BBC - The Conspiracy Files 911 Ten Years On (2011)

pulled from demoniod.

[The following reviews were added for clarity of content by Dunamis (Moderator)]

Quote:

The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 Ten Years On dispelled ten years of fantasy

TV review: The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 Ten Years On entertained the most popular conspiracy theories surrounding the World Trade Center, before exposing them as ill-informed and disrespectful delusions.

With the advent of the internet conspiracy theories surrounding the 9/11 attacks have reached a larger audience than perhaps any other event and have raged on for nearly ten years.

The Conspiracy Files: Ten Years On aimed to put an end to this, detailing each preposterous theory and then shooting it down with fairly incontrovertible proof.

The error however was in entertaining the theories at all and the documentary lingered on each hypothesis for a little too long for no reason other than sheer sensationalism, adding legitimacy to a largely YouTube-based debate - an arena in which streams of Justin Bieber songs altered to sound as though they were performed by chipmunks can garner 47 million views.

All the classics were here; the exploding column supports on lower Twin Tower floors, the small hole made in the Pentagon wall, the debris found miles from the United 93 crash site.

Sherlock Holmes said that when you’ve eliminated the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth’ one conspiracy theorist informed us.

Well, Willy Wonka said: ‘Invention, my dear friends, is 93% perspiration, 6% electricity, 4% evaporation, and 2% butterscotch ripple’ but you don’t see Apple bringing out a Snozzberry iPad, so perhaps we shouldn’t base our judgements on those of fictional characters.

While some of the technical incongruences surrounding the four aeroplane crashes were vaguely worth of attention, the overarching idea that the US government was behind the attacks was surely, whatever your political persuasion, preposterous.

Do people really believe that there was a 'rogue' group of megalomaniac government officials who watched the orchestrated destruction of 3000 lives and rubbed their hands with glee because in the long term the US would reap some lucrative oil contracts from it? Come on.

There is such guilt in the US about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that many almost want to believe that the invasions formed part of an elaborate government cover-up, as if it distances them and makes them feel less complicit in America's dealings in the Middle East.

American foreign policy has certainly proved worthy of debate in recent years, but these fantastical theories serve only to distract from them, along with the serious issue of whether corners are being cut when it comes to the building of high-rise skyscrapers.

These blockbuster notions of government inside jobs are ultimately disrespectful to the dead and I’d like to be able to say that The Conspiracy Files: Ten Years On will put an end to them, but more than likely it will just drive more viewers to grainy YouTube clips of false evidence.

Source: http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/reviews/873825-the-conspiracy-files-9-11-ten-y...

Quote:

The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 10 Years On - An Exercise In Labelling

By Liam TuckerTuesday, 30/08/2011

You might have heard the one about the little girl who woke up and worked out what was going on the night before Christmas.

She told her classmates what she'd seen and they called her a 'conspiracy theorist'. These days that's far more of an insult than anything pertaining to hand-me-down clothes or halitosis.

In this scenario, whilst we're merrily stretching metaphors, the BBC might be the teacher who overhears the conversation, assures everyone that there's nothing to worry about, tells them to open their books and politely orders them to keep the noise down. Not directly responsible for any festive smoke and mirrors, they keep the peace and prevent people asking questions by presenting what might seem like an open-and-shut case to those who don't find the 'conspiracy theorist' tag a rather weak label to slap on the box a growing segment of the population have been discreetly plopped into. According to their own figures in last night's The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - 10 Years On, 14% in the UK and 15% of people in the US aren't buying the official version. Sadly, this programme didn't seek to properly address any of the points from which their suspicion stems.

While there are still kids in class who won't pipe down, producer Mike Rudin seemed keen not to convince the disbelievers that they're barking up the wrong tree, but rather to assure others who haven't yet delved into the topic to stay away from the woods.

The problem here is that this central tag, used as a pejorative term throughout an hour-long documentary, made it appear that there are dozens of wild theories that multiply 'like whispers in a hall' when actually there's only one conspiracy theory - that the attacks were carried out by agents far closer to home (using explosives) rather than a ragtag band of Al Qaeda terrorists. To compound the theory, there's a great deal of scientific and recorded evidence that would make even the least suspicious mind open to the idea of a better, less biased inquiry. And then there's speculation, which always comes to the fore when calls for an inquiry are ignored, because people feel they need some answers to questions with enormous implications. Rather unfairly, Rudin chose to debunk five or six points of speculation without once going near any of the undeniable, head-turning and slightly mind-boggling evidence, instead opting to pop the balloon of arbitrary issues, as many debunkers tend to do.

A key organisation, and one which Rudin has briefly engaged with before, is Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, most notably Richard Gage, the frontman of a group of over 1,500 professionals. They were airbrushed from history in last night's programme, despite the fact they would have had far more to add on the subject of Thermite than the chosen talking head, Niels Harrit - a far less credible individual and someone who didn't really deserve the screen time. But whilst the talking heads were disappointing, what really galled was the fleeting treatment of the key events.

An hour was never going to be enough to cover three separate building collisions, the collapse of World Trade Centre 7 (which tumbled over without the assistance of a plane crash) and the Pennsylvanian crater. Whilst the tumbling of the two towers only warranted a ten minute treatment, five minutes were given to a woman who happened to be on a plane that was grounded on that day, scolding those dastardly conspiracy theorists for having the nerve to ask a question or two.

That was actually the overall impression the show gave the viewer. What really galled was the emotional blackmail inherent in telling the audience that conspiracy theories are disrespectful to the victim's families and survivors, which seems particularly odd when there are plenty in that camp who question the NIST report and support the Truth movement publically. Again, this aspect wasn't deemed worthy of mention. If the producers feel that these people are deluded and acting out of grief, then Rudin could have included that thesis rather than pretending they don't exist.

Starting proceedings with the ever-histrionic Alex Jones set the stall out from the start. This was essentially a labelling exercise designed to discourage people from looking into the facts by constantly using a bogeyman term. Whilst there are very eloquent presentations that can be viewed where key issues are highlighted methodically - especially a two hour presentation by Gage which follows the scientific method to the hilt - the BBC and Rudin chose to engage with the most wayward of theorists, and treated Loose Change producer, Dylan Avery with contempt (only showing one question and answer - presumably the one he faltered on) despite travelling all the way to see him at our expense.

Sad to say, some viewers will probably have tuned in and felt that genuine concerns were properly addressed and thrown out with something approaching integrity, when actually this was an hour which, frightened by the heavy content it had to deal with, instead opted to skim the surface of the perimeter fence, ultimately providing more of an arsenal to those who find fun in shutting down interesting questions with name-calling, fragile arguments and dismissiveness. Playground stuff, by any other name.

Source: http://tvpixie.com/tv-news/2011/08/30/conspiracy-files-911-10-years-exer...