Please wait
Home » BBC » Peter Drew's full complaint Full details of the BBC complaint from Peter DrewAfter watching the two BBC documentaries '9/11 Ten Years On' and '9/11: Conspiracy Road Trip' in September 2011, Peter Drew decided that what the BBC was showing to the public with those two documentaries was so clearly inaccurate and biased towards supporting the official story of 9/11 and smearing the legitimate questions asked by the 9/11 truth movement, that he decided to challenge the documentaries through the BBC's formal complaints processes which is in place to ensure that the BBC adheres to its 'Royal Charter' and 'Agreement' with the British public. This requires the BBC to present important items of news in a manner that is factually accurate, impartial, and fair. Peter Drew is a member of the 'volunteer team' for the US based organisation 'Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth' (AE911truth), an organisation which includes 1,700 professional architects and engineers as well as 14,000 other individuals, who all question the official version of events for the collapse of the three towers on 9/11 and who are calling for a new and independent investigation. As such, through this organisation there was abundant scientific and professional evidence available which could prove that what the BBC was telling the public in those two documentaries was at best extremely misleading and inaccurate, and at worst was part of an intentional and wilful cover up of one of the biggest crimes in history. The main elements of Mr Drew's complaint surround the following issues:
These are the three main areas of focus of Mr Drew's complaint and all the details are shown within the various communications below. Index of complaint correspondence
23/01/2012 - Email to BBC Audience ServicesDear BBC Audience Services Many thanks for your response to my complaint which is much appreciated. I take your point that there are many different thoughts, opinions, and theories regarding what happened on 9/11. That is without doubt correct. But your inference that this means that the BBC cannot adequately address my specific complaint because it is just one of numerous opinions is very much mistaken. In my complaint I have not even raised any opinion at all about what happened on 9/11 or who did what, all I have done is highlight the fact that many aspects of the official story have been proven to be incorrect or not possible, and of even more concern, many absolutely critical aspects of 9/11 have not even been reported by the BBC and other mainstream media outlets. This is negligence by the BBC according to what the BBC’s responsibility is to the paying public to inform them of important worldly events. In the BBC’s response to my complaint, it states that what I have said to be factual information may not actually be factual and is just my opinion. This also is not correct. It is not my OPINION that a 47 story skyscraper not even hit by a plane came down on that day at free fall speed, it is a fact which NIST have now reluctantly had to change their story on and admit this due to expert scientists proving this to be the case. This is an absolutely incredible fact that is now admitted by the officials, a fact that has truly enormous ramifications, and yet has not been covered at all by the BBC. This is negligence by the BBC in its responsibility to inform the public about extremely important worldly events especially when the science is quite clear on the fact that free fall collapse of a building can only occur as a result of controlled demolition. If the BBC doubts me on this, then anyone with any kind of journalist skill and integrity can quickly find this information out, which is really what journalists at the BBC should be doing if they have a potentially huge news story on their hands
The above points are all indisputable facts, not individual opinion or theory, but indisputable occurrences. And they are occurrences that absolutely should be major items of news and which the public have a right and a requirement to be informed about. So my question to the BBC stands. Why have these extraordinarily important news stories listed above not even been mentioned by the BBC so that the vast majority of the public are not even aware that these things have occurred? As an additional point, and to further reinforce the strong feeling by many many people on this issue, I provide a link here to a letter/article recently posted on the ‘Veterans Today’ website in the US and addressed to Mrs. Shami Chakrabarti as part of the current Leveson Inquiry http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/12/20/rupert-murdoch-911-and-the-leveson-investigation-of-the-media-police-complex/ . Thank you again for your response to my initial enquiries and I look forwards to receiving some further feedback as to why the BBC have not covered the very important news stories listed above and have therefore been negligent in their responsibilities to the public to inform them about these important issues. Yours sincerely Peter Drew
|