Who they interviewed

Fourteen to three with a
seriously bias referee

(1) The BBC must do all it can to ensure that controversial subjects are treated with due accuracy and impartiality in all relevant output. [BBC Charter]

The foundation of the programme was interviews with 17 people and BBC “voice over” commentary.

The BBC commentary and 14 interviewees presented the official Bush/Cheney explanation, SNAFU with rider, throughout the hour long programme.

Three highly clipped and censored opposing voices were allotted 7 minutes in total.

These three, Dylan Avery, Loose Change producer, introduced as "self confessed dropout" (vehemently denied) - Alex Jones, talk show host, introduced as "evangelist preacher" (rebutted as a slander) - and Dr James Fetzer, retired Marine Corp officer & university professor. They are all critical of the BBC coverage and consider their views were misrepresented.

These three are not representative of the broad swathe of critical voices.

Those supporting the official explanation were presented as independent observers and no defamatory remarks were made or compromising backgrounds revealed:-

Military/Intelligence personnel
Of the 14 supporting the official explanation; 2 were serving FBI agents directly involved in countering “Islamic terrorism” (Dale Watson & Bill Gore) 1 retired CIA agent, ex head of the bin Laden unit (Mike Scheuer) and a serving National Guard officer (Lt Col Steve O’Brien)

Mike Scheuer: 22 years a CIA officer - ex Head of a bin Laden Unit at CIA and author of “Through Our Enemies Eyes” which spelled out connections between Saddam Hussein and bin Laden. His book provided backing to Bush for launching wars of aggression against weak and virtually defenceless peoples in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, the latest edition revises this intelligence in a 100% U turn refuting these cited connections. Yet still, in opinion polls 25% believe 911 was the work of Saddam Hussein & Bin Laden. What credibility can he have unless the BBC offers him some?

The FBI and the CIA agents could not be described as successful if the official conspiracy theory of 19 Islamic hijackers led by a man in a cave in Afghanistan were to be believed.

Are failed intelligence officers reliable witnesses? The FBI is culpable in the catastrophe, either treasonous or incompetent in the failure to protect their homeland, are they really going to give a valid - honest account?

Lt Col Steve O’Brien: For a year witnesses had spoken of a C130 above the Pentagon. As stories spread questioning the competence of Hani Hanjour to perform the aerobatics that the Boeing 757 is reported to have made, prior to diving into the Pentagon like a military plane, Lt Col Steve O’Brien surfaced to give eye witness account.

O’Brien is reported to have taken off on a “routine” flight from Andrews Air base some 5 minutes after the grounding order was issued. (9:25) This order was to all military and private planes, to make immediate landings at nearest airfields. The only exceptions were Warren Buffet’s Lear jet, Airforce One and, by accident it would appear, Lt Col O’Brien’s C130. The role of supersonic fighters with the responsibility to defend the nation remains unclear.

The first man in history to see a full size airliner disappear into thin air after hitting the Pentagon, Lt Col O’Brien, for reasons unknown, failed to comply with the grounding order. Rather than return to Andrews a short distance away, O’Brien flew west, Over western Pennsylvania, he (O’Brien) “looked down at a blackened, smouldering field”. This was F93. So O’Brien is unique in witnessing the only two passenger jets in aviation history to crash without leaving behind any significant aircraft wreckage.

As a serving military officer, signatory of official secrets act, Lt Col O’Brien is duty bound to defend his brothers in arms and the prestige of his country’s armed forces. As a military officer he has to obey orders.

These 4 naturally had their livelihoods, their wages and pensions, possibilities of promotion and advancement absolutely controlled by the Bush/Cheney administration.

How reliable can these witnesses be?

The men of science.
The major scientific issue of 911 is the absolutely unique utter destruction of the Twin Towers and building 7, according to the official account, due to fire, - the only 3 steel framed buildings, ever in the world, to have collapsed due to fire.

Three “experts” are presented to offer scientific analysis. Only one covering WTC as the BBC presents a Nova computer simulation of the collapse rejected by the official inquiries as unreliable. The other two comment on the Pentagon.

Davin Coburn: Employed by the Hurst Corporation as a Popular Mechanics reporter. His last know position was on a Pennsylvania local newspaper covering community sports events plus neighbourhood fires or car crashes in summer 2003. He is not credited with any professional qualifications or experience.

Hurst Corporation are backers of the Republican Party and strong supporters of the Bush/Cheney administration. Hurst’s president, Cathleen Black is married to Thomas E. Harvey who worked for the CIA and the Department of Defence.

The other “scientific” experts are presented in connection with the Pentagon attack.

Allyn Kilsheimer: The owner of a firm of structural engineers (KCE) enmeshed for decades with the Dept of Defense/US Military. After the attack he got the engineering contract for rebuild the damaged wing of the Pentagon. By Sept. 2002 the Pentagon had awarded 10's of millions of dollars to contractors. He is so well connected to the Pentagon that no formal contracts were signed initially.

Kilsheimer claims to have calculated that the twin towers would collapse in the minutes after impacts. He did this on the back of an envelope after first hearing of the first strike on the North Tower. In the event he was diverted to the Pentagon and claims have been involved in the “rescue” by midday and to have found the black box recorders - claims disputed by FBI statements and other rescuers.

How reliable a witness can this man be? Has he lied about when he arrived, about what he found i.e. the black boxes and is he exaggerating a bit about his remarkable skills in predicting the collapse of the Twin Towers? Is he compromised by decades of favourable financial contracts from defence and intelligence services?

Christopher Hoffmann: is the Director of the Rosen Centre for Advanced Computing, Director of the Purdue University Dept. of Computer Science and co-director of the Computer Research Institute. These are all inter linked and funded by the Department of Defense, The National Science Foundation (itself created to further military defence) and the department of Homeland Security.

Hoffmann, with his simulation expertise, is a central figure in a web of military and intelligence related projects. Can Hoffmann be described as “independent of government?”


Cheryl Shames - Walley Miller -Mayor Lichty - Brenda Wasson and Mary McFadden Five Americans related to some events on 911. But none were actually involved in the attacks. None were eye witnesses to what happened. Shames, Miller, Mayor and McFadden chant the mantra that echoes through the BBC programme, that doubting Bush and Cheney is a manifestation of mild mental disorder or flawed character. None are identified as coming from a professional background in psychology or sociology.

Senator Graham: was the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. On the morning of September 11, Graham, together with Porter Goss, chair of the House Intelligence Committee were having breakfast on Capitol Hill with General Ahmad, the chief of Pakistani intelligence service, the ISI.

General Ahmad, to use the FBI expression, was the alleged "moneyman" behind the 9/11 hijackers. The Washington Post, 18 May 2002, reported “General Ahmad ran a spy agency notoriously close to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban”.

According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, the ISI Head was instrumental in providing financial support to the 9/11 terrorists. General Mahmoud Ahmad had allegedly ordered the transfer of $100.000 to the alleged 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta.

In February 2002, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the House Intelligence Committee agreed to conduct a Joint Inquiry into the activities of the U.S. Intelligence Community in connection with 911. Bob Graham was its chairman.

Despite numerous press reports, which were confirmed by US officials, linking Atta money transfers to Pakistani ISI, this evidence has never been addressed by the U.S. government, nor explained by any "investigation" into the 9/11 attacks.

Was it appropriate for the BBC to interview someone so deeply enmeshed in the Bush/Cheney story line when purportedly engaged in investigative journalism aimed at revealing a deeper, more authentic understanding the events?


Frank Spotnitz: Finally we come to Frank Spotnitz, Fox TV drama writer. Spotnitz was the writer for the successful X Files series. He was allowed 3 min's, to pass judgement on the psychological soundness of all that question the official Bush/Cheney account of 911. Spotnitz is not a scientist or psychologist but a science fiction writer. He’s got a good record of telling fictional tales but is he the best the BBC could find for hard scientific analysis or investigative research?