Full details of the BBC complaint from Adrian Mallett

After watching the BBC Conspiracy Files program called '9/11 Ten Years On' Adrian Mallett, a member of the 9/11 truth movement, decided to complain to the BBC. The program distorted or avoided the facts in order to cast members of the 9/11 Truth Movement in the worst possible light.

The BBC then broadcast a further program called '9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip' which can only be described as blatant propaganda in support of the official story. It was full of truly ridiculous 'demonstrated' and 'experimental' evidence heavily stacked to make a group of carefully selected young people, not fooled by the official story, look callous and delusional. The program was so bad that even people who had no idea of any of the problems with the official story thought it was daft.

The BBC is governed by it own charter in which it states it is dedicated to the principles of accuracy and impartiality. Both programs mentioned above, and especially the Road Trip propaganda, ignored the BBC charter. If you care to read through the complaint correspondence that follows you will see that the BBC charter is nothing more than a paper exercise and the BBC itself has no interest in ensuring its producers comply with the rules.

Index of complaint correspondence

Date	Title
09/08/2011	Initial complaint sent by email to the BBC Editorial Standards Committee
25/08/2011	Reply by email from Gareth Brennan of the BBC Audience Services
25/08/2011	Further email to Gareth Brennan of the BBC Audience Services
12/09/2011	Email to Gareth Brennan of BBC Complaints
19/09/2011	Letter from Tanya McKee of BBC Complaints (PDF)
01/10/2011	Email to Tanya McKee of BBC Complaints
07/11/2011	Letter from Gemma McCartan of BBC Complaints (PDF)
02/12/2011	Letter to Gemma McCartan of BBC Complaints
13/12/2011	Email from Patrick Clyde of BBC Complaints
14/12/2011	Email to Patrick Clyde of BBC Complaints
15/01/2012	Further letter to Gemma McCartan of BBC Complaints
11/02/2012	Email from Stuart Webb of BBC Complaints
12/02/2012	Email from Jamie Patterson of BBC Complaints
16/02/2012	Letter to the BBC Editorial Complaints Unit
17/02/2012	No further comments reply from the BBC (PDF)
24/02/2012	Letter from Colin Tregear of the BBC ECU (PDF)
03/04/2012	1200092 911 Conspiracy Road Trip ECU Finding (PDF)
05/04/2012	1200091 The Conspiracy Files 911 Ten Years On ECU Finding (PDF)
23/04/2012	Letter to Lucy Tristam of the BBC Trust Unit
25/04/2012	Email reply from John Hamer of the BBC Trust Unit
29/05/2012	Email from Lucy Tristam of the BBC Trust Unit
30/05/2012	Email to Lucy Tristam of the BBC Trust Unit
13/06/2012	Reply from BBC - Conspiracy Files Mallett (PDF)
13/06/2012	Reply from BBC - Conspiracy Files Annex 2 (PDF)
13/06/2012	Reply from BBC - Conspiracy Road Trip Mallett (PDF)
13/06/2012	Reply from BBC - Conspiracy Road Trip Annex 2 (PDF)
24/06/2012	Letter to Lucy Tristam of the BBC Trust Unit

15/01/2012 - Further letter to Gemma McCartan of BBC Complaints

Re: CAS-927900-GS71RV / CAS-990119-DZS7WB / CAS-1028278-6DFXXR / CAS-955156-6T8K92

Dear Ms McCartan

I've pretty much given up trying to highlight to the BBC the full range of glaring errors and omissions from your 9/11 coverage as no one seems to care. The fact the coverage blatantly breaches the BBC’s charter by promoting a single view point by the use of propaganda doesn’t seem to matter to anyone.

Even a basic scientific scrutiny of the official story quickly reveals it to be ridiculous and actually impossible according to the laws of physics. Even NIST themselves stated that their own explanation for the collapse of WTC building 7 is impossible in a press conference their chief investigator, Shyam Sunder, hosted in August 2008. Sunder also stated in a BBC interview that it was impossible for WTC7 to have collapsed in free fall. He now stands behind their final report that the building fell in free fall for at least 2.25 seconds. Free fall is impossible without the use of explosives which in turn reveals prior knowledge and is clear evidence of a cover up. The BBC’s method of covering this, and many other disturbing facts which blow the whole official story wide open, is to avoid it at any cost. The BBC seems to be under the instruction of the government to promote the official story as dictated by the Bush Administration regardless of its validity and the deadly consequences to hundreds of UK armed forces personnel.

All the stock replies I've received so far from the BBC to my detailed letters seem to indicate that the responsibility for ensuring the factual accuracy of any programs broadcast lies solely with that programs producers.

The US is currently looking for excuses to go to war with Iran. A US court recently ‘proved’ (based on very dubious evidence) that Iran had helped finance the alleged 9/11 hijackers. This is significant because the 9/11 commission actually included evidence that the Pakistan SIS had made payments to the alleged hijackers of approximately $100K prior to 9/11. The commission dismissed that fact because ‘motive was irrelevant to their report’! If we do get involved in a US war in Iran then the BBC can congratulate itself on having helped ensure our involvement in yet another illegal war by not doing its job.

Can I please get an answer to just one question without being fobbed off with any more stock replies: Clearly the BBC complaints procedure doesn’t work to ensure the factual accuracy of broadcasts so if a BBC program stated that the earth was made of cheese and the producer refused to do anything about it then who, if anyone, at the BBC has the responsibility of correcting that mistake?

This is a simple question which no one at the BBC seems to know the answer to. I’ve kept this letter short in the hopes that it will be read (as some of my previous letters haven’t been) and I’ve highlighted the single question I’m asking so that it shouldn’t get missed. A clear concise answer would be greatly appreciated.

Yours sincerly,

Adrian Mallett B.Eng (Hons).

« Previous item

^ Return to index ^

Next item »