BBC BLOGS - The Editors
« Previous | Main | Next »

The Conspiracy Files: Osama Bin Laden, Dead or Alive?

Mike Rudin Mike Rudin | 15:05 UK time, Thursday, 7 January 2010

The latest Conspiracy Files documentary explores the many stories about Osama Bin Laden's supposed illness and even death.

Osama Bin LadenWhat is immediately apparent is the lack of intelligence about Bin Laden. We hear from the man who was tasked by President Obama to review US policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The former CIA officer Bruce Riedel has seen the intelligence on Bin Laden and his blunt conclusion is that "there is no trail any more".

"It's not cold," he says, "it's frozen over".

Riedel, who has advised three US presidents, admits that despite the biggest manhunt in history "we haven't had eyes on target now in over eight years... and we don't have a clue where he is."

Nowadays, if there's a situation where there's no certainty, in jump the conspiracy theories.

Over the last eight years, Osama Bin Laden has become shrouded in myth and rumour.

There have been reports from some leading news organisations suggesting Bin Laden has been seriously ill with kidney disease and even some claiming that he is dead.

The leading French newspaper, Le Figaro, and Radio France International reported that Osama Bin Laden was given emergency kidney dialysis in the American Hospital in Dubai, a few months before 9/11.

CBS ran a story on their main evening news suggesting that Bin Laden was given kidney dialysis at the Pakistan Military Hospital in Rawalpindi, on the day before 9/11.

Often these reports emanate from smaller newspapers, such as one in the Pakistan Observer, which claimed that Osama Bin Laden had died of a lung complication during the battle for Tora Bora at the end of 2001 and was buried there in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan. That report was then picked up around the world.

Such stories might once have slowly faded from view but now the internet stores them and endlessly recycles them. Years on, the stories are presented as fact, without any checks.

The hospitals in Dubai and Pakistan both deny the stories without reservation. Both have investigated the reports and checked their records.

Robert Baer spent 21 years working for the CIA as a case officer in the Middle East, with postings in Sudan, Lebanon and Iraq. He is surprised by how little is known about the world's most infamous terrorist but he's scathing about the reports of Bin Laden's kidney illness.

"He's probably in the same bed next to Elvis Presley. You can't hide something like that in Dubai," says Baer.

"It's the crap you read on the internet that people believe in," adds the experienced former CIA officer.

The editor of the Arabic newspaper Al Quds, Abdel Bari Atwan, interviewed Bin Laden in Tora Bora back in the 90s. He is critical of those who stay in their office and don't get out to research stories about Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

But there's an immediate rejoinder from the sceptics. David Ray Griffin, a retired philosophy professor in California, has written a book suggesting there is good evidence that Bin Laden is dead. He questions the motives of officials and former officials who contradict his theory:

"We do know historically that people have lied under pressure or promise of money or whatever. I'm not making any accusation. I'm saying I don't know these people. I don't know their motivations, but I'm saying that the very fact that people say these things don't necessarily mean they're true."

Griffin's previous book suggested the American government could be responsible for 9/11.

Now he speculates that US military intelligence could be faking Bin Laden's recent video statements to keep an evil bogeyman alive and to help justify the so-called war on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq and back at home.

He thinks the "military-industrial complex" has ample motive for this grand conspiracy in the huge sums that have been spent. Afghanistan alone has cost the US $240bn.

The CIA case officer, Robert Baer, dismisses those suggestions of conspiracy theories involving the US intelligence, but he does question whether Bin Laden is still alive: "The problem is nobody's convinced me he's alive."

Baer questions the veracity of some of the recent Bin Laden videos. Instead though, he thinks it is in the interests of al-Qaeda to fake the tapes to pretend their icon is still alive.

But perhaps the last word should go to the last journalist to interview Osama Bin Laden, back in November 2001.

Hamid Mir, now the executive editor of Geo TV in Islamabad, says Bin Laden is still alive and the secret of his survival is that he is "much cleverer and wiser than the American intelligence". And he warns: "we should not underestimate him. All these conspiracy theories are actually helping him."

Mike Rudin is series producer of The Conspiracy Files. The Conspiracy Files: Osama Bin Laden - Dead or Alive? is on Sunday 10 January at 9.30pm on BBC Two.


Page 1 of 6

  • Comment number 1.

    Considering how pathetic the previous conspiracy files programs have been I don't really understand why you're bothering to make any more of them, especially one about this 21st century bogeyman.

    If you were going to make a program about Bin Laden then it would be a much better use of license payers money if you made a program about his past involvement with western governments and how he is a classic example of what happens when you fund, arm and organise one group of mercenaries to take out another group of mercenaries and how this inevitably blows up in your face a few years down the line.

    Stop perpetuating the myths of the War on Terror and actually do some real investigative journalism and expose those within our own government and security services who have failed us so miserably since the end of WWII.

  • Comment number 2.

    Osama Bin Laden is now totally irrelevant; that horse has bolted, possibly with help from his family's friends such as George W Bush.

    More useful would be a programme exposing Ajem Choudary's links with Al Muhajiroon and other terrorist groups.

  • Comment number 3.

    Couldn't have said it better myself General_Jack_Ripper. Also, why don't the BBC do some actual research into the origins of Al Qaeda instead of perpetuating the myth that they are a terrorist organisation let alone a threat.

    Al Queda literally means "the base" a term coined by the CIA when referring to members of a database of international mujaheddin and arms smugglers used by the CIA and Saudis to funnel guerrillas, arms, and money into Soviet-occupied Afghanistan.

    Robin Cook knew this, the Rockefellers (and the rest of the so called elite) know this, but they don't want you to know this because there would be no war on terror! WAKE UP people, the media will keep on feeding you lie after lie.

  • Comment number 4.

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

  • Comment number 5.

    I can confirm that he is dead from the neck upwards.

  • Comment number 6.

    We have not heard from the man for a while. Bin Laden is not the type that keeps quiet for so long. He would have make some comments and send us videos to let the west know he is alive. I believe he may be dead or incapacitated in a way. If he is not seen nor heard of, he must be dead.

  • Comment number 7.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 8.

    Chances are he's living quietly somewhere in Gordon's multicultural Britain. On social security and in a ten roomed mansion provided by the local authority.

  • Comment number 9.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 10.

    Is this from the same CIA that allegedly trained Osama Bin Laden in the first place? (Ref: )

  • Comment number 11.

    I0. Keith,

    Yep, it sure is and he was not only trained by the CIA he was working for them up to 9/11. See Sibel Edmonds at;

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    If that does not work just search 'sibel edmonds 911'. No doubt you aware of Sibel, Mike!

    By the way, the FBI does not have Uncle Bin on their 'wantded for 9/11' list because they do not have the evidence. So what does that say about all the alleged 'Bin Laden' videos? Any self incriminating statement by him would be evidence. Seems that the FBI is not fooled by fake Bin Laden videos.

    I hope you do not rely too much on those videos Mike, to conclude one way or another that Bin is dead or alive.

    Trust you had a word with David Frost to get the good oil on his interview with Benazar Bhutto (broadcast on BBC) wherein she said Bin was murdered, (I think in December 2001?) by the person she named. Pity you are unable to talk to her now.

  • Comment number 12.

    The BBC are going to try and tell is Bin Laden is still alive?? What next for The Conspiracy Files?

    WMD: Bush and Blair were right all along.

    THE REICHSTAG FIRE: The Commies did it.

    SANTA CLAUS - How pesky conspiraloons are ruining Christmas for children.

  • Comment number 13.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 14.

    The speculation is interesting, but irrelevant to a certain extent. Whether Obama is dead or alive, the terrorist threat and issues underlying it remain. The threat to our security remains, no matter what.

    The real emphasis has to be on protecting ourselves, and that means tight security and border controls. The days of mass air travel might well be over, as the possibility of security failure is so high, and the potential consequences of a terrorist attack so costly in lives.

    And we might have to pretty much close our borders to people from countries and regions associated with the terror threat.

  • Comment number 15.

    As far as I know, we have not had any public appearances or videocasts from him so it is possible that he is dead.

    Then again given the amount of information hidden from us by national governments it's possible that he could be a CIA figurehead to give governments a reason to adopt greater powers to infringe civil liberties.

    It's also possible that he died a long time ago but governments forgot to tell us for the same reason.

    It's almost like a SPECTRE global domination plot from the James Bond stories.

    We'll just have to wait to see if he makes any further public appearances.

    Even then, with the wonders they can do with plastic surgery these days, we won't actually know if it really is him.

    Maybe, it's just better for us to fight the enemy we can see and to be all a bit more security conscious.

  • Comment number 16.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 17.


    Aha, UK and US should be sealed, rogue elements within these governments should be dragged into light, we should reject rejections of independent inquiries regarding mass murders that marked the beginning of century… and those treasonous murderous… I'll stay polite, should stand on trial and answer for crimes against humanity.

    That way, we'll deal with the menace once and for all.

    It shouldn't be much larger than Nuremberg and it will serve as a trigger for new, better and brighter reality.

    imo, as ever.

  • Comment number 18.

    #14 Quote: "Whether Obama is dead or alive, the terrorist threat and issues underlying it remain."

    Hush, hush, my friend. You'll start another conspiracy off for Mr Mike with statements like that.....

  • Comment number 19.

    A) Whether he's dead or not makes little difference. The current terror threats come from amateur's who claim allegiance to Al Qu'eda as a brand-name rather than being under the control of any mastermind in a cave somewhere.

    B) He very probably is dead. If he'd been caught in a cave in Tora Bora during a US airstrike, he and everyone who knew where he actually was will be buried forever under a billion tons of rock.

    C) Al Qu'eda won't say their figurehead is dead for PR reasons. It suits the US to have a bogeyman and the PR coup of saying he's dead will backfire if he suddenly pops up again alive so no-one in Washington will say he's dead unless they have a body. It suits all sides for him to remain 'at large'

    D) If he IS alive I'd personally look in Saudi Arabia. You may note that Al Qu'eda have quietly stopped calling for the destruction of the house of Saud and the Saudi Royal Family are infinitely more corrupt than people claim the Bush's are (see BAe deal). The Bin Ladin family are very, very rich and the Saudis do not like the west, but aren't quite dumb enough to openly bite the hand that feeds them so it suits everyone in the Penninsula to have OBL on-side again but quiet. The $15-20M reward offered for Al Qu'eda leaders in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan has worked pretty well but this is small change for senior Saudis.

    Incidentally for those suggesting plastic surgery. Bin Ladin is about 6' 2" tall. You can do many things with a scalpel but not make him 8" shorter. He's literally head and shoulders above most Afghans and Arabs.

    #10 What exactly do you think the CIA 'trained' Bin Ladin to do? From what I've seen he can't even hold and fire an AK47 properly. He certainly doesn't carry out bombings personally! Whether or not the FBI can prove he's responsible for 9/11 doesn't change the fact that he was on their most wanted list for much of the Clinton administration (for the USS Cole attack and the US embassy bombings in Africa). He wasn't created by Bush in 2001.

    Most people have very little knowledge of the history of the Afghan war. For starters the CIA did not help the Taliban... the Taliban didn't exist until the mid-90's and were a creation of Pakistani smugglers. The CIA aided various mujhadeen groups who morphed into the "Northern Alliance" who then fought a ten year civil war against the Taliban and their Al Qu'eda allies. The reason the Taliban refused to give up Bin Ladin was that a few days before 9/11 his boys had assassinated some senior Northern Alliance people and were owed a big favour by the Taliban.

    Its also worth comparing what the US gave the Afghans and what the Chinese (no friend of Russia either) sold them. The US gave some anti-air missiles. China supplied tanks.

  • Comment number 20.

    #15 "Then again given the amount of information hidden from us by national governments it's possible that he could be a CIA figurehead to give governments a reason to adopt greater powers to infringe civil liberties."

    This is the same CIA that failed in over 100 attempts to assasinate the poorly protected leader of a banana republic (Castro) and who were riddled with soviet agents throughout the 60's & 70's? It always amazes me that the US couldn't get castro, couldn't even cover up the Iran-Contra or watergate scandals and couldn't even silence Monica Lewinsky yet could apparently pull of 9/11 or murder Diana and keep it silent despite the hundreds of people it would take to accomplish. If 9/11 had been engineered by a govt. agency we'd know because the full plans would have been left on a USB stick on a train in the home counties!

    Our govts and their agencies are incompetent. Our economic and immigration policies should prove that.

  • Comment number 21.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 22.

    Perhaps Mr Bin Laden is alive and well and sipping pink gin (non-alcoholic, I'm sure) with Bush snr and Bush jr at Camp David?

    If I were a world leader, I would need terrorists (real or imaginary) like I would need fresh air. Otherwise my selfish foreign policy would be completely untenable.

    If there aren't any terrorists to hand when you need them, you have to recruit and train them yourself, or just get your own security services to commit the required atrocity and retrospectively invent some terrorists to blame it on.

    Whatever helps oil the wheels of the juggernaut of your self-absorbed foreign policy (I'm sorry, did I write 'oil'....can't imagine what I was thinking about).

    Or how would you do it? Never read Machiavelli? Some of us are playing for keeps.

  • Comment number 23.

    May I recommend one book on the rise of radical Islam over the past four decades, of which Al-Qaeda is one strand of thought. It is ‘Al-Qaeda: The True Story of Radical Islam’ by Jason Burke. Penguin.

    Rather like all the 'Judaea popular fronts' in Python’s Life of Brian movie, so radical Islam is much factionalised.

    Some of the comments above appear to believe that such groups do not exist, ergo there is no threat. That is naive in the extreme.

    One reason the west found it could ignore these groups for so long (other than when Khomeini seized power in Iran) was that their primary aim was to overthrow governments in Islamic countries, in order to install one reflecting their hard-line views.
    The brutal civil war in Algeria for example went largely unreported; it cost tens of thousands of lives.

    The radicals’ failure in the main to overthrow governments in their own countries led to Bin Laden’s shift to a position that the west would have to be dealt with first before moderate Islamic governments could be overthrown and replaced with hardline ones.

    As with all such groups hard-line Islamic extremists appeal to a tiny, tiny percentage of the Muslim population. But as the 1998 Nairobi bombing showed a couple of people can inflict many casualties.

    Al Qaeda is less an organisation, more an ideology. Anyone can profess to agree with it and act in its name, without the consent of any central body or person.

    If alive, Bin Laden may no longer have much influence; that really came because he could supply training and funding to recruits.
    He no longer has bases in Afghanistan and the current conflict would be the main concern of any foreign radicals attracted to the region.

    Leadership of Al Qaeda could easily gravitate to other individuals or groups in the Middle East sharing Bin Laden’s aims, as the current Yemeni situation shows.

  • Comment number 24.

    #22 To be more accurate its rather useful for a politician to have a "threat" to focus attention on. You don't need terrorists, climate change serves the same function. In 1950s america it was communism, in 1930's Germany it was Jews etc. Maggie Thatcher managed quite nicely with trade unions as a threat to the UK. Its not unique to the west either. The Iranian govt do very nicely from imaginary Mossad/British/CIA plots too.

    The last thing you want is to actually have to deal with these threats though..... look how much 9/11 wiped off the US stock market. What did Vietnam or Iraq cost? The perfect result was the cold war.... a nice clear threat, plenty of justification for spending a fortune on your military-industrial power base, a bit of sabre rattling for good tabloid headlines, but no unpopular wars that drag on & cost a fortune that could be spent better elsewhere.

    Blair & Bush did not come out of the Iraq war more popular or with more power. As you've mentioned 'oil' you might want to think closely about Iraq, oil & 9/11. The worlds biggest reserve of oil is Saudi Arabia. Bin Ladin was/is a Saudi. The 9/11 Hijackers were Saudi. If you wanted to justify a war to grab oil wouldn't 9/11 justify attacking Saudi? Instead the US spent more than just buying the damned oil would have cost invading Iraq (who have recently signed oil deals with China) and no-longer have any troops in Saudi although they did in 2000.

  • Comment number 25.

    #23 Nice post. I totally agree. Rather than being a result of our foreign policy these groups have arisen because we ignored them as being 'internal problems'

    I get sick of people trying to claim 7/7 was a false flag attack simply because of what happened exactly two weeks later.... 4 more muslims attempted exactly the same attack with exactly the same weapons and simply propelled themselves around the tube trains on fire because they hadn't got their DIY explosives mixed quite right. It is inconcievable that this cell was formed and armed in under 2 weeks so its planning predated 7/7. The fact that our police then shot a Brazillian electrician creating a scandal leading to the departure of Londons top cop rather proves that we had no idea what the hell was happening that day.

    The four 21/7 idiots are clearly not British agents. Nor was the amazing self igniting Nigerian from the Xmas day screwup or the two indians who set themselves on fire, nor Richard Reid attempting to light a fuse in the cabin of the plane with a match, rather than go to the toilet with a cigarrette lighter.

    We've been very, very lucky so far in that the various amateurs claiming allegiance to Bin Ladin have managed to kill less people on the trains than Network rail has managed but they will continue to occaisonally get lucky and every now and then manage to make working bombs.

  • Comment number 26.


    To comment on Al Qaeda and Saudi Arabia,

    In 1991 Bin Laden was expelled from Saudi Arabia for anti-government activities. However given years of anti-Western incitement in the Saudi religious (Wahhabi) educational system, Saudi Arabia is probably the most sympathetic location for Al Qaeda members to hide.
    The Saudi charity, al-Haramain, has been primary conduit for funding al-Qaeda in Southeast Asia.

    Major figures in the Wahhabi clergy, such as Sheikh al-Ulwan & Sheikh al-Shuaibi have backed bin Laden.

    Some radical Saudi princes are known to have backed Al Qaeda out of identification with its anti-Western ideology, while other support may have come in the form of protection money to keep Al Qaeda from attacking the royal family.

    Parts of Saudi Arabia, particularly the mountainous south-western area near the Yemeni border are known hideouts for Al Qaeda. In October 2000 the skiff that attacked the USS Cole in Aden left from Saudi port of Jizan. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility.
    There were suicide attacks on western compounds inside Saudi in 2003.

    Inside Middle East politics (a maelstrom itself) Al Qaeda doesn’t have much mass support and governments, even sympathetic ones like Saudi, keep it at arms length, most are hostile to it; hence its reliance on terrorism.

  • Comment number 27.

    I find it incredible that with the amount of resources the USA has allocated to fight 'terrorism', Mr Osama bin Laden is still at large. Your suggestion about the likelihood of the odd video being staged as coming from Osama appears to be quite a probable scenario. After all America is run by the media and what better way to keep their public in check than to keep them in fear. The amount of damage done to the foundations that makes America so great - free speech, privacy, human rights is tremendous. If the public were not afraid of something, I think it would be highly unlikely that they would be able to accept some of the government action undertaken under the label National Security

    Even common sense indicates that there is something seriously fishy about the whole Osama situation. Humour on the conspiracy topic has gone as far as the Wonkie cartoon blog in South Africa - check out the sketch on depicting Osama as being unfairly victimised by the USA!

    I think the conspiracy files concept is great.. keep it up BBC!

    Anne Sempe

  • Comment number 28.

    #27. Only one slight problem with that (apart from the risk of such a deception being uncovered.... and lets face it, most of these things such as Iran-Contra ARE discovered because there's always someone willing to be 'Deep throat' or forget their laptop on the train) is that if I was to write a list of things that really scare me Islamic terror would barely make the top 50. I'm more scared of Robert Preston (the BBC financial guy) than Bin-Ladin because the chances of Bin Ladin killing me are tiny, whereas the chances of Preston talking savers into making a run on my bank and me losing my job, home and savings seems quite a bit higher.

  • Comment number 29.

    Mike Rudin: "The latest Conspiracy Files documentary explores the many stories about Osama Bin Laden's supposed illness and even death."

    Another duff documentary then?

    MR:"Riedel, who has advised three US presidents, admits that despite the biggest manhunt in history "we haven't had eyes on target now in over eight years... and we don't have a clue where he is."

    No reference to the FBI agents who "just missed him" at Tora Bora or the American General who said "he was never there in the first case"?

    MR:"Often these reports emanate from smaller newspapers..."

    But they don't fool you do they?

    MR:"Such stories might once have slowly faded from view but now the internet stores them and endlessly recycles them. Years on, the stories are presented as fact, without any checks."

    There are some stories and comments about you on the Internet too, Mr Rudin, which obviously you deny vehemently? And they only get "endlessly recycled" because they are there if you CHOOSE to visit them.

    MR:""It's the crap you read on the internet that people believe in," adds the experienced former CIA officer. "

    And in some DVDs no doubt, including those claiming to be responsible?

    MR:"David Ray Griffin, a retired philosophy professor in California, has written a book suggesting there is good evidence that Bin Laden is dead. He questions the motives of officials and former officials who contradict his theory."

    So you quote a 911 conspiracy theorist when it suits your purpose?

    MR:"The CIA case officer, Robert Baer, dismisses those suggestions of conspiracy theories involving the US intelligence, but he does question whether Bin Laden is still alive: "The problem is nobody's convinced me he's alive.""

    When was ObL last seen alive by anyone remotely reliable Mr Rudin?

    MR:"But perhaps the last word should go to the last journalist to interview Osama Bin Laden, back in November 2001."


    Not very much to make a film about is it?

  • Comment number 30.

    Anna Semp (28)

    The fact is, the muslim world has significant difficulties, with or without the west. The other fact is, 9/11 and the London and Madrid bombings were done by muslim terrorists.

    Obviously, some people need to blame all that on the west, and they are at liberty to do so, but the conspiracy theories do look a bit lame, blaming the victims rather than the perpetrators.

    The threat does exist, and the way to counter it is internal security, and border controls, not pretending it's the fault of the victims.

  • Comment number 31.

    The fact is, we have a gap, perhaps some people here should ask google about such basics as the 'ABC's of Jihad'.

    Some people here should ask: Who murdered Pat Tillman?

    Some should realise, the funding of enemy is act of insanity... and treason. Much like seeing controlled demolition and stating it is something other than controlled demolition.


  • Comment number 32.

    #30. Sadly internal security will stop the majority of attacks but never all of them (countries like Israel, Russia, Iran & China with much stricter internal security also have terror attacks) and border controls don't work when your terrorists are home grown (7/7 or Madrid) or given visas after applying through the proper channels (9/11 and the Detroit clown)

    Nor does your foreign policy make much difference either. Virtually every country in Europe has had Al Qu'eda affiliates operating within it. Even anti-Iraq war nations like France and Germany have foiled attacks. The "justification" for the Madrid bombs wasn't because Spain had troops in Iraq but vengance for the Crusades in Granada in the 13th century!!!! There's not really much you can do to change medieval foreign policy.

    There is only one reliable way of combating terror. Social justice and improving living standards (very few happy people with a nice house and money in their pockets wish to blow themselves up) and reaching a suitable compromise with the mainstream leaders therefore marginalising the extremists. Ulster is a perfect example. Doing a deal with the major factions and sorting out the discrimination that Catholics suffered 30 years ago have left only 100 or so angry Republicans in the whole country. Its funny how people like Martin McGuiness have become a lot less desperate for a united Ireland when given an MP's expense account.....

    Bin Ladin won't deal with us & we can't buy off a billionaire but there's plenty we CAN deal with and that leaves the rest marginialised. Al Qu'eda were defeated in Iraq not because we beat them, but because the moderate muslim population of Iraq were sick of being bombed and informed on the locations of the leaders.

    'The Golden Cavalry of St George' was the #1 weapon of the British empire (massive bribes in the form of gold sovereigns for those who don't understand the reference). I've posted many times on these blogs that my first foreign policy action were I in no 10 would be to buy up the entire Afghan opium crop (keep what we need and dump the rest in the sea) and just see how popular Al Qu'eda and the Taliban are then. Who blows up the guy who's giving you gold and lots of it? Long term it would be a bargain for us.

  • Comment number 33.

    #31 On 9/11 I saw something that looked a bit like controlled demolition but was nothing of the sort. I CERTAINLY saw two planes fly into those buildings. What happened is quite simple. The impact knocked the asbestos from the steel girders, the jet fuel plus burning offices, plus the high winds at the top of the towers created a very hot fire. This softened the steel (and contary to what you read online the fires do not need to be hot enough to actually melt steel... 600'C, enough to make the metal glow red makes steel very soft... thats how blacksmiths make horseshoes) and the top floors collapsed under their own weight. The top 10 floors collapsing downwards onto the floors below took them out as funnily enough buildings are not designed to take that sort of impact. As the top floors fell down, not sideways, the whole building came down.

    Not only do I know a few things about demolitions I actually blew an old railway bridge up once (in Germany as part of a NATO excercise). It took us most of the day carefully drilling the steel and placing charges and we must have used about 2 miles of detcord. By the time we finished there were wires and charges all over the bridge. As an excercise we later worked out what it would take to blow up the Tyne Bridge in Newcastle (our home town and in response to a newspaper article saying the IRA had considered it). Our engineers couldn't guarantee dropping it without at least 500kgs of explosive. The idea that both towers of the WTC could be wired up without anyone noticing is insanity. If you WERE going to blow it up you wouldn't mess around with planes anyway. You'd just repeat the Feb 23rd 1993 Truck bombing of the WTC (remember that one? Al Queda hit new york 7 years before Bush becomes president) and use a damned big truck bomb (plus some preplaced charges on supporting structures if you think you needed it)

    Another question those who think the big bad CIA is behind everything should ask is 'what was that suicide bombing of 7 CIA agents all about then?'.... I rather proves my point that our intelligence agencies are of borderline competence.

    The conspiracy lobby seize on a few events and ignore the bulk of the rest.

    They think the CIA was behind 9/11 yet don't wonder why an organisation that will kill 3000 americans to further a Presidents dodgy policies couldn't arrange for one American white house intern to have a car accident to cover up the Presidents 'indiscretions'. Apparently they can can cover up an act of massive mass murder but can't cover up a few dodgy arms deals. 9/11 worked first time, but 100 goes at Castro didn't.

    What REALLY amazes me with this CIA super-organisation doing the neo-cons bidding is that not one of them had the great idea to take a few tons of the US army's 40,000 ton chemical arsenal and plant them in a bunker in Iraq to justify the WMD saga. They can engineer 9/11 and get away with it, but not fly a C130 with a few tons of VX onto a desert highway somewhere? Is that likely?

    Funding our enemies may be treason but I haven't seen any proof of it. Funding our enemies, enemies however is normal statecraft even if it does normally backfire a decade or so later. Roosevelt armed Stalin in the 40's, Israel supplied weapons to Iran in the 80's (because Saddam was bigger threat at the time and Iran was fighting Saddam) WE armed Saddam because we felt Iran was the bigger threat etc etc etc

  • Comment number 34.

    FBI bombed the WTC in 1993, it is historical fact, these days you can read about it in encyclopaedias.

    And before we continue, do bare in mind, i don't care much about conspiracy theories, all I'm interested in are unanswered questions and calls for independent investigation.

  • Comment number 35.


    'They can engineer 9/11 and get away with it, but not fly a C130 with a few tons of VX onto a desert highway somewhere? Is that likely?'

    They cannot get away with it... obviously so. And nope, you cannot drop chemical weapons precursors without disclosing the point of origin... you know like that mishap with Anthrax?

    The source of the attack was pinpointed with immaculate precision, isn't it eerie, the fact that one could say the Anthrax attacks were carried by US military?

    Eerie indeed...

  • Comment number 36.

    In order to believe anything about OBL, you have to believe the same people that said there was WMD in Iraq or that Saddam helped AQ or that Saddam and AQ were behind the Anthrax attacks of 2001.

    Personally I believe people that have been known to the truth consistantly and don't seem to have an axe to grind:

    Try Sibel Edmonds for one! At great personal sacrifice she has brought the real story of the CIA and AQ out into the open. Now I do I trust her rather than a bunch of lying neocons?

  • Comment number 37.

    #34 You can read that Elvis lives in area 51 on-line. Even if your delusional idea that the FBI carried out the attack was true (so now we have the FBI AND CIA attacking New York) the fact remains that it would be much easier, more plausible and require a fraction of the conspirators to repeat the truck bombing that to muck about with planes and controlled explosives. As I keep saying they couldn't suppress Lewinsky but they can cover up this? Hahahaha.

    #35. Do you know what the precurors for Sarin are? Isopropyl alcohol, sodium fluoride (the stuff you put in toothpaste), any of 4 possible organophosphates (sheep dip) and acetonitrile (and industrial solvent). This isn't a big bacteria with complex DNA that has variations in it that are virtually signatures but very, very basic chemicals. Nerve gas is 1940's tech, mustard gas 1860's tech. There is no difference between US Sodium Fluoride and Dutch Sodium fluoride. Its one Sodium Atom stuck to one Fluorine atom. You can't tell the difference between it.

    The UN destroyed about 30,000 tons of chemicals... we know to the last atom what Saddam had and exactly what factories produced it. Most of the feedstocks came from Germany & Holland. Quadafi bought his Sodium Fluoride from Sigma-Aldrich in New Jersey!!!!

    In any case who would find & test the nerve agents? The US (or for more plausibility someone like me in the British army... we used US testing gear as part of my role as advanced medium armoured recon).

    The idea that they couldn't get away with this but could cover up 9/11 is laughable.

    Likewise the total failure by the pro-conspiracy people to explain the dozens of cock-ups by Islamic terrorists is equally laughable. 7/7 was MI5 yet 21/7 despite being identical in all but outcome wasn't?

    I can't wait to here why the US army used Anthrax to kill 2 postmen a 94 year old widow and some vietnamese woman either. I'm sure it makes far more sense to you than the truth... that it was a one-off nutjob like the Unabomber doing a rather poor job at causing more trouble for the muslims. Charles Manson did a similar thing with some of the notes he left at his murder sites.

  • Comment number 38.

    Hey, how about we take a look and see what BBC says about this whole OBL issue.

    it's a fake you say?

    'until Americans invented one for him'?

    oh my..

  • Comment number 39.

    @33. Peter_Sym wrote:

    "#31 On 9/11 ... I CERTAINLY saw two planes fly into those buildings."

    This ignores WTC7 - the third tower that fell at freefall at 5.20pm in the afternoon. Official explanation: fire! There's no way that fire can knock a steel framed building symmetrically - especially when it contained documents linking certain taxan politicans to the Enron scandal - the coincidences are just too incredible.

    Peter_Sym wrote: "What happened is quite simple."

    What? Not even the scientists on the official side consider it "simple" - why are you trying to wrap this up with over-simplification!?

    Peter_Sym wrote: "The impact knocked the asbestos from the steel girders"

    Firstly - you have No Evidence for this. This supposition on your part (ok, the official story's part).

    Peter_Sym wrote: "the jet fuel plus burning offices, plus the high winds at the top of the towers created a very hot fire."

    You have no evidence for "Very hot fires" - it was just a standard office fire - especially for WTC7! Jets aircraft burn very hot but the thin alloy steel does not melt. Jet fuel in the open does not burn any hotter than a kerosene heater - I don't see them melting! And what high winds?!!! You just made that up!

    Peter_Sym wrote: "This softened the steel (and contary to what you read online the fires do not need to be hot enough to actually melt steel... 600'C, enough to make the metal glow red makes steel very soft... thats how blacksmiths make horseshoes) and the top floors collapsed under their own weight."

    Firstly the fires don't even get as hot as 600C... certainly not within an HOUR! And secondly the steel even if soften would deform and the towers would not EXPLODE! Both of them - exactly the same manner - exactly the same as WTC7. Look at other skyscraper fires: not one of them have exploded of collapsed universally at freefall.

    Peter_Sym wrote: "The top 10 floors collapsing downwards onto the floors below took them out as funnily enough buildings are not designed to take that sort of impact. As the top floors fell down, not sideways, the whole building came down."

    The towers immediately below the impact points were undamaged by fire yet somehow the 48 immense central steel columns did not resist the collapse? In fact the collapse appears to be because these 48 columns appear to be blown up! This just does not make any sense. Indeed it seems to defy some of Newton's Laws of Physics. In what way is this simple? Where is your computer model to prove this? Where is a computer animation to prove this collapse sequence? How does this also explain WTC7 or the many other anomalies of the day?

    Sure organising the Controlled Demolition of these three buildings would be difficult but we know the US had warnings of 9/11, the money supply and share movements indicated that some people knew. Why not the people who owned the buildings? The WTC was a white elephant, needed asbestos removed, contained incriminating evidence, had gold bullion in the vaults underneath, was the centre for inside trading relating to 9/11 "put-options"... why not also blow it up? There nanothermite residue to prove that explosives was used, accesss to the columns from a major elevator refurbishment, power downs the weekend before 9/11, retirement of sniffer dogs and "friendly" people controlling the security of the place. So why couldn't it have been brought down by Controlled Demolition?

  • Comment number 40.

    #36 No-one claims Al Qu'eda were behind the anthrax attacks, much less the FBI. They say the exact opposite.

    Sibel Edmonds proves many of my points. Firstly no-one has had her murdered. Does that make sense? Not even a car crash or other accident.

    Secondly she's founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition! Funny how not one of the hundreds who'd be needed for all these fantasy plots have come forward. All she claims is that the FBI were made aware that Bin Ladin was planning an attack on US cities using planes in the next few months. The intelligence failures leading up to 9/11 are widly publisised and again back up my point that rather than being masters of conspiracy our govt agencies are barely competent civil servants on fat pensions.

    Me & Sibel Edmonds are in total agreement. We both reckon our national security is threatened by the incompetence of our security services not their evil. Not much point having a terror watch list if you don't check it when handing out Visas is it?

  • Comment number 41.

    #39. Considering 'none of the scientists know what happened' you seem to think you do.

    A charcoal fire in a barbeque burns hotter than 600C. in 3 1/2 mins the heat from a normal house fire can hit 1100'F (google it- this is pretty good)
    and you claim that 100 tons of jet fuel burns COOLER than a TV set and sofa on fire????

    I've told you why controlled explosions wouldn't work: you'd need TONS of PE in thousands of small charges linked by miles of cables. Have you ever seen an old office building brought down by a controlled blast? The dems guys spend days wiring it up and even then clear everyone back half a mile in case it goes wrong and falls sideways.

    Your 'nanothermite' is even more ridiculous. That melts steel rather than cuts and would be impossible to guarantee that all the girders melted through at the precise milli-second to have a building fall vertically. Explosives are nitrate based. Thermite is aluminium iron III oxide (I made some in chemistry class aged 14 and burnt through a steel plate). 'nano-thermite residue proves explosives were used' makes no sense at all. Nano-thermite residue proves thermite was used.... and it would be to cut up the girders wouldn't it?

    I'm going home for a beer before any more pseudo-scientists come up with more nonsense... and I'm a damn site more worried about my govts failure to clear the snow than their ability to fake terror attacks killing me.

  • Comment number 42.

    Laden is so obviously dead that any assertion otherwise is pathetic. Not only that, but he's obviously been dead for years. I still can't believe some people think bombs brought down the twin towers! For crying out loud! Sad, or what? What has always amazed me is why the buildings didn't collapse immediately. When a building is designed, weight is accounted for. However, there would have been no account for the almost 400 tonne weight of a plane resting on one of the floors!

  • Comment number 43.

    39. At 4:08pm on 08 Jan 2010, ynda20 wrote:

    Sure organising the Controlled Demolition of these three buildings would be difficult


    Difficult - any demolitions expert will tell you it would have required thousands of man-hours by numerous specialists whilst, presumably , the thousands of workers employed in the twin towers went around with their eyes shut anfd their fingers in their ears actively ignoring the flurry of unusual activity around them. No survivor has ever mentioned any such activity.

    I know i'll never convince the conspiracy theorists but some of these theories are so ridiculously complex and would have had to have been executed with 100% secrecey and competence that it staggers me that people find it easier to beleive in them rather than that the towers were brought down down by being hit by two planes.

  • Comment number 44.

    Are you folks seeking the window of opportunity? After FBI bombed the WTC back in 1993 they've renovated both buildings, as the song goes, they had all time in the world.

  • Comment number 45.

    44. At 5:04pm on 08 Jan 2010, moriaeencomium wrote:
    Are you folks seeking the window of opportunity? After FBI bombed the WTC back in 1993 they've renovated both buildings, as the song goes, they had all time in the world.


    yes, you've convinced me, i'm sure thats exactly what happened. or maybe the explosives were put in during the construction phase.

    perhaps new york, nay the entire american continent is full of explosive skyscrapers just awaiting detonation by sinister government agencies...

  • Comment number 46.

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

  • Comment number 47.

    @43. Hi goldCaesar

    gC Wrote: "Difficult - any demolitions expert will tell you it would have required thousands of man-hours by numerous specialists whilst, presumably , the thousands of workers employed in the twin towers went around with their eyes shut anfd their fingers in their ears actively ignoring the flurry of unusual activity around them. No survivor has ever mentioned any such activity."

    Disagree. Google Scott Forbes or William Rodriguez. Do you know who controlled security at the WTC? (And Dulles Airport)?

    gC Wrote: "I know i'll never convince the conspiracy theorists but some of these theories are so ridiculously complex and would have had to have been executed with 100% secrecey and competence that it staggers me that people find it easier to beleive in them rather than that the towers were brought down down by being hit by two planes."

    Sure it was complex - but so are magic tricks and people do them all the time. Secrecy is not a problem if you have a bunch of motivated and well paid people - just ask any Drug Barron. And have you read about Project Northwoods? 9/11 is not much different from that. The fact of the matter is that you have 1000 named architects and engineers (ae911truth) saying the THREE skyscrapers - don't forget about WTC7 - were brought down by explosives; Danish scientist Harrit showing the nanothermite in the dust (nanothermite is a military explosive); media people telling you on the day that it was AQ and OBL - and frankly it was compelling! But with no proper forensic or air crash investigations to support the official story; destruction of fraud evidence in WTC7; lots of money to be made; then don't you think that if 9/11 was such an important moment then we should have answers to 9/11 families' questions? Why the air force was stood down? Actions of GWB on the day (he went to a party in the afternoon of 9/11)? Why the intelligence on 9/11 was ignored? Fights over who does the DNA analysis? Ignoring the plight of the first responders? The Anthrax attacks (also coming from a US military labs)? Whether OBL is still alive? (especially after he was allowed to escape at Tora Bora). etc.

  • Comment number 48.

    "41. At 4:25pm on 08 Jan 2010, Peter_Sym wrote:

    Your 'nanothermite' is even more ridiculous. That melts steel rather than cuts and would be impossible to guarantee that all the girders melted through at the precise milli-second to have a building fall vertically."

    But that's just it! I'm not a conspiracy theorist, as I have no theory. But this is one of the things from the day that doesn't add up for me, and leads to some uncomfortable questions.

    It's highly unlikely that nanothermite would melt all the girders at exactly the same time to enure the buildings fall straight down. For it to happen once, would be a mixture of great planning and great luck. For it to happen twice, would probably need more luck than planning. And for it to happen a third time, well, the conspirator would have to be an incredibly lucky person.

    And yet, random fires managed to do it three times in a row?

    Had the buildings fallen over, I would agree that fundamentalist Muslim bombers would be the most plausible explanation. That the buildings fell straight down, suggests something's not quite right.

  • Comment number 49.

    I noticed that Mike R. said that bin laden had an FBI most-wanted poster and then went on to neglect to tell the viewers that 9/11 is not included as one of bin laden's crimes. In fact the FBI explicitly say that the reason for that is that the FBI do not have the hard evidence (the only kind that cpunts) to indict bin laden for 9/11.So legally as regards 9/11 he could drink hot coffee on Park Avenue in perfect safety. Which begs the question of what the legality of the original attack on Afghanistan was actually based on ?

    As regards bin laden in the American Hospital in Dubai Rudin produces some faces who say it didn't happen but failed, without explanation to interview the French Journalists who first printed the story in 'Le Figaro' and broadcast the news on French radio. This was to my mind a startling omission.

  • Comment number 50.

    Bin Laden is obviously dead , by his lack of presence in any video.
    He thought he would be in the hands of 72 virgins , but he is munching on the fruit from the tree of zaquum and it will boil in his belly !

  • Comment number 51.

    Any time suggestion of explosives being planted at the WTC arise the questioner always seems to ignore the fact that there were several teams of Explosive Detection Dogs stationed at the WTC for several years before, and up to 9/11.

    One of those dogs, Sirius, even died in the attack, a memorial website can be found here;

    Some additional Explosive Detection Dogs were removed from the WTC not long before the attacks but the dedicated WTC Explosive Detection Dog teams were still doing regular searches every day up to the attacks. These dogs were also trained to detect detonators so even if they weren't trained to detect Thermite or it's derivatives they'd still be able to detect the detonation systems being used to ignite it.

    So, how exactly do you plant explosives in a building that has 24-hour Explosive Detection Dogs operating in it without a single one of them noticing anything ?

    There are loads of questions I'd like answering about 9/11 but I just can't see how anyone would ever have the opportunity to fit that much explosives to two of the most closely guarded buildings in New York.

  • Comment number 52.

    OK let me give you a scenario, if we get the news tomorrow that Bin Laden is dead, then do you all free thinking people that 'the war on terror' will come to an end? Of course it would. Its in the benefit of the U.S and UK that Bin Laden remains alive even if he is dead because there will be no justification for the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. Its like the exaggeration of the Soviet threat which was highlighted in the movie 'Goodnight and good luck. The governments of this world must portray that they are fighting with an invisible enemy so that they can go on and create tighter legislations on the mass. Check this documentary by the BBC some years ago and verily fits in to this argument;

  • Comment number 53.

    The Conspiracy files is always the same formula. Take a conspiracy. Get the viewer to start believing in it. Then right at the end show them how the conspiracy is nonsense.
    Do the editors believe history is devoid of conspiracies?

    Also why are the ONLY people debunking the conspiracy former or current intelligence staff of the CIA or Pakistan and an ex RAF chap?

    And to debunk the conspiracy you get the people who are running the conspiracy to tell you that they aren't. Mmm. Good one.

    It is totally bonkers. But sadly, most people will believe your program because it makes them feel better to believe it.

    I do not know if he is dead or alive but your program is astonishingly poor.

  • Comment number 54.

    It was quickly recognised by critical thinkers everywhere that bin laden was the American administration's quintessential bogeyman.

    But if you want a bogeyman it is just as easy to invent him as it is to wait for him to conveniently show up.

  • Comment number 55.

    One thing this conpiracy files program mentioned is that he's wanted for the 9/11 attacks........False he's not wanted by the FBI for 9/11 as there's not enough evidence to link him to the attacks. Look for youself on the FBI's site under most wanted terrorists.

  • Comment number 56.

    I am inclined to think he is dead. It would only make sense, seeing as the American high command refused to end his life when it was placed squarely in the crosshairs of US snipers, that God would have ended it by now.

    When it comes to death, God is a much more reliable decision-maker.

    Naturally enough, there are plenty of parties interested in maintaining the idea that World Public Enemy No. 1 is alive. Unless he is disguised as a post-op transsexual somewhere in some out-of-the-way fringe community (and who would say that is entirely impossible), or even as some top secret captive (another wild idea impossible to rule out), it is logical to consider it likely he is indeed dead.

    Still, the name makes money for those who peddle the hate-filled drivel. So no surprise some believe it worthwhile to perpetuate the industry, and others sincerely demand proof positive...

    Don't hold your breath. It makes much more sense, including the emergence of "new" preachers of hate such as the Yemen-based ones, that he is indeed dead. That would also support the desperate types of attacks we see, from the storming of the hotel in Mumbai, to the Underpants Bomber...

    As horrifying as the sight of blood-drenched public places is, the net impact of even the most elaborate terror attacks is comparable to the effect of a handful of horseflies tormenting a vast herd of horses... The bit is painful, the suffering at the site intense, the rage of the poor creature severe: and yet the net effect is negligible. No one is going to bring down any civilisations in this absurd manner. Why, they can't even paralyse a single city neighbourhood in this manner... Remember how many savage attacks have taken place in Algeria or in Sudan over a period of decades. Net change? Zero.

    So even as these attacks & tragedies end or ruin the lives of hundreds, thousands, or even traumatise a nation the size of Iraq (sad as that is), in the great scheme of things they are the exercises in futility of small bands of seriously mentally disturbed individuals. Their proper place is in a super-secure psychiatric prison -- although it is much more cost-effective simply to exterminate them & stamp out the disease that way.

    Similar patterns of seemingly-escalating dramatic & desperate attacks was very much on display as Russians were more and more successful in subduing restive Chechen rebels. The present situation in the hot zones very much mirrors those patterns, albeit as the territory involved is bigger it is a more drawn-out process.

    Small comfort to those whose loved ones die, or to the wounded. But the fight must conclude the only way it can: with the primitive side forced to capitulate and give up the campaign to slaughter & maim perfect strangers simply for the audacity of operating within a different set of beliefs & lifestyle choices.

  • Comment number 57.


    Trust good old Mike Rudin to come up trumps again. What a plonker. You might want to save yourself some time in future Mike by just cutting the program down to five minutes and having all your experts claim that conspiracies are laughable and ridiculous throughout as opposed to wheeling them out at the end of the hour to basically just contradict themselves. You and so many clever clever people seem to forget that the official government version is itself a CONSPIRACY THEORY. It has never been proven. THIS IS A FACT.

    "We have no idea if he is dead or alive but WE KNOW he is plotting against us still" How does that work? If the CIA does not know if he is alive or dead then they cannot claim to know that he is plotting against them. I would like to have been head of the Bin Laden unit it must be one of the easiest jobs in the world.

    "Any sightings today?"
    "Any sightings today?"
    "Right I'm off for some lunch."

    Oh and for the record the WTC had tremendous carrying strength and the fires were neither HOT enough nor burning LONG enough to cause a total collapse. Never mind melting steel the steel was never even subjected to temperatures that would have led to them weakening if you use just fire as the cause. As for planting explosives in the towers do people really believe that the mechanics carried big boxes labelled explosives on them? Or that they carried around miles of cabling. Maybe the main man had a big plunger eh? Bomb sniffing dogs you say Buck Turgidson? Details on their duties pre-911 please. 110 ten floors so a dog for each floor then with access to all areas.

    People like Peter_Sym are fooling nobody. They should try putting some thought into what they post. No doubt another violater of old James Randi's teachings. Yet another imbecile who has no problems with hypocrisy or double standards as long as it suits their argument. Arguments based on false assumptions, lies and distortions. I am only interested in CREDIBLE evidence son. Poor old tfk had a very hard time understanding what Credible means but maybe you can do better eh?

    Oh and does anyone know any more details about the following information?

    Shalev et al v. Gonzales et al
    Plaintiffs: Eddy Guigui Shalev and Meryl A. Kessler
    Defendants: Alberto R. Gonzales, Michael Chertoff, Emilio T. Gonzalez, Rebort S. Mueller, III, Office of General Counsel and Rod J. Rosenstein

    Case Number: 8:2007cv00256
    Filed: January 30, 2007

    Court: Maryland District Court
    Office: Greenbelt Office [ Court Info ]
    County: Montgomery
    Presiding Judge: Judge Peter J. Messitte

    Nature of Suit: Other Statutes - Other Statutory Actions
    Cause: 28:1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
    Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant
    Jury Demanded By: None

    Eddie Shalev provided the ONLY endorsement of HANJOUR as a competent pilot. Here is his record as provided by the 911 commission.

    Event: Interview of Eddie Guigui Shalev

    Date: 04/09/2004 9/11 Personal Privacy

    Special Access Issues: Agreement dated 07/29/2003 with the Attorney General

    Prepared by: Quinn John Tamm, Jr.

    Team Number: IA

    Present for the interview was Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), in accordance with the cited agreement.

    Mr. Shalev is an Israeli national who was employed as a flight instructor by Congressional Air Charters, Gaithersburg, MD airport in 2001. Mr. Shalev served in the Israeli Defense Forces in the paratroop regiment. He was a jumpmaster on a Boeing C-130. Mr. Shalev moved to the Gaithersburg, MD area in April 2001 and was sponsored for employment by Congressional Air Charters. Congressional Air Charters has subsequently gone out of business and Mr. Shalev is presently unemployed. He is attempting to obtain permanent alien resident status.

    In August 2001 he evaluated the flying ability of Hani Hanjour, to determine if Hanjour would be allowed to rent an aircraft from Congressional Air Charters. This is known as "certification." Mr. Shalev stated that he was interviewed by two FBI agents soon after 09/1112001. At that time Shalev told the FBI agents that Hanjour came to Congressional Air Charters accompanied by two mid-eastern males. The males did not fly with Hanjour, but remained in a motor vehicle, Mr. Shalev described as a 1990 Toyota Camry.

    On his first certification flight a Cessna 172 was used. This is a single engine aircraft. Mr. Shalev sat next to Hanjour and had him fly north from the Gaithersburg airport away from Washington, D.C. Mr. Shalev noticed that Hanjour used a landmark or terrain recognition system for navigation and did not use the VOR or Very High Frequency (VHF) Omni Directional Rangefinder instruments. Mr. Shalev stated that he considered this unusual because basic ainnanship requires knowledge of the operation of the VOR. Mr. Shalev selected Clearview airport in northern Maryland as their designation. The airport is located near Westminster, Maryland. Mr. Shalev said that the runway is small at Clearview and difficult to land. Hanjour landed at the airport without any difficulty. Mr. Shalev stated that based on his observations, Hanjour was a "good" pilot. Mr. Shalev thought that Hanjour may have received training from a military pilot because of his use of terrain recognition for navigation. Hanjour told Mr. Shalev that he (Hanjour) had most recently trained in Florida as a pilot.

    After the certification flight, Mr. Shalev approved Hanjour for the rental of the Cessna 172 from Congressional Air Charters. Mr. Shalev said that Hanjour had his own flight bag, headset and aviator's chart for the Washington, D.C. area airspace. On 08/26/2001, Hanjour returned to Congressional Air Charters and rented an aircraft. Hanjour came in and spoke briefly with Mr. Shalev. The conversation related to the air corridor between Reagan National Airport and Dulles International Airport. The airspace is restricted because of heavy commercial airline traffic. Mr. Shalev said that the Cessna 172 that Hanjour would be flying is not pressurized and that would restrict the altitude. Generally, the air controllers allow small aircraft to fly to an altitude of 5000 feet. Hanjour was accompanied by a young mid-eastern male, who was different from the two mid-eastern males, who came with Hanjour when Hanjour took his certification flight at Congressional Air Charters. Mr. Shalev does not know where Hanjour flew on 08/26/2001. When Hanjour returned to the airport, he did not speak with Mr. Shalev.

    Mr. Shalev stated that Hanjour rented aircraft from Congressional on at least two other occasions. On 09/1112001, after Mr. Shalev heard about the terrorist attacks he spoke with the owner of Congressional Air Charters, Monty Lilley. He told Mr. Lilley that he (Shalev) was suspicious of Hanjour and recommended that Mr. Lilley contact the appropriate authorities. Mr. Shalev was also suspicious of two Egyptian flight students at an adjacent flight school at the Gaithersburg airport, Montgomery Flight School. FBI agents contacted Mr. Shalev two days later.

    Observation: Mr. Shalev would make a decent witness as part of a panel of flight instructors. His English language skills are good. Mr. Shalev has some reluctance, because he feels guilty that as a former Israeli soldier he was not more aware of Hanjour's radicalism and interest in flying in the Washington, D.C. area. His visa expires in July 2004 and he will have to return to Israel if he does not find another employer.
    NARA Source"

  • Comment number 58.

    MrObycyek wrote:

    And it is something you sadly lack, coming on here and calling people names isn't going to earn you any either. I don't always agree with Peter_Sym but a quick glance through his previous posts shows that he is anything but an imbecile.
    On this subject he also has something very few people have, personal experience in a related field, something he has been good enough to share with the rest of us.

    As for sniffer dogs, even if they only had one it would be enough to detect the amount of explosives that would be required to rig both towers for the type of controlled demolition people are claiming was used to take them down.
    If, as many people claim, every floor of the towers had been rigged with explosives then you're talking about several tonnes of explosives, dozens of detonators and miles upon miles of cables and it would have taken several days to set up.

    When a much smaller building was demolished around here a few years ago it took the demolition team a week to weaken the building, two days to rig the explosives and no-one was allowed within fifteen feet of it in case they set anything off. The WTC was at least ten times the size of that building so God only knows how long that would take to set up.
    Unless "they" had thousands of people working on it the day before there's no way for that amount of work to be done unnoticed and this leaves us with the only opportunity being when the building was refurbished after the earlier attack but that would mean all of those explosives, detonators and wires being in place for several years without a single one going off, a single cable or detonator failing and no-one being able to detect any of it.

    So could you please provide a credible method for "them" to do this without a single dog or maintenance crew being alerted to it ?

    I can't.

  • Comment number 59.

    @58, Hi Buck,

    Concerning the sniffer dogs. I understand that all (some) of the sniffer dogs were retired before 9/11. But regardless of that or not, it is the security of the buildings before 9/11 which should be investigated. Do you know who ran the security company at WTC? Look it up and then tell me there's nothing to investigate.

    Have you seen WTC Building 7's (no, not one of the twin towers) collapse by the way?

  • Comment number 60.

    48. At 12:29pm on 11 Jan 2010, TanSauNg wrote:
    Will you all please read,and try to understand, this post by TanSauNg, which sums up my own views, as a physicist and hopefully as a rational human being. I accept all that is said about how difficult it would be to bring these buildings down in their own footprint by controlled demolition- Peter_Sym explains this very clearly at post 41. So if it's difficult by precision controlled demolition, how likely is it that an aeroplane striking at an essentially random angle and height could achieve such a symmetrical result? (Forgetting WTC7 which wasn't even hit.) This struck me immediately as I watched it happen on the day- why were these buildings falling perfectly symetrically after being struck asymmetrically?? I don't have a theory, but if you could demolish skyscrapers so tidily by aircraft strike, what is the controlled demolition industry there for?A remote controlled retired 747 would be so much cheaper, and the building would collapse into its own footprint-well 2 out of 2 so far, or is that 3 out of 2? No theories,sorry, only questions, but some of the posters on here really should be asking them too.

  • Comment number 61.

    @60 Hi huafdeed,

    Oh... we've been asking them... check out

    5614 comments in a year. There were a series of people that couldn't be convinced despite the 1000 professional architects and engineers at ae911truth, intelligence analysts, military types, 9/11 family victims and indeed politicians(!) that continue to ask questions about 9/11 - apparently that doesn't persuade some people (usually Americans (or Mike Rudin)) that 9/11 looks like a false flag event. And whether it was or not, it needs a darn sight better set of investigations than have currently been performed!

    Whether OBL is alive or dead, is just one of the many mysteries.

  • Comment number 62.

    @ ynda20

    Hello mate, there were additional dog units stationed at the WTC shortly before 9/11 due to a reported threat, once the threat level had been lowered these additional dogs were removed but the dedicated dog teams were still stationed there right up to the moment the planes hit and one of the was even killed by falling debris while resting in the on-site kennels.

    "tell me there's nothing to investigate."

    That's not what I'm saying at all, there are loads of unanswered questions about those events, I just can't see any plausible way that amount of explosives could be planted over such a large area without any of it being detected.
    If someone can come up with a plausible explanation then I'd be happy to accept it, so far no-one has been able to.

  • Comment number 63.

    @62, Hi Buck,

    Thanks for the clarification on the sniffer dogs. Yes, that sounds plausible. Have you checked who handled the security at the WTC? Google "WTC Security"

    And, of course, in the year before 9/11, there was a massive elevator renovation going on in the WTC towers. This was being done by ACE Elevators. If you've never heard of them, that it isn't surprising. There were a very small outfit to undertake such a large job and no longer in business.

    Also look up William Rodriguez - he mentions there were many empty floors in the towers - some empty floors exhibiting many strange noises. And he should know - he was the caretaker there.

  • Comment number 64.

    If anybody is looking for the strangest WTC anomaly and a huge vulnerability for the perps they should look very critically at how the fires in the massively compressed rubble pile burned for three whole months despite being drowned in what one firemaan called 'a lake of water'.

  • Comment number 65.

    Dear People, especially those new to the examination of the nonsense of the 'official Bush believers conspircay theory that 19 Arabs did 9/11' and that it was organised by Uncle Bin.

    If you wish to read an exhaustive examination of the official conspircay theory, refer up to Ynda at 61 and read the comments that are linked, There are over six and a half thousand of them, but I would suggest that you start at the end and work back. The topic has been dealt with in much detail with some great references linked. It is pontless to go through them all again, as for sure most of the argument has been covered, to October 2009, when the comments were closed off after a year.

    Late 2009, David Ray Griffin published his work; 'The Mysterious Collapse of Building No 7' with an addendum to the affect that the official report is a fraud etc. [2009 Olive Press]

    I commend to all, a reading of that work, prior to making embarrassing claims in support of the official story here. The BBC has diligently provided enough embarrasment, through ignorance, on this topic for the whole Western world already and paid for by the UK people, I might add.

    It may be noted that Mr Rudin produced a program in his conspircay stuff to the affect; that in regard to building No 7 "Mystery Solved". Well that is shown to be rubbish yet the BBC has not, to my knowledge, deigned to update and correct the misrepresentaions inherent in the title to that program. The mystery has not been solved (correction: it has; they were 'blown up', no doubt about it!)

    So as regards 9/11, Bin Laden is irrelevant. He did not do it, the FBI do not say he did it and common sense demonstrates that he could not have arranged it. So who did? We do not know, that is why the 9/11 truth movement want a proper investigation.

    As an aside to the 9/11 lies, there needs to be an investigation into the role of the msm in the covering up of and into the failure of most of our Western politicians to examine the mass murders. That is essential if we are to continue to have faith in our democracy/ies. Accountability is essential, as with any other crime that has been committed.

    It is embarrasing to we of the West, particularly, here in Australia that our main stream media, with their mass weapons of mass deception, do not properly inform our public. An example of the Germans being superior in intellect to us and appreciating the lies of 911 can be seen in recent publictaions such as:

    Focus Money: [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

    The BBC also has not, to my knowledge, produced a competent report and discussion of the finding of military grade nano-thermite/ate in samples of dust from the WTC towers. The April 2009 paper by Niells Harrit and 8 other scientists has been reported upon on Danish tv and on Russia today (title?) and another that I cannot recall at the moment. People may have other sightings of a report. Those videos can be seen with a search at The Niels Harrit paper is easily found by a search; 'Niells Harrit 911 thermite paper' or something similar. Seems that as well as the Germans, the Danes and the Russians are also smarter than most of the dumbos in the West, who just accept what proven and serial liars (governments) say with the intention of instigating hate and false revenge to justify going and invading sovereign countries for the purpose of theft.

  • Comment number 66.

    Further to 65 above.

    Congratulations Mods, that was quick.

    To make up for the deleted links in 65, I suggest that people go to

    The link is, if allowed;

    Otherwise just search it and it will come up.

    When it does, scroll down to the article on 1.8.2010 at 8.57 am titled:
    "German Business Journal Questions 9/11".

    Also please read the comments, there are useful links to the other German Article of September 2009.

    Now for a good chuckle, scroll down the comments to 1.9.2010 at 10.31 where there is a link to a video titled: "Hitler knows what nano-thermite in the WTC dust means". Enjoy!

  • Comment number 67.

    @66, Hi Malleestump,

    This is, what?, the 5th or 6th blog thread we have both been on! :-)

    I presume you are a "professional" and not usually taken with flights of fantasy, so tell me:

    What got you interested in 9/11?
    What are the weakest parts of the official story?
    What are your top three questions about 9/11 you'd like to resolve?
    How could the MSM organize a cover-up, as you discuss in post 65?

    Are you likely ever to be in London? ;-)

  • Comment number 68.

    67. Thinking of all those threads here on BBC. What is probably not apprecitaed by the BBC and our Mr. Rudin and others, is the amount of unpaid time spent by so many, trying to investigate/study and expose the Lies of 9/11.

    As a profesional, I have both, prosecuted for Her Majesty and defended Her Majesty's charges over about 40 years.

    1. My neighbour gave me a paper in about late 2003 or early 2004. I thought 'BS', those bloody Muslims did it. Then I came across the French site; 'Search for the Boeing' and started from there. I like forensic exercises and dislike intensley being suckered by anybody. Griffin's book; '9/11 Commission Report, Omissions and Distortions', gave me the confidence to know I was on the correct track. One does not have to be the most clever member of a jury to know that; if the witness is lying and hiding material and failing to produce the most obvious material, then there must be something very smelly around just waiting to be unearthed.
    2.Need a week for that, but one, is the three buildings obviously being 'blown up'. As the fellow from the convenience store, the fellows in the coffee shop, some QCs and my engineering and architect acquaintenances and others have commented; "Those buildings were blown up, you do not have to be an engineer to see that". Then add a dash of science and hey Presto: "Buildings being 'blown up'".
    3. Who conceived the plan, who did it and who has been knowingly covering up the most dispicable mass murders of modern times.
    4. By direction from government, by pressure from media owners, by threats by advertisers, who knows? Except that over 5 years the Media people have reported to me such things as; 'No one is interested', 'journalists are to lazy', 'it is too difficult', 'journalists do not have time', radio announcer wsa told to leave 9/11 alone. Generally there is a blanket refusal/: the concocted campaign mantra is "You a conspircayy theorist"?, I suppose your a 'holocaust denier too!. You from the twilight zone etc.
    Well, to all those who have heaped it over all the years now it is payback time.
    Now it is time for all the good little loyal Bush believing conspiracy theorists to straighten their tin foil hats and polish up their antennaes for a message of reality to be received.
    As I said Ynda, I do not like being taken for a sucker by anybody, people made me think ill of certain people and that, I did not like, it is unchristian and as a christian, one has a duty to expose a 'bum wrap' and to get into the dirt now and then, for that is where one finds the grubs.
    Family is offering to pay for a trip to London and Is of Man, later in the year, but I would rather stay home alone and that is what I intend to do. Can't beat Sydney, yea, I know 'Philistine', I'll lump the title. (:-)

  • Comment number 69.

    @68, Thanks, Mallestump.

    Have you joined Lawyers-for-9/11-truth?

    Soon we won't be even question the government according to this news article:

    since the US government... "wants to hold blogs and web hosting services accountable for the remarks of commenters on websites while altering libel laws to make it easier to sue for spreading rumors..."

    Taking yet another leaf out of 1984

    - How did OBL gain access to the towers, insert nanothermite and blow up the towers and WTC7?
    - Why would OBL blow up WTC7 since it only helped Texan politicans who were investigating fraud?
    - How did OBL stop fighters intercepting all four hijacked aircraft?
    - Were the aircraft hijacked?
    - If hijacked did the hijackers ever meet OBL?
    - How come there were resident experts around on 9/11 to a) record the crashes on video (except in Washington where despite all the CCTV cameras and longer time to prepare there was video) b) Have AQ experts ready to declare that it was OBL-that-did-it c) Have Harley-Davidson Guy who supposedly knew how the towers collapsed appear on TV (while to everybody else it is somewhat baffling!)
    - How much money did OBL make via Put-Options and other share dealings?

    Are these questions going to banned in the future?

  • Comment number 70.


    No doubt the questions you raise will be answered by KSM during his trial for plaanning the 9/11 mass murders!

    He might alos tell us: who conceived the idea of using nano-thermitic stuff, where he abtained it, who provided it, how much did he apy for it, wher he obtained the finace for it, who did he consult as to where tp place it, who plaed it, when was it placed in the buildings, who facilitaed the access to place it,was there any other type of explosive used as well, if so wher did they bget that from etc.

    Should be an interesting trial of the man who is reported as planning everyhting about 9/11 fro "A to Z". Marvelous what people tnhink up when they think they are drowning.

    Mike no doubt will be sent by the BBC tpo watch the trial and get the information referred to above.

    In addaition, he might tell us how he arranged for the VP to ignore the 'young man' when he was in the bunkeras reported by Norman Mineta .

  • Comment number 71.


    Sorry, the last post was sent by mistake before it was complete, please delete it and include this comment as an explanation.

  • Comment number 72.


    Trying again.

    The questions formulated now doubt will be answered by KSM in his trizal. He has been reported as claiming that he did everythinf for 9/11 from "A to Z".

    In the messed up post, (70) I posed all the obvious questions concerning the thermite that KSM should Know. I will not repeat them.

    It is going to be an interesting trial!

    Ynda, Only a few people have joined lawyers for 9/11 truth, as most have aligned with the Patriotsquestion911 site or the ae911truth. Then again, there are some who are with the Lawyers and also with the Political Leaders for 9/11 truth, which is also a bit short on members for the same reason. (:-)

  • Comment number 73.

    Bit confuseed this morning, a sad funeral pending at lunch time, so will merely suggest to people that they seriously contemplate the consequences to our democracies if people like Sunstein get there way.

    Everyone should read the link provided by Ynda at 69 and spend the extra time to read the comments, they should be noted and everyone should be alarmed.
    We are aware of course that there are been organised campaigns to discredit anyone who questions 9/11 and indeed, many have provided misinformation and set up 'straw man' arguments in order to create embarrassment generally, but for governments to have it as an official policy is sinister and must be objected to.
    After all, who pays for them!
    Clear examples of such campaigns can be detected in the attempted debunking in the comments section of the 'Caught up in a conspircay' blog by Mike Rudin and linked by Ynda at '61' above.

  • Comment number 74.

    997 architects and engineers demand a new investigation into the WTC collapses. Any day now there will be 1000...

    So how did OBL do that? How did he convince 1000 architects and engineers that the official story doesn't hold water?

    How come the BBC reported that some of the supposed hijackers were still alive?

    Where is the evidence proving the official story? It's not the 9/11 Commission Report - a pre-formed report based upon stories extracted by torture!

  • Comment number 75.

    Nightmarish, is it not?

    The fact that accountability and justice are being denied by those who are complicit in mass murder.

    Rejections of independent investigations... a spit in the face of public.

  • Comment number 76.

    Hi moriaeencomium,

    Yes, while there is a facade of liberalism and only a small amount of state-sponsored torture, this freedom could be washed away very quickly. It happened very quickly in Nazi Germany. Goring was very specific about how this could be achieved: it could happen anywhere especially in the UK/USA where the public is so docile. In this country people almost universally believe the BBC - yet... where is the follow-up to that hijacker story? Or even the follow up to David Kelly's death? Or a Newsnight story on the WHOLE story of 9/11: the preknowledge, WTC7, lack of fighters, lack of evidence for the OCT, 9/11 family questions etc.

    When the BBC does announce a story such as the recent Lockerbie Newsnight investigation - how come it goes so quiet afterwards?!

  • Comment number 77.

    Sincere regards ynda,

    What bothers me the most, when it comes to the BBC that is, it is this treason to the public it feeds upon.

    It is my strongest opinion that there is hegemony established within the service, it is my strongest opinion that some of these 'cognitive infiltrators', if you will, are deluded themselves; drown into collusion with fraudsters and criminals.

    Some would still think that end justifies the means, such idealists, unable to grasp petty, greedy, treasonous nature of those 'who had us under attack for many years, but most especially on 9/11.'

    Misplaced idealism turned conformism… here, let's have a song...

    with best wishes to all.., as ever.

  • Comment number 78.

    Hi Moriaencomium,

    I thought you be referencing this song...

    In the meantime, OBL has had new id photos from the FBI

    Trouble is, he looks about 20 years younger than previous photos. Are we sure that the mantle of chief bogey man is not being passed down little the title "Dread Pirate Roberts"?

  • Comment number 79.

    @78, as usual minor spelling mistakes! :-] "just LIKE "Dread Pirate Roberts" - ah well.

    The main trouble about discussing OBL is that there is very little recent news. Let's try old news. The OBL confession tape... so how was it found? what did it actually contain? Uh-oh. Digging even just a little deeper and the official story flounders again!

    Since the US DoD lacks records that document the authenticity and the factualness of the reported circumstances surrounding the discovery of the December 13, 2001 Osama bin Laden “confession video”, whatever it contains does not substantiate what the Bush Administration claims.

    There are countless minor problems with the OBL on tape - right handed, voice, and appearance. And on top of that the incredible COINCIDENCE that the tape came out, just when required by Colin Powell said there would be more evidence coming!

    If we compare with Lockerbie that the BBC has recently done a report the evidence there was a small fragment of a circuit board which lead all the way to Libya - yet that evidence, the BBC proved to be planted(!) - therefore if such evidence can be faked and planted then How Likely Is It that the Highly Convenient OBL Confession Video was also planted. (Especially when the DoD itself cannot explain the process of how it was obtained!).

  • Comment number 80.

    @79 Even the BBC doesn't believe the FBI

    "A Spanish politician has said he was shocked to find out the FBI had used his photo for a digitally-altered image showing how Osama Bin Laden might look.

    Gaspar Llamazares said he would no longer feel safe travelling to the US after his hair and parts of his face appeared on a most-wanted poster.

    He said the use of a real person for the mocked-up image was "shameless"."

  • Comment number 81.

    So, can we pinpoint these treasonous elements within the BBC? These 'untouchable' elements that collude with the powers soon not to be?

    I'd say we can…

    What's your say?

    This world wills to be free, with or without the BBC...

  • Comment number 82.


    the internet over the last few days has covered this, but now that it has hit the msm maybe you might note the following;

    "'Bin Laden' is alive and well and living in Spain".
    [Sydney Morning Herald. Monday Jan 18th 2010. page 7]

    Article commences:

    "MADRID; The FBI has admitted it used a photograph of a bearded Spanish politician as the basis for a mocked photofit of Osama bin Laden, to show how the terrorist might look now".

    Love the term 'mocked photofit', what do they call a fraudulent, deceitful lying video?

    By the way BBC, I hear that you re-ran a broadcast on building No 7 for about 15 minutes in some 'news service' last week. I am told that it was another or a repeat hit piece. Getting desperate are we BBC?

    Anhyone see it? Trust it dealt with the Nielss Harrit paper on the military grade nano thermite/mate and molten metal minute spheres relevant to the twin towers and therefore relevant, in the circumstances for building N0 7.

    Nah, no way BBC would you do that now would you, people might be informed and realise that they cannot trust the BBC, in view of the BBC's treatment of the 9/11 mass murder event in the past.

    Oh well, the FBI has Uncle Bin lurking around for the next false flag '9/11 type event'.

    Now who is going to take the responsibility for the repeat event, if it happens, because the first one (9/11)was not competently exposed, was covered up and the real perpetrators, properly investigated and dealt with?

  • Comment number 83.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 84.


    Even the Washington Post doesn't sound too convinced about the FBI's efforts:

    ...where does one apply to be a forensic artist for the FBI? I’m less interested for myself than for my 11-year-old daughter, who is really good at Google Images searches and Photoshop.

    (and)... if we are going to dummy up a random guy and call him bin Laden, can we try to find someone other than an elected official who has been outspoken about U.S. policies?

    ...But most important, if we are going to send 100,000 young people into Afghanistan to fight on our behalf, can our intelligence apparatus throw just the tiniest bit of additional resources into a serious bin Laden effort?

    ... frankly it’s hard to get fully on board when the FBI and State Department are so unbelievably ham-handed about the person who started the war in the first place.

    Frankly I find it hard to get on board with ANY of the official conspiracy theory. Where is the proof of these hijackers actually had anything to do with Bin Laden? The Afghans wanted to hand OBL before the US invasion (and the offer was rejected)? There is a 1000 architectects and engineers that said the WTC buildings 1,2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition (There was certainly a lot to hide!) No substantial proof that OBL is still alive and plenty of evidence that the US government is creating smoke screens to keep the illusion that he is still alive. Including this latest stupid photo image.

  • Comment number 85.


    I mentioned a 1000 architects and engineers with questions on the official story. Yet Rudin in his OBL documentary and wtc7 documentary just refered back to a couple of government Authority figures - the people actually being accused of the cover up, who just say "of course we're honest!" How does that stack up when you have serious professional people like these answering questions (just like the 9/11 families(!)) and not getting answers...

    Take, for example, this comment:

    Paul Browning, M.S. 35 years engineering experience with a NASA contractor, Bell Labs, Bellcore, AT&T Labs and Cingular/AT&T Mobility (12 years Engineering Management)

    "The only steel framed skyscrapers to have ever collapsed as a result of a fire were WTC 1, 2, and 7. These buildings were built to withstand the impact of a fully loaded Boeing 707, an aircraft about the same size and weight as the aircraft that hit them on 9/11.

    "Temperatures produced by the fires simply did not reach those required to have a significant impact on the building's structural integrity. Firemen 2 floors beneath the impact area in one building radioed out that the fire was controllable. Obviously he was not confronting a temperature of 2000 degrees only two stories above him. Pictures showed survivors of the impact standing in the hole made by the aircraft. These people wouldn't have been there under the kind of conditions assumed by the official story.

    "Fireman recalled hearing a series of secondary explosions exactly like those that would have been used to cause a controlled demolition and that the collapses looked exactly like that's what happened.

    "WTC 7 was hit by nothing and yet collapsed in the same way as the towers. Molten metal containing sulfur, indicating thermate, remained underneath all three buildings for weeks after 9/11. The structural steel debris was carted away as soon as possible without inspection. Taking pictures of ground zero or even stopping to look at it was made a criminal offense.

    "The impact of the aircraft and the resulting fires could not possibly have caused the twin towers to collapse and saying that the collapse of WTC 7 was due to the impacts is simply absurd."

    And, Mike, there are 999 other NAMED professional persons expressing similar comments.

  • Comment number 86.

    Referring to my question at 82 about the BBC program on building No 7. Anyone have any news? was it the usual hit piece.

    No doubt BBC, you lot are still trying to cover for the real culprits it seems.

    Anyway BBC things are moving on without you, bit by bit, drip by drip and one day the BBC will have to expalin.

    For those who cannot find Uncle Bin, whilst you are wondering if he did it, bring your mind around to the question as to who really did it. First, look at the official conspircay theory and realise that it is nonsense. When you have reached that stage then forget Bin and seek a new investigation.

    The 3,614 comments linked by Ynda at 61 above is a start. But if that is too tiring just see what is currently happening, e.g:

    * The architects and engineers are now up to 1,000 (not to mention the non-engineering supporters of their petition.)
    * Richard Gage has a report on his recent reports/trips over at the architects and engineers site: 9Ynda might note the photographs, we are unlike the US, we drive on the correct side here)
    * Richard never stops! On 7/1/10 he lectured to a class at St Mary's College of California. See the report at:
    Seems that out of the 24 students at the commencement of the address only 3 thought it was controlled demolition, after about 2 hours of Gage, 15 were for controlled demolition, 7 unsure and 2 were still Bush/Cheney believing conspiracy theorists.
    Rather impressive BBC, perhaps it is time to wake up BBC and consider the topic openly with proper debate with competenmt consideration of the scintific evidence and theories.
    I calculate the Gage success rate on that little exercise at 50% for the positive.
    Not bad Eh, Mike, how is your/BBC rate of attracting denial and support for the official conspircay theory going?
    By the way, Gage explained that prior to 9/11, the WTC elevators were being upgraded, just in case someone wonders how the thermite/explosives were placed. There is more on the net about those mysterious students (?) with construction identity cards camping in the tower/s.
    * A group (suppose one should call them 'a flight' of..... (;-)) of 60 space (?) engineers of flight people or whatever, have turned up and they can be seen at;

    Must be off, trust you have enjoyed some of the further drip, drip, dripping, BBC!?

    Enjoy the ride ynda!

  • Comment number 87.

    On reflection BBC; what are you lot doing for truth that can compare with Gage's work?

    Note Richard Gage's tireless support for a new investigation for the benefit of the democratic world and genuine freedom, not to mention for justice.

    He toured Australia, New Zealand and Japan from November to Christmas 09.

    On 7th januray he goes to the trouble and gives his time to address 24 students for about 2 hours at St Marys [see 86 above]to achieve a 50% result and with 7 new 'doubters'. He convinces a mere new 12 people, not that that is trite, those twelve will take the material to others and so on. The 7 'doubters' will exercise an open mind in their discusion on the matter from then on.

    Of course there many others assisting also, but having spent some time with Richard, I have seen him in action, basically, he never stops, even when sitting/travelling, he is texting away, organising his US ofice, etc and advancing the truth.

    It is about time his work was more widely appreciated by the world media and the public at large.

    So how about giving him the recognition he deserves, Mr. Rudin and BBC? How about an in depth interview with him that is not edited and any temptation of a surprise ambush that has not been forewarned, is dispensed with.

    I wonder if the BBC management appreciates that Richard is doing more for '9/111 truth and accounting' than the whole of the BBC put together and is doing it for practically nothing. So BBC, how much is your budget on finding the truth on 9/11?

    In a word/s, Richard is shaming the whole BBC organisation and the MSM in general.

    The least the BBC can provide for Richard, (and Jones, Harrit etc) is an open platform for; the benefit of the public and as part of the public duty the BBC should honestly and competently carry out.

    Come on BBC you can do it. (OR CAN'T YOU) If not, why not? Who/what is stopping the BBC?

    Is there not an ounce of shame within the BBC, when it compares it's efffort; (not) with Gage's work, dedication and effort, considering the usual BBC 'hit pieces' that are being replayed without correction and/or updating?

  • Comment number 88.

    Hi malleestump, yes, indeed. It is the same old story 1000 named professionals at ae911truth, saying the Politicians are pulling the wool over our eyes. But all it needs is one politician and the BBC to say, "no that ain't so" - and apparently that works to keep the masses happy. George Orwell would be so proud! (not)

  • Comment number 89.

    Hi everybody.

    This comment is on behalf of fillandfrowpist who still cannot log-on thanks to the super-lack-of-efficiency of the BBC machine (see item on Technical problems).

    Great comment malleestump. It probably surprises none of us that Rudin avoided a further episode on 911 since a conspiracy file is nothing of the sort if it contains something that cannot be knocked down i.e. the truth.

    The switch to Osama bin Laden, hardly a riveting subject for a conspiracy file, does highlight Rudin's previous efforts rather sharply as "cheap" material for the Discovery channels and money in BBC coffers. Rudin has managed to make conspiracy a dirty word with the BBC and that just about sums up the effort put in. Was that his brief I wonder?

    I am looking forward to the next conspiracy file - "Does the BBC Know Anything?"

  • Comment number 90.

    The whole of 9/11 has "The Weird Factor". In fact everything around the War of Terror has the weird factor where normally logic is not allowed and only Fear is the accepted response. Perhaps on Sept. 11, 2001, the impact of those airliners as they hit the Twin Towers sent us careening into an alternative dimension where fires make buildings explode, jet fighter pilots are inferior to crazed hijackers in airliners that can barely fly cessnas and torture is the American Way! In short we entered Bizarro World. And we have been trapped there ever since. The post-9/11 cognitive shift that heralded our entry into this alternate dimension is amplified around each terrorist incident: OBL doing reality TV shows in his cave, terrorists with exploding pants or the FBI morphing OBL into a guy 20 years younger!

    And if you try to ask any sensible questions - it is, er... the Questioners that are bonkers!?


  • Comment number 91.

    Angel at 89 suggests the title; "Does the BBC know anything", for the next conspiracy file program.

    Other thoughts might be a conspircay file program titled;

    "Has the BBC conspired to cover up 9/11?".

    Perhaps the BBC has some other producer who might take an objective look at that. Just imagine, all the fertile material that the producer would have, to examine that aspect. How about the BBC whistleblowers BBC, you think there are not a few lurking around just waiting for the opportunity to be be honest and think of their democracy first?

    Probably will not happen, seems that we will have to await a proper Commission of inquiry, such as the ongoing Chillcot/Childcot inquiry (??sp?).

    Now is that not a doozey? All the lies, lies, more lies and serial lies, perhaps a murder, deception, private deals with Bush to go and invade Iraq and resulting killing.

    Democracy and freedom BBC?!! That's what we are told the 'terrorists' don't lke us for.

    Seriously BBC, how thick do you lot think the world is?

  • Comment number 92.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 93.

    FBI 'fabricated terror emergencies to get phone records'

    Justice department to accuse FBI of invoking crises to obtain details of more than 2,000 calls, Washington Post reports...

    Which then allows FBI to set up fake terror plots: FBI ‘lured dimwits’ into terror plot

    And so it goes on to justify more terror alerts. It is whole circle of life sort of thing - all focused back to 9/11 - which HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN - in anything like an objective way - to be associated a terror organisation - except AQ - which ITSELF was an American front - so says FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds (deposition made under oath! ie the only evidence here which is legally admissible!)

  • Comment number 94.


    Yes indeed name calling is rather childish and does not really accomplish anything and for that I apologize Buck Turgidson and others. It just beggars belief to me that anyone with any common sense or logic can believe in something that is physically impossible.

    Buck Turgidson said

    "Unless "they" had thousands of people working on it the day before there's no way for that amount of work to be done unnoticed and this leaves us with the only opportunity being when the building was refurbished after the earlier attack but that would mean all of those explosives, detonators and wires being in place for several years without a single one going off, a single cable or detonator failing and no-one being able to detect any of it."

    So unless it was done the day before (2 110 storey buildings pre-rigged in one day!) then it must have been when the building was refurbished. That is the only other opportunity in your opinion. No room for anything in between.

    Also the bomb sniffing dog units in the WTC. Basically what you are saying Buck is that there was a system in place to prevent anyone getting in and planting explosives in the towers. Just like there was a system in plae at the airports to stop people carrying weapons onto planes. Like that kind of system Buck? Just like there was a system to stop terrorist suspects flying into the country? Like that kind of system Buck? Just like there was a system to deal with hi-jacked airliners? Like that kind of system Buck? Time and time again all these systems failed before and during 911 so why should the bomb dog units be any different? This is what I am talking about when I mention double standards. You are perfectly happy to believe the government when they tell you that all their agencies failed in order for the attacks to have succeeded and that Al-Qaeda just got lucky but when you hear an alternative theory you dismiss it because of these very same systems in place to stop these things from happening now suddenly work! Incompetence does exist of course but when you see time and time again this so called incompetence working in one direction then it can no longer be called incompetence. Someone had the power to stop all these systems from doing their respective duties before, during and after 911. Al-Qaeda does not have the capability so then who does?

    A man plans to rob a bank. Now the man knows that the bank has surveillance cameras and security measures to deter him and prevent him carrying out his heist. What does he do?

    Does he:
    A:Find a way to get round the security measures.
    B:Have someone on the inside bypass the security measures for him.
    or C:Hope that they just suddenly stop working on the day in question and he gets lucky?

    If the US governments conspiracy theory is true then Al-Qaeda chose option c. Totally implausible and an insult to anyones intelligence.

  • Comment number 95.

    The BBC's attitude to 9/11 is "Move along now. Nothing to see here"

    If there really is nothing to see then why can we not get simple answers to these questions:
    a) How did the twin towers collapse? (We want independent analysis)
    b) How did WTC7 collapse at freefall?
    c) After 9/11, why was there molten metal at the base of these skyscrapers?
    d) Why won't the BBC admit the existance of Prof Harrit's paper of nanothermite found in the GZ dust? (Yet was quick to pronounce on Steffan's unpublished maths paper which supposedly supported the official theory).
    e) Why there were no fighter intercepts on 9/11?
    f) Confirmation of the hijackers identities, despite the BBC running a story that some the supposed hijackers are still alive?
    g) How did the hijackers actually take over the four aircraft? Did nobody send any warnings out to pilots after the first 2 hijackings?
    h) Where did the hijackers money come from?
    i) Why have there been no air-crash investigations? Particularly at the Pentagon and Shanksville where there is no video record of impact.
    j) Why have there been no forensic, fire or crime scene investigations?
    k) Who profited from the "put-options"?
    l) After it was announced on 10th Septemeber 2001 by Donald Rumsfeld, where did DoD's unaccounted $2.2trillion go?
    m) Where are the training flight records impounded by Jeb Bush?
    n) What was Marvin Bush's role in all this?
    o) Why did George Bush give conflicting accounts of 9/11?
    p) Why did George Bush ask for a minute's silence for the dead in the middle of the twin tower emergency?
    q) Why was George Bush not immediately rushed from the school as soon as it was known that America was under attack?
    r) Why did George Bush join William Buffet at Offutt Air Base in the afternoon of 9/11 where Buffet was holding a get-together with businessmen from the WTC?
    s) Why has the BBC not reported on the investigation of the anthrax attacks which was traced back to US Military Labs?
    t) Why has the BBC never reported the explosion in Toulouse 10 days after 9/11 was connected to the French military industrial complex SNPE (which produces nanothermite)(and not just the AZF factory)?
    u) Why does the BBC pronounce on 9/11 without using the term "allegedly" and never question the official story despite many vague statements from FBI, use of torture by the CIA, incomplete investigations by NIST, police (the police chief during 9/11 is now in jail), lack of solid evidence in terms of voice records, radar information, air crash investigations, forsenic information on the many small bone fragments (the only record of many 9/11 victims), the lack of DNA for about a third of the 9/11 victims, the dispute over who should conduct the DNA analysis, the gold that was recovered at 9/11 "in transit", other aspects of foreknowledge including unusual spikes in the money supply immediately before 9/11, etc etc etc.
    v) The BBC refered to the WTC7 as the "Last Mystery" - oh, if only!

  • Comment number 96.

    Ynda at 95.

    May I suggest that the reason we cannot get the answers to the questions posed is because the murderous, treasonous, dispicable, hypocritical muerderes and war criminals have people of influence protecting them who do not want the public to know that the official Bush believers conspircay theory is a load of 'hogwash', to quoute Lt. Col. Bowman (ret)[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]See also the increasing number of decent, law abiding, genuine, honest, moral, sincere and influential people who are questioning 9/11 on that site.

    Another question to be posed; who are the people who are for truth and who are those who cover for lies and murder? I suppose it boils down to; you are either with us (the law abiding etc) or against us. (with the criminals)

    Many other questions may be posed ending with: should they be hanged? Whilst one should be against capital punishment, one has to be practical and recall what happened to the WW11 criminals, Sadam and his henchmen, all the criminals Bush did not pardon when he was Governor and what the punishment is in New York for mass murder and aiding and abetting a cover up and making false 'expert' fraudulent reports.

    Ynda, Most likey the consequences set out immediately above would be the final reason we are not being provided with the answers posed by you and millions of other decent people all over the world, strangely (!) the BBC is really not that interested, as to why that is so is pretty clear, just read bewteen the lines.

    Mr. Mahathir, ex Malaysian PM, is the latest to expree publicly, doubts abbout the official conspircay theory. (see Prison Planet and Info wars over the last 2-3 days.)

    Now there, is a story for you Mike/BBC, how about an interview with him, you can add few more; the ex President of Italy, (who exposed the Gladio false flag murders in Italy) Michael Meacher, Yuki Fujita, a few ex Russian Ministers, and some European parliamentarians, and all those politicians for New Hampshire as a sample of just a few.

    You could title the program; "Nutty 'Tin Foil Hat' Leaders of the 9/11 Conspircay World". Should be fun! An update could be of the same title, but refer to all the Nutty Engineers and Architects over at ae911truth (dot org) or the military people over at patriotsquestion911 (dot com)

    There comes one day; the 'tipping point', drip drip drip, BBC.

  • Comment number 97.

    So Alan Johnson has received some "intelligence", possibly from ObL, or should I call that man "Rudin's Ghost"?

    More likely AJ received a phone call from a certain person who is shortly starring at the Chilcot Theatre.

  • Comment number 98.

    the BBC ran a programme on whether Bin Laden was alive or dead... a kind of 'conspiracy files' thing I think it was. Only problem was, that they failed to even include the fact that Benezir Bhutto stated on the David Frost Show (on the BBC of all places!) that Bin Laden was murdered by a guy called Omar Saeid Shaek (I think I spelled that right?). Ps. Benezir Bhutto was killed one month after this interview and the BBC sensored the Bin Laden statement out of the interview... luckily it was released onto the net (link below).

    You wanna know who omar saied shaek is? well, he was an ISI (Pakistani intelligence services) agent who worked under General Mahmoud Ahmed, who just happened to be the guy that wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta... yep, thats right, Atta was the lead hijacker (allegidly!) on 9/11.

    In the movie '9/11 press for truth'... Omar Saeid Shaek is talked about in the following link... (Ps very very important for you to note that the '9/11 press for truth' film was released years before Benezir Bhutto's interview with David Frost on the BBC)!

    9/11 Press For Truth (@ 7 mins in, Omar Saeid Shaek is talked about)...

    And here is the later Bhutto -Frost interview on the BBC...

  • Comment number 99.

    @97, Hi A-i-T

    No there was a recording from OBL (allegedly). The BBC did use the "allegedly" word for the tape. But then the story that OBL was behind 9/11 has already been established (no "allegedly" association there). And even he was (see post 95 for further details and questions), this still does not answer the point raised by FBI whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds, under oath (ie the only thing legally valid around here!) that OBL was a US agent up until 9/11

    As for real reporting, how can you have it when whistleblowers are either ignored (like Sibel Edmonds) or most-probably killed, like David Kelly - the latter being used to silence the BBC and hushed up for SEVENTY years according to today's Daily Mail

  • Comment number 100.

    The time required for all this is a bit annoying, no pay, just free information provided on a plate to Aunty and her sweet nephew Mike, but we get nothing. Not even a 'thankyou' from aunt or nephew. Ungatefull, I say, we are being used I suspect and worse still, Aunty just ignores us as if we are some recalcitrant annoying relations, born to be ignored. Mike gets all the cake and cream, we get nothing. Aunty, I am taking note of this from now on.

    All right Aunt, listen up; I know you already know that evil uncle Bin has laid claim to the flight 253 attempted bombing er,.. I mean 'fizzer' of the scary grade. He really is a showoff and a skite and an embarrassment you know, his family must be about to just give up on him.

    Worse still, he is not "Arab" any more, he has had some plastic done and now turns up as an Indian. Hey Mike, he dresses in smart clothes, according to Kurt Haskell (the Michigan Lawyer who saw him with the 'fizzer fellow')and is semi retired working at some Denmark airport as an usher; to get terroists onto planes with a 'bomb' and without a passport. He is damm samrt as always, no pictures of him with his new persona, he must somehow arrange for the sirport security to withhold the videos of him and his mule. Oh dear, shades of the Pentagon; no useful videos, no plane parts. Bin always had a way with arranging these things, as you know.

    Now time to fully explain Mike, but I suggest that you search; 'Kurt Haskell, flight 253', heaps of juicy stuff will come up, even broadcast interviews on some mssms.

    Sorry mate, but I think it only fair that, as you are paid and we are not (except for the 'Cass Sunstein' boys (?)) that you ferret about a bit, you will eventually get one of these 'conspircay file' programs right, keep up the effort, even if it is just for; truth, (leaving out the Dr. Kelly matter), democracy and to maintain our freedoms and way of life.

    After all, it is Australia day tomorrow [26.1.10], and our politicians always sprout their hypocracy on such days, [also on ANZAC day] no doubt some of them will spruke the 'war on terrorism' to us and think we are so dumb, that we will believe them, but actually there are many more now who merely laugh at them. No doubt Mike by now, you might be inclined to agree somewhat?


Page 1 of 6

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.