Such questions are not on the BBC's radar. Here they cannot claim ignorance - Senator Bob Graham from the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 was interviewed. Graham has expressed his considerable frustrations at the lack of a desire in Washington to look into the behaviour of Saudi Arabia, but you would never have got that impression from this documentary.

Such questions are on our radar, as they should be for any serious researchers. For the BBC, taking on the likes of Alex Jones using taxpayers money is one thing. Messing with the Saudi's is clearly quite another.....

I am hoping the show will pop up on YouTube or Google and will post it here if I find it.

Screw Loose Change On the Beeb!

I am scheduled to be interviewed on the BBC sometime this afternoon, I assume for later airing. I will put up more details as they become available.

Update: The segment will air on the BBC World Today program which is broadcast over many NPR stations. You can also listen here at 23:00 GMT, which I believe is 6:00 PM on the East Coast, with rebroadcasts at 10:00 PM and 1:00 AM. They had already interviewed the Loose Change boys (all three participated) and asked me a few questions. I have done quite a few radio interviews, but this was the first time I'd actually done one from a studio. Thanks to Bill Shedd and the rest of the folks at KJZZ and the BBC for setting this up!

Update: We may have to wait for the show to be archived at that link; I don't appear to be in the 23:00 GMT show that is up there as of now.

Update II: Others heard the stream of the show at this link. It will be on again at 10:00 Eastern, and eventually the archive will be up.

Update III: The show is now available in the archive under 23:00 GMT. The segment on Loose Change begins about 3/4 of the way through the show. I am very pleased with the results--the Loosers talk too fast and I came across as calm but confident. Shows you what good sound editing can do. ;)