Write To The BBC
Write to the BBC
The BBC Trustees address is
BBC Trust, Editorial Standards Committee,
180 Great Portland Street
London W1W 5QZ
Put: For the Attention of the Editorial Standards Committee in the subject line.
See Lawyer Paul Warburtons Letter
you could also mention :
1. Some Official Commission members now have serious misgivings about their finished work - they say they were lied to. (see quotes on this website) by T.Kean, L.Hamilton, (co-chairs) J.Farmer, (legal advisor to commission), and others.
p; 2. why there was no adequate defensive response despite multiple intelligence warnings from around the world, some specific as to place, time, date.
You can also write to the individual BBC TV news presenters who read off auto cues. Maybe suggest that they do their own
research and look at the following websites:
http://io911truth.com (intelligence officers)
Lawyer Paul Warburon is in correspondence with the BBC Trust, complaining about the BBC's far from impartial reporting of the 9/11 attacks. They seem to recognise from the correspondence so far that there is a case to be answered and it is essential now that as many people as possible email them or better still write in. The only email address the BBC give out is t so please
The BBC Trust has been bombarding viewers, saying "we would like to hear your views on the BBC news". To give you some ideas on what to write:-
I thank the BBC (Audience Services) for the attached letter dated 4th July apologising for not replying to my 2nd letter of complaint dated 10th May, 2 months ago.
Although their brief letter refers to an investigation it doesn't really tell me a great deal. It certainly doesn't tell me when I can expect a resolution or who is conducting the investigation or what issues it is looking at. Based upon your previous coverage of 9/11 (the conspiracy files) and your ongoing documentaries being made now (please see below) I am not filled with confidence that the BBC will break away from the mantra of the Official line. Which leaves me back at Square 1 and my reason for writing to you again.
I also need to (1) link in with recent national developments in the media/police/political arena and (2) bring in another great social organisation which has been silent over the past 10 years when it should have been much more outspoken - the church.
The past few days with the phone hacking scandal has shown further cracks in the media world, the world of the police and the world of politicians. It is now being openly touted that media can and do pay people and influence them and this outside the law in some cases. I hope that sentence will begin to alert you to the possibility that both you at the BBC (and the church) may have been blindsided by a far bigger problem than phone hacking. I am openly challenging the BBC in this letter whether you have "the public's interest at heart" and whether you are "truly free of all political influence". (Michael Grade's comments as your chairman in 2004.) If you have been misrepresenting the events of 9/11 the BBC's part in this will make the News of the World pale into insignificance.
I do not want you to take this letter as a letter of attack. All I want to get at is the truth. When it finally does come out we will all have serious problems on our hands about how society is ordered and run. When we come to a common understanding it will be down to each individual organisation how it goes about setting its own house in order.
We are now 2 months off the 10th anniversary of 9/11. An anniversary that will be very significant not least because hundreds of delegates (Victims family members, witnesses, professionals and experts) from the 9/11 truth movement will descend on a Toronto University campus for 4 days from 8th to 11th September to try and get to the truth in the face of 10 years of Govt and major media opposition. Of course from 12th September the world will wait for the outcome of that independent investigation with bated breath.
Crystallising this down to a few basic principles of criminal and investigative journalism you at the BBC have failed as a fact to ask basic questions about 9/11;
1. Where is the film footage of the Boeing striking the Pentagon ?
2. Why haven't your journalists asked the US authorities to see it ? Why is it secret ?
3. Why haven't you interviewed people like April Gallop who stepped through that hole after the attack and said there was no plane there ?
4. Why haven't you interviewed firefighters who heard explosions in the Twin Towers ?
5. Why havent you been able to show substantial wreckage (or photos of) from the Shanksville site ?
6. Why do you only interview explosives experts that back the official version ?
7. Why don't you speak to any pilots from pilots for 9/11truth ?
8. Why don't you speak to victim's family members who still demand an independent investigation ?
9. Why are 5 of the alleged hijackers alive and well according to your own news reporting ? Who then did hijack the planes ?
10. Why aren't you seeking written scientific evidence to rebut the compelling claims of the teams of Richard Gage and Niels Harrit ?
11. Why are your programmes "conspiracy files" on 9/11 so overtly biased as to not withstand scrutiny as fair and objective ie they don't address any of the above issues ?
Each above fact is suggestive in itself but taken as a cumulative the argument is overwhelming and would pass the criminal standard of proof; beyond reasonable doubt viz a viz the Official 9/11 is radically wrong.
The internet is rife at the moment with Charlie Veitch's about face on 9/11. He is entitled to change his mind if he has done so freely. You are also entitled to show that in your documentary you are making on him and other young people on their views on 9/11. What you are not entitled to do under your Charter is to continue to be biased and to avoid the stark questions above in bold. It would appear your current filming is not unbiased.
You see what we are left with is the distinct impression that you have gone along with and are propping up the Official version although its riddled with inconsistencies and you have been doing this for 10 years.
I think with the passage of time I have been waiting for the BBC's reply you need to be more honest with me and try and negotiate a way out of this impasse. Let's see what cards we hold.
I don't believe for one moment the BBC don't reply because they lack the staff. It's more likely I have raised an ugly spectre and one way the BBC can deal with it is to ignore it for as long as possible and hope I will tire or something happens to me. It is after all a very uncomfortable position the BBC now find themselves in - the assertion that a major piece of news you have been putting out for 10 years is false to the extent you identified the wrong culprits and your investigative journalists failed to track that down. You are after all operating to a Royal Charter and taking money from everyone in the country with a TV set. Is it too much to ask for some honest reporting on the most pivotal event of the 21st Century ? I suggest you do not continue ignoring me. I am going to offer you a way out.
I believe you have high ranking people within the BBC who have known for a long time that 9/11 was an inside job. I also think that group may be very small. Outing them will have both a destructive and constructive effect on your organisation. Destructive because many in this nation will be shocked at being deceived, constructive because it will begin that overdue sense of cleansing we need in high politics and truth telling. You will be part of that new and honourable move if you choose to take it. You need to think about purging that element. You will not be the only media organisation that will need to put its hands up but being the biggest and most trusted you do need to take the lead. Bear with me.
If that suggestion seems ludicrous or dangerous I invite you to look at the consequences of continued silence;
1. You or some of you are knowingly or unwittingly party to the cover up of a crime/s. 9/11 did not stop on 9/11. It is played out every day on the streets of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan even London.
2. The perpetrators continue to evade justice because media giants like you fail to do your purported jobs properly. Instead you go to great lengths to call people like me "conspiracy theorists". What is wrong asking to see the Boeing footage of the plane striking the Pentagon wall ?? It is the most elemental part of a criminal process - you show the crime being committed because you (the US Govt) have the CCTV or you (the BBC) request it. I don't need to list again all the elements lacking in the Official version. I am granting you the intelligence to see through it and to engage in this process.
3. You are ruining the futures of our children by constructing a lie and maintaining it. For example think of all of our dead soldiers (who were little more than children) from the last 10 years who were angered by 9/11 and went to war because of it. Do you think they would have gone if they knew an American "Elite" had something to do with it. I remind you of that sick comment by Kissinger "soldiers are just dumb stupid animals, pawns used in foreign policy". You have not helped our soldiers become more informed.
4. Say you say nothing and I am quietened do you not think the next atrocity will be worse than the one before ? This isn't going to go away. I remind of your excellent Gladio documentary aired in 1992.
5. The church, that other sleeping giant that puts such store by truth and decency and justice, once provoked will eventually send out its own individuals to set the record straight. It will take time but they will wake up. In the same way I challenge you I challenge them. I will send them separate cover letters with this letter. You can't say you stand for all the best of British and go silent over the true culprits of such a sick crime perpetrated in full view of the world. If I stop writing someone else will pick up the pen at some point. When I talk in churches about 9/11 and Biblical justice it is well received by more than you would expect, to the extent of applause. Others who are uncomfortable with the message cannot contend with it on either theological grounds or evidential ones. It just deeply upsets them and they say they don't want to hear more. But that is the reality of the world we live in and churches and the BBC need to live in it if you both keep pronouncing you are bastions of truth. That message can be taken to many hundreds of other churches.
Please start your internal (uncompromised) investigation offsite, take legal advice if necessary from trusted advisers, speak to trusted members of your circle who are outside of the establishment loop and let me help you extricate yourselves from this mess. There is a simple way but I am not going to commit it to paper until I know I can trust the people who read these letters and then engage with me on equal terms. This issue is not going to go away. I do not think of you as an enemy. I think you have found yourselves in a situation that you dont know how to handle. Please face up to that and be brave enough to do the right thing. Trust imports powerful things. Any programmes you are currently making and air on the 10th anniversary that back up the official version will only dig a deeper pit for yourselves. Go back to the basics of common sense and decency and good investigative journalism and ask the FBI and CIA this 10th anniversary year for footage of the Boeing impact at the Pentagon and ask them why it has not been released. You should have asked for it 10 years ago. That one thing will tell you everything.