From: Andrew Johnson
Date: 2007-02-16 14:30:32
News travels so fast…. prisonplanet.com/art… BBC Pressured to Air 9/11 Hit Piece?Crane claims two different versions exist, former Fox exec demanding attack dogs released to prevent harm to American market Paul Joseph WatsonPrison PlanetFriday, February 16, 2007 The BBC has produced two versions of its documentary on 9/11, one being a balanced example of investigative journalism and the other a sophisticated hit piece. According to a leading UK 9/11 truth activist, recently appointed US chief Garth Ancier is pressuring the corporation to air the version that portrays the 9/11 truth movement as a fringe cult of mythology in a bid to protect BBC’s American market. Yesterday we reported on the allegations of those interviewed for the show that the documentary was set to be a debunking effort, with the intention of relegating important questions in favor of nebulous and damaging theories. This story garnered massive readership after being featured on the front page of Digg, a user generated content phenomenon that gets more traffic than the Drudge Report. In a follow up story, we highlighted how the BBC was using promotional material, including a psychological conspiracy test and an interview with X Files producer Frank Spotnitz, to imply that 9/11 truthers were borderline cult members with psychological problems. In a new development, Ian R. Crane, Chairman of the 9/11 Truth Campaign for the UK and Ireland, claims a source told him that producers Mike Rodin and Guy Smith have edited two different versions of the show and are in a quandary as to whether to air the balanced piece or the hit piece. Crane’s claims are printed in full at the Cremation of Care website. It appears that the dilemma is a direct result of the phenomenal reaction to the recent flurry of 9/11 related items appearing in the National Media,” writes Crane. “The debate kicked off with the publication of George Monbiots ill-researched hit-piece on Loose Change, the most downloaded video in the history of Google Video. Any casual observer perusing the responses posted on the Guardian website, could not fail to notice that the remarkable difference in style between those who leapt to the defence of the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) and those were seeking answers to the glaring anomalies between the OCT and the physical evidence. The vapid vitriol from the defenders of orthodoxy was no match for the measured curiosity of the Truth seekers.” In addition, Crane cites the UK Daily Mail article as another example of a fair hearing for 9/11 truth and one that angered those with a stake in maintaining the official myth. Yet another large British newspaper, Scotland’s Herald, also today featured a positive write up of the 9/11 truth movement. Crane claims that the new head of the BBC’s commercial operations in the US, former Fox senior executive Garth Ancier (pictured above), is the point man in persuading program directors to air the hit piece, fearing that a more balanced appraisal would anger corporate partners and sales across the Atlantic. “Newly responsible for the marketing of BBC productions in the US, Ancier is no doubt claiming that he will not be able to maximize revenues if the BBC is seen to be running programmes, however balanced, intimating that 9/11 might have been an inside job. From personal experience of operating within the US industrial complex, it is not beyond the realms of probability that Ancier is waving mega$ incentives if the Beeb agrees to run the hit-piece. As Princeton graduate and an initiate of the Phi Beta Kappa fraternity, serious pressure will be being put on Ancier to get the Beeb to play ball,” writes Crane. If past examples are anything to go by, it’s likely that the hit piece will be chosen because the previous installment in the series, an investigation into questions surrounding the death of Princess Diana, was widely acknowledged as a whitewash that toed the official line. Besides the X Files interview and the psychological test, BBC’s promotional material for the show has been both extensive and reasonably balanced. A summary article of the 9/11 truth movement lent implicit credibility to 9/11 skeptics, and an online unedited clip of Alex Jones and Jim Marrs at Dealy Plaza was absent the usual condemnation and ridicule seen in mainstream coverage many times before. The fact that the promotional trailers do not prominently feature any debunkers (besides a poorly spoken woman who is presumably used to rubbish the Jewish conspiracy angle), suggests that the show will either be a fair representation or the more likely scenario, that the BBC will employ the familiar tactic of using a sneering female narrator to arrogantly attack the carefully edited words of the skeptics and obsessively focus on tenuous issues while ignoring the hardcore evidence. GET ACTIVE: Populate the BBC’s Conspiracy Files blog and encourage the BBC to represent real investigative journalism and air the balanced version. Click here and leave your comments.
