Channel’s 9-11 documentary a farce; real debate proposed

The Big Picture/with Mark Anderson, American Free Press national writer, www.AmericanFreePress.net; and host of RBN’s When Worlds Collide, Saturdays, 7 to 9 p.m. Central; email truthhound2@yahoo.com

Writer’s note: Those wanting to call the host during his radio show on this topic are urged to do so, to briefly share your thoughts and ideas; please call 800-313-9443 during showtime.

The History Channel has delved into 9-11 with a new documentary, 9-11 Conspiracies: Fact or Fiction, that seems to have a built-in “structural failure.” Thus, it cannot break new ground of any consequence toward truth or justice, as it largely supports the government’s conspiracy theory.

Viewing it Oct. 18 was an unsettling experience. Many people in the documentary from “both sides” say many things about the events of 9-11-01 that undoubtedly vary in their factual basis, but ideally everything should be sorted out by a new, genuine investigation. The NYC CAN 9-11 plan for New Yorkers to vote for a new probe failed to make the ballot, so some new ideas are needed for now.

It’s clear that History Channel programmers understand that it is not so much a matter of who says what about 9-11; rather, it’s a question of how to structure the program in order to fashion it as a barricade against free inquiry and ward off a new probe, under the disguise of open inquiry.

The key thing about this documentary is that anyone referred to with the word “expert” is either a believer in the government’s theory, a skeptic of the 9-11 truth movement or both. Therefore, all those who question the government’s conspiracy theory, regardless of the credibility of their statements, are referred to as “conspiracists” (which is not really a word in the strict sense) Or they are portrayed as mere theorists, or referred to by occupation, but never as “experts.” The propaganda function is served by this inherently biased structure.

When former Brigham Young University physics professor Steven Jones is first shown – the one whose research indicates the presence of explosives in the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center – his name was not even flashed on the screen, let alone that he is a physicist. And Jones’ claims, those of theologian and well-known 9-11 author David Ray Griffin, Professor Jim Fetzer and several others are each “refuted” by what is shown onscreen as an “expert response,” when what is actually happening is a slanted debate that should be openly conducted in person without documentary producers stacking the deck.

Thus, this column is offered as the first step in an earnest request that can and should be sent to the History Channel. The proposal here is that the producers of the History Channel’s 9-11 documentary round up their show’s experts, including the chaps from Popular Mechanics magazine, and bring them to a real, in-person, televised debate at a physical location, casting aside the contrived format in which “the final word” and the nametag “expert” is lopsidedly given to those who tend to side with the government’s story of 19 men, using box cutters, taking over four large jetliners and flying them thousands of miles with the greatest of ease, obliterating two 110-story buildings with fire and gravitational collapse alone while ramming one of the jets — below treetop level at more than 500 miles per hour, mind you — into the side of the Pentagon without any defensive intervention by history’s most sophisticated military command center. Yeeeeaaaaahhhh!!

And by the documentary’s own claim, this Pentagon attack totally obliterated two massive jet engines, both wings and a 44-foot tall tail section – all without disturbing the lawn. No seats. No bodies. No nothing, other than small, shiny “tinfoil” remnants alleged to be actual plane wreckage. Indeed, the Pentagon part of 9-11 needs much more investigation, since the World Trade Center gets the vast majority of press coverage and scientific analysis, even though a direct, successful attack on the Pentagon – an actual government institution, run by the military – is harder to understand than three WTC buildings which are important but were not the actual nerve center of the American military itself.

Moreover, the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7 that collapsed into its own footprint more than six hours after the towers were decimated was known to have city and federal government assets and served as New York’s emergency command center, yet it came down uniformly in about seven seconds even though it was not hit by a plane. Poof! The critically important equipment, documents and other assets used by authorities on certain floors in WTC 7 were destroyed. Their seizure, in a proper crime scene investigation that never happened, could have cleared up a lot of questions about what took place on 9-11-01.

With a debate needed, there is no need to ramble on here. So, let’s consider how the History Channel’s “experts” and 9-11 citizen-activists, including their experts, would fare in a real debate. This column ought to be forwarded to a host of activists, some of whom this reporter has interviewed over the years. And through AFP, RBN and other means it is suggested that this article be forwarded to the History Channel; or, better yet, a letter inspired by this article could be sent to the History Channel by a coalition of 9-11 groups and other interested individuals. Group affiliation is not mandatory, of course.

Readers are urged to save this column and send it to interested parties to help get the ball rolling. Expect a video or audio commentary accompanying it soon.



http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=4864