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.

BBC WTC 7 Documentary Producer Shares His Thoughts

Good overview of the conspiracy theories in general and WTC 7 in particular.

With the publicity also came the "debunkers", challenging the "truthers" at every stage.

After Loose Change came a website called Screw Loose Change. And internet film 9/11 Mysteries was followed by Screw 9/11 Mysteries.

For our UK readers, be sure to watch the Conspiracy Files tomorrow night!

So Who Wanted That Line in the Film?

Here's a rather interesting revelation from Dylan on the BBC's early broadcast of the collapse of WTC 7:

I put this to the writer and director of Loose Change, Dylan Avery. I asked whether he believed the BBC was part of the conspiracy. Given the question his film had posed about the BBC I was surprised by Dylan's response: "Of course not, that's ludicrous. Why would the BBC be part of it?"

He added candidly: "I didn't really want to put that line in the movie."

Hmmm, didn't the film credits say that it was "writen" by Dylan Avery?

This will presumably be part of the BBC's broadcast of Conspiracy Files: 9-11--The Third Tower, which is being presented on Sunday night in the UK. I highly recommend it to our British readers. The BBC have done excellent work on their Conspiracy Files programs, and I am sure this will be no exception to the rule.

Note: The post also clears up who actually jumped the gun on the WTC-7 collapse story; apparently Reuters was the original source for the story, which the Beeb picked up as did CNN.

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.