All 18 entries tagged War-On-Terror
No other Warwick Blogs use the tag War-On-Terror on entries | View entries tagged War-On-Terror at Technorati | There are no images tagged War-On-Terror on this blog
September 20, 2008
Polygraph like machines to “spot terrorists” by scanning general public for anxiety
Friday, Sept 19, 2008
The Department of Homeland Security has previewed new technology that they promise will help rout out terrorists and other dangerous people in public places by covertly bio-scanning subjects as they walk past sets of cameras.
It may seem Orwellian, but on Thursday, the Homeland Security Department showed off an early version of physiological screeners that could spot terrorists, reports USA Today.
According to DHS officials, the scanners work like polygraphs but without the subjects having to be wired up to them. They measure body temperature, pulse and breathing regularity. Any sudden changes recorded could indicate “the kind of anxiety exuded by a would-be terrorist or criminal.”
According to the report, the new technology will not just be limited to use in airports:
The system would be portable and fast, said project manager Robert Burns, who envisions machines that scan people as they walk into airports, train stations or arenas. Those flagged by the machines would be interviewed in front of cameras that measure minute facial movements for signs they are lying.
Law experts have charged that the technology constitutes a government enforced “medical exam” which would violate civil rights.
There can be no doubt that this technology is part of Homeland Security’s Project Hostile Intent (PHI) program, on which we reported just over one year ago.
Scientists were tasked by the DHS to develop technology by 2010 that can scan the bodily functions of citizens, without them knowing, and uncover any possible hostile intent or deception.
The DHS revealed to The New Scientist that it wishes to develop a lie detector-type test that can be used remotely, which was described as “an advantage because it would not interfere with the flow of a crowd and it could be used without the target’s knowledge.”
Other technology to be used for PHI includes lasers, cameras, eye trackers, microphones and heart rate and breathing sensors.
The new technology complements already escalating security measures in airports and train stations such as biometric body scans, lie detector tests, behavior analysis, facial analysis and spot teams to spy on passengers.
In addition, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) started conducting random additional at-gate screening earlier this year of airline passengers who display “involuntary physical and physiological” actions indicating stress, fear or deception.
To anyone who remembers Poindexter’s gait analysis this is pretty disturbing stuff.
We are being acclimatized to these things, first within airports and stations. Technology and measures that you don’t even see used in prisons or high security facilities are being passed off as completely normal in public places.
Furthermore, from the wording in these reports, it is clear that the intention is to roll out the exact same measures throughout public places in major cities and subject the general public to intense airport style harassment on the city streets.
How long before we see checkpoint officials inspecting internal passports and consumers body scanned merely to enter a supermarket or a sports arena?
March 25, 2008
Homeland Security, weapons company express desire to use "Security Bracelet" in law enforcement, crowd control
Paul Joseph Watson
The Department of Homeland Security is pursuing the introduction of a device known as the Security Bracelet, a wearable tag that would allow authorities to inflict pain compliance on suspects from a distance, while also recommending law enforcement applications and potential use in "crowd control situations".
Introduced ostensibly to combat airline terrorism, a creepy promo video courtesy of the patent holders Lamperd FTS exploits shocking 9/11 imagery to push the torture device as a solution to countering potential hijackers by inflicting "Electro-Muscular Disruption" and presumably giving the rest of the passengers a debilitating shock at the same time.
Watch the clip.
"Upon activation of the electric shock device, through receipt of an activating signal from the selectively operable remote control means, the passenger wearing that particular bracelet receives the disabling electrical shock from the electric shock device. Accordingly, the passenger becomes incapacitated for a few seconds or perhaps a few minutes, during which time the passenger can be fully subdued and handcuffed, if necessary. Depending on the type of transmission medium used to send the activating signal, other passengers may also become temporarily incapacitated, which is undesirable and unfortunate, but may be unavoidable," reads the patent for the device.
The claim that such a shock would "not cause permanent injury" is an insult to the hundreds of Taser victims who have lost their lives to so-called "non-lethal weapons" - devices whose abuse by authorities has led groups like Amnesty International to condemn them as an affront to basic human rights.
Why the terrorists wouldn't just remove the bracelet as soon as they boarded the plane isn't explained, but the perceived fallibility of the device isn't the issue - the heart of the matter is the fact that the Department of Homeland Security has publicly expressed an interest and is seeking funding to utilize the device against the "criminal element".
Letters exchanged between the company and DHS official Paul S. Ruwaldt show Homeland Security's intention to utilize the device for border control and, "indeed for anywhere else for which the temporarily restraint of large numbers of individuals in open area environments by a small number of agents or Law Enforcement Officers".
The letters confirm that funding is being sought for the widespread deployment of the device and that several state and local authorities have expressed an interest, as well as the DOD, the CDC, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture Forestry service as well as unnamed law enforcement agencies.
In addition, according to the biography of Barry Lamperd, the owner of the company behind the device, carried on his own website, "His current focus is on products related to the use of less lethal weapons in crowd control situations".
Since revelations about warrantless secret surveillance of all U.S. citizens as well as millions of innocent Americans being included on the terror watch list have come to light, the new legal precedent of guilty until proven innocent has all but been established in the "land of the free".
So why not force protesters who insist on expressing what they claim is "freedom of speech" to wear the Security Bracelet? If they step outside of their free speech zone - zap them! How about making everyone who attends a Presidential inauguration or speech wear the bracelet in the interests of national security?
Since "crowd control situations" can easily be interchanged with "unauthorized demonstrations," why not force dissenters and undesirables to wear the bracelet so as to prevent civil unrest in times of national emergency?
Why not go the whole hog and just tag babies from birth in order to combat violent crime and robbery? If a crime is in progress, the police could just activate the shock from a safe distance and save lives.
The cost of enforcing any of these measures would of course be the complete and unmitigated death of any notion of liberty and freedom, but such concepts don't seem to concern advocates of the device.
Judging by comments left by You Tube viewers, most people are not going to "happily opt" to submit to the measures, as the promotional video claims, with respondents agreeing in unison that the device itself is "a lot scarier than terrorists".
"I'd rather be killed by terrorists then spend my life tracked and controlled by government "benefactors". Freedom always carries with it some risk of things going wrong.Who trusts the government enough to allow them to track citizens? If they start implementing this kind of technology, I just won't fly," writes one.
"What better way to assist terrorists (be they called "terrorists" or "police") to use you as tools at will than to do this? If "they" can subdue a few terrorists, than "they" can just as easily subdue the entire plane and use it as they see fit. Terrorists are scary? Please. Police (by all their names: KGB, SS, CIA, FBI) have killed far, far more people than any "terrorist" ever dreamed. So, lets give THEM more power, eh?" cautions another.
"Only the worst coward would subject himself to the indignity of such a device in the name of "security." Some things are more important than security, and one of those things is freedom. Free people do not allow themselves to be treated as criminals, guilty until proven innocent," writes another.
The way in which the promo invokes horrific images of 9/11 to sell the product also leaves viewers revolted.
"Fearmongering to sell a product. No thanks. But lets get them to keep demonstrating how the shocking someone part works on their own employees!" writes one respondent.
March 14, 2008
Pentagon Attempts To Memory Hole New Report That Dismisses Al Qaeda-Saddam link
Cancels plan for broad public release of report that debunks Neocon lie
Thursday, March 13, 2008
The Pentagon has blocked the scheduled release of a definitive report that found no pre-Iraq war link between late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.
The report, which is based on 600,000 official Iraqi documents seized by US forces, was due to be posted on the Joint Forces Command website late yesterday, and was to be followed up by a background briefing with the authors. However, the report will now only be made available to those in the media who request it.
Of course, given that the mainstream media is more concerned with the myspace page of the Spitzer hooker than iron clad proof that the Bush administration lied its way into a still ongoing war, we are unlikely to hear much more about this report.
Asked why the report, which was produced by a federally-funded think tank, the Institute for Defense Analyses, would not be posted online and could not be emailed, the spokesman for Joint Forces Command said: "We're making the report available to anyone who wishes to have it, and we'll send it out via CD in the mail."
Another Pentagon official said initial press reports on the study made it "too politically sensitive.", reported ABC.
Translation: With the fifth anniversary of the Iraq war approaching on March 19, and the White House attempting to hold support for a continued large U.S. troop presence there, those who have not yet realized they were monumentally deceived by their own government on this issue may finally wake up to the truth.
A reminder of the lies that took the country to war:
''There is no question but that there have been interactions between the Iraqi government, Iraqi officials and Al Qaeda operatives. They have occurred over a span of some 8 or 10 years to our knowledge. There are currently Al Qaeda in Iraq,'' - Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Infinity CBS Radio, Nov. 14, 2002.
"What I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the Al Qaeda terrorist network," former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, United Nations Testimony, February 5, 2003.
"We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the al-Qaeda organization," - Vice President Dick Cheney, NBC Meet The Press, March 16, 2003.
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," - President George W. Bush, Washington Post, June 18, 2004.
The lies have not stopped either. As recently as last July, Bush tried to tie Al Qaeda to the ongoing violence in Iraq. "The same people that attacked us on September the 11th is a crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims," he said.
Last Summer also saw Dick Cheney doing the rounds in high schools, giving speeches in which he repeated the claim of a Saddam-Al Qaeda link.
Although the new report is the first "official" admission of neocon war lies, there have been many previous accounts that corroborate the deception.
As reported by the NY Times, "The chairman of the monitoring group appointed by the United Nations Security Council to track Al Qaeda told reporters that his team had found no evidence linking Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein" [6/27/03].
According to national security officials, "In the 14 weeks since the fall of Baghdad, coalition forces have not brought to light any significant evidence demonstrating the bond between Iraq and Al Qaeda…Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah, the two highest-ranking Qaeda operatives in custody, have told investigators that Mr. bin Laden shunned cooperation with Saddam Hussein" [NY Times, 7/20/03]
Even the 9/11 commission report, famed for its numerous omissions, undercuts claims before the war that Hussein had links to Al Qaeda.
Fast forward to April 2007 and a separate Pentagon Report, based on interrogations, dismissed any link between Al Qaeda and Saddam.
It was also revealed last Summer, via Stephen Hayes’s biography on Dick Cheney, that the current Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell appears to side with “those who believe that the administration manipulated intelligence on Iraq for political purposes before the 2003 invasion.”
McConnell decried the “secondary unit” established within the Pentagon to “reinterpret information” prior to the war. An internal Pentagon investigation released in February revealed that former Undersecretary of Defense Doug Feith utilized the Counter-Terrorism Evaluation Group within the Pentagon to create and promote false links between Iraq and al Qaeda.
Specifically, then-Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz “asked Feith’s analysts to ignore the intelligence community’s belief that the militant Islamist al-Qaida and Saddam’s secular dictatorship were unlikely allies.” Subsequently, Feith “disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al-Qaida relationship…to senior decision-makers.”
February 29, 2008
Alleged Hijacker Booked On Post-9/11 Flights
Astounding FBI documents contradict 9/11 Commission report as CIA veteran Robert Baer calls for investigation to be re-opened
Paul Joseph Watson
Astounding newly released FBI documents obtained via the Freedom Of Information Act show that alleged 9/11 hijacker Hamza Al-Ghamdi had booked future flights to San Francisco and Riyadh, suggesting that he was unaware of his eventual fate aboard United Airlines Flight 175, the plane that hit the World Trade Center's south tower.
The papers consist of a 300 page Federal Bureau of Investigation timeline (PDF link) that was used by the 9/11 Commission but not made public until now.
The 9/11 Commission failed to mention in its final report that Al-Ghamdi was booked onto several flights scheduled to take place after 9/11, including another flight on the very day of the attacks.
The fact that Al-Ghamdi had booked post-9/11 flights obviously gives rise to doubts about whether the alleged hijacker knew the 9/11 attack was a suicide mission and even brings into question if he was on the flight at all.
Citing “UA passenger information," on page 288 under an entry pertaining to “H AlGhamdi,” the FBI timeline reads: "Future flight. Scheduled to depart Los Angeles International Airport for San Francisco International Airport on UA 7950," reports Raw Story (excerpt below).
Al-Ghamdi was also booked to fly on September 20, 2001 from Casablanca, Morocco to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and September 29, where he planned to fly from Riyadh to Damman, Saudi Arabia.
The FBI timeline documents also contradict with several other details of the 9/11 Commission Report, notably on the movements of alleged Flight 77 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar.
Researcher Paul Thompson believes the Commission cherry-picked the dates of the alleged hijacker's movements in order to shield their ties with high-level Saudi Arabian officials.
He points to the redaction of the name of a person who is a known employee of a Saudi defense contractor, Omar al-Bayoumi, who lived at the same location, reports Raw Story.
“We know it’s Bayoumi,” said Thompson, “because after 9/11, the Finnish Government mistakenly released a classified FBI list of suspects that showed Bayoumi living in apartment #152 of Parkwood Apartments.” That information is available here.
“But also important is that it strongly suggests that the hijackers already had a support network in Southern California before they arrived,” Thompson continued.
“In the official version of the story now, the hijackers drift around L.A. listlessly for two weeks before chancing to come across Bayoumi in a restaurant [according to Bayoumi’s account],” Thompson added. “Whereupon he's an incredible good Samaritan and takes them down to San Diego, pays their rent, etc.”
”But from the FBI's timeline, we now know the hijackers started staying at Bayoumi's place on Jan. 15 – the very same day they arrived,” Thompson says. “So obviously they must have been met at the airport and taken care of from their very first hours in the US. That's huge because the FBI maintains to this day that the hijackers never had any accomplices in the US.”
Former 20-year veteran CIA case officer Robert Baer, who has previously asserted that 9/11 has aspects of being an inside job, told Raw Story that the new developments immediately demand the 9/11 investigation be re-opened.
“There are enough discrepancies and unanswered questions in the 9/11 Commission report that under a friendly administration, the 9/11 investigation should be re-opened,” wrote Baer.
“Considering that the main body of evidence came from tortured confessions, it's still not entirely clear to me what happened on 9/11,” he concluded.
Raw Story provides further details concerning how the documents shed more light on the role of Saudi authorities and their complicity in the attack.
These new revelations mark the most astounding 9/11-related developments in many months and are sure to kick of a firestorm of new doubts about the crumbling official government story.
February 24, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008 In a significant observation many time UN contributor & international observer Professor Hans Koechler said “9/11 may have been an insider’s job” in response to a question from one of the delegates attending his lecture The 'Global War on Terror - Contradictions of an Imperial Strategy' last night at the Trades Hall in Auckland. “I am not a boy-I am 59. There are many inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the official version of events. Those who could not handle a Cessna pulled off 9/11,” he said. But he was quick to note that the official version has to be challenged. Quoting David Ray Griffin he said these events, in terms of destruction caused, these incidents cannot have been exclusively organized by a shadowy network of Mujahedeen from the remote places of the globe. The causes officially given for the incidents are not a sufficient explanation for what actually happened on that day, especially as regards the logistics of this highly sophisticated operation and the very advanced infrastructure required for it. He has published more than 300 books, reports and scholarly articles in several languages. In his book The Global War on Terror and the Metaphysical Enemy he writes the atrocities of September 11, 2001- Instead of dealing with the contradictions and inconsistencies in the official version of events and the numerous gaps in terms of the factual information, a “dogma of political correctness” has been promulgated according to which 19 Islamic-inspired Arab hijackers, directed by an elusive “Al-Qaeda” (“base”), succeeded in carrying out the atrocities all by themselves. During the course of his lecture he recalled the detailed and precise questions asked on 11 January 2008 by Yukihisa Fujita, member of Japan’s House of Councillors (Senate) and Director of the Senate’s Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence, about the 9/11 attacks as the origin of the war on terror are a rare exception. The total silence about Mr. Fujita’s intervention before the Committee, that was broadcast live on Japan’s public NHK television channel, in the Western corporate media is a telling example of the
lack of courage in front a powerful political establishment. Thus, a rather docile and obviously opportunistic intellectual élite in the West, in tandem with client régimes in the Muslim world, has effectively silenced – or at least marginalized – critical opinion. Against this bleak – geopolitical as well as civilizational – background we can basically identify two desiderata of international politics in the framework of the increasing alienation between Islam and the West, which accompanies the confrontation over the “global war on terror”: The countries of the West, “assembled,” to varying degrees of intensity and loyalty, around the United States as the imperial hegemon, have to realize that they are about to embark upon an unwinnable test of wills: a conflict that cannot be ended in (conventional) military terms and that will, if not contained by means of multilateral diplomacy, completely absorb the “political energies” and exhaust, to a considerable extent, the resources even of advanced industrial societies. At the same time, they have to correct and eventually reverse the process of “civilizational alienation” vis à- vis Islam for which they are responsible in important respects. There is a need, as then Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, has put it, “to unlearn the stereotypes that have become so entrenched in so many minds and so much of the media.” Since 1972, UN Secretaries-General in their statements subsequently acknowledged Professor Köchler’s contributions to international peace. In April 2000, Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Professor Koechler as international observer at the
Syed Akbar Kamal is Producer/Director for current affairs programme Darpan - The Mirror nationwide on Stratos & Triangle TV.
January 15, 2008
Writing about web page http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Fox_hypes_terror_of_Al_Qaedas_0114.html
Fox hypes terror of 'White Al Qaeda Army'
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
The hosts of Fox & Friends are all worked up over a claim in the British press that al Qaeda may be recruiting Caucasian members to infiltrate Western societies.
"Have you heard about this new thing going on in Great Britain," asked host Gretchen Carlson, "[where] Al Qaeda [is] rooting up all these Britons, essentially, 1400 strong, apparently, in a new, what's being called a new 'White al Qaeda Army.' Tougher to detect, potentially ..."
"Yeah, because they're not Muslims," co-host Steve Doocy commented. "They look just like regular British people."
"This is what we've always talked about," Carlson went on, "That if you have people in one country transplanting to another religion and they maybe aren't exactly what you think they are, that can be more difficult to fight.
"Yeah. They're converting them in prison, to, uh..." "To kill us!" "Yeah, great," said co-hosts Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy in turn.
Brian Kilmeade then brought on Mike Baker, a former CIA agent and professional counter-terrorism expert. "Mike Baker's here -- this word that al Qaeda's building up a white terror army of up to 1500 operatives in the UK:" said Kilmeade. "How soon could they strike us here, and would they be trying to do something similar using convicted criminals?"
Baker told Kilmeade that al Qaeda looks for operatives who can fit in, just as the CIA does, saying, "If they can recruit a Scandinavian, that's the holy grail for them." He added, "They need people who can move around freely and do their bidding," apparently implying that blue-eyed blondes are the people who blend most seamlessly into Western society.
However, Baker dismissed Kilmeade's suggestion that al Qaeda would be particularly interested in recruiting in US prisons. "To go into a prison and try to recruit individuals -- that person's already tainted. What they really need, they need people who haven't run afoul of law enforcement in the past. ... Their problems are extreme in trying to recruit someone who can go out there and carry out their business."
Baker also commented on the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, saying, "You're not going to sway the conspiracy theorists, and there are a lot of them, who exist on the anti-Musharraf side. ... They just will not be convinced that the government was not involved in this."
This video is from Fox's Fox & Friends, broadcast January 14, 2008.
December 22, 2007
"Lobster serves as model for new X-ray device":
December 21, 2007
Writing about web page http://www.infowars.net/articles/december2007/201207Satellite.htm
Plans also include "cyber-security strategy" to "protect" domestic computer networks
Thursday, Dec 20, 2007
The Department of Homeland security is forging ahead and finalizing plans to use a network of spy satellites for domestic surveillance despite the fact that the Congressional committee supposedly overseeing the program has had no update on it for over three months.
A report in today's Wall Street Journal suggests that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is in the process of finalizing a charter for the program this week, regardless of the fact that it is supposed to be suspended.
The DHS had declared that the program was "on hold" after its existence was made public in August, prompting an outcry amongst civil libertarians and lawmakers.
Demands to justify the congressional legality of the satellites, which were originally mandated for foreign surveillance, followed the revelation that a new department branch called the National Applications Office would oversee the program and be responsible for providing images from the satellites to non military law enforcement agencies.
Critics have called for cuts to DHS funding, stressing that the program is in direct violation of the Posse Comitatus act, which prevents the use of military for domestic law enforcement. It also violates the fourth amendment as the satellites are capable of seeing through the walls of people's homes.
Domestic intelligence and security agencies are now receiving more funding for spy satellites than the military.
"We still haven't seen the legal framework we requested or the standard operation procedures on how the NAO will actually be run," House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie G. Thompson told the WSJ.
In addition to the satellites, the surveillance program also includes new forms of internet monitoring:
Mr. Chertoff also plans soon to unveil a cyber-security strategy, part of an estimated $15 billion, multiyear program designed to protect the nation's Internet infrastructure. The program has been shrouded in secrecy for months and has also prompted privacy concerns on Capitol Hill because it involves government protection of domestic computer networks.
Essentially the program would allow the DHS to regulate and control access to the internet in the name of "protecting" national security.
The news comes on the back of separate revelations that another military spy agency, the NSA has increasing control over SSL, now called Transport Layer Security, the cryptographic protocol that provides secure communications on the internet for web browsing, e-mail, instant messaging, and other data transfers.
In other words the agency is capable of intercepting and reading your emails and instant messages in real time.
We also learned this week that the lawyer for an AT&T engineer has alleged that "within two weeks of taking office, the Bush administration was planning a comprehensive effort of spying on Americans’ phone usage.” That is BEFORE 9/11, before the nation was embroiled in the freedom stripping exercise commonly known as the "war on terror" had even begun.
We shouldn't be surprised obviously, Government surveillance programs targeting Americans are legion and have been in place for decades.
November 12, 2007
BBC To Apologize For 9/11 Truth Hit Piece?
Scandal-hit network desperately scrambles to offset legal action over lies and bias in February 2007 documentary
Paul Joseph Watson
The BBC could be forced to apologize and admit mass public deception for airing a documentary on the 9/11 truth movement that was clearly riddled with errors, lies and bias, as the scandal-hit corporation desperately squirms to avoid a potential court case brought by a British scientist.
John A. Blacker, a qualified physicist & mechanical engineer and a member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, is currently engaged in a pre-action protocol with the BBC in an attempt to settle out of court and get an apology from the broadcaster as well as a guarantee that the program will never be shown on television again.
In a letter to the BBC, Blacker cites a catalogue of errors, distortions and outright lies that were contained in the program, arguing that the documentary is an insult to those that lost their lives on 9/11.
"The Conspiracy files team spoke to and recorded the testimony of many eyewitnesses, fire fighters, police officers, and public high witnesses, plus also officialdom high witnesses and had access to written testimony from many high witnesses via official sites on the WWW," writes Blacker. "YET NOT ONE SINGLE HIGH WITNESS WAS PRESENTED IN THE DOCUMENTARY TO PUT THE TRUTH PERSPECTIVE," he adds.
"The Conspiracy Files Documentary was a work of Total Public deception from start to end, perfectly crafted to stealthily deceive and forward nothing which was conclusive either one way or the other, in other words, perfect propaganda YELLOW journalism by stealth, omission & deception," Blacker concludes, after citing dozens of examples of bias, fraud and agenda-driven presentation.
In a clear sign that BBC are struggling to form a case for the legal defense of the program, they have put back a meeting with Blacker for the third time in succession, now agreeing to a late November date.
In our review of the documentary, we slammed the program as a tissue of lies, bias and emotional manipulation from beginning to end, listing 17 clear examples of gross inaccuracy, distortions, obfuscations and character smears.
After the show aired in the UK, Producer Guy Smith subsequently appeared on The Alex Jones Show but failed miserably to address these concerns, only being able to repeat empty sound bites about how the show was intended to be an impartial investigation.
The BBC were embroiled in a similar spat later that same month when footage emerged of one of their correspondents reporting the collapse of WTC Building 7 on 9/11 over 20 minutes before it actually fell, leading to claims that the broadcaster was, either wittingly or unwittingly, being fed a script as events unfolded on the day. At the very least, the saga painfully illustrated why the establishment media cannot be trusted when major news events occur because they simply act as a feedback loop for whatever the authorities tell them, no matter how dubious the facts of the matter are.
If the BBC are forced to admit mass public deception it will mire the corporation in a new scandal hot on the heels of numerous allegations of rampant corruption regarding phone-in contests. The public broadcaster, which is financed by the British public by way of mandatory TV licensing, has also been slammed for staging scenes in documentaries and asking members of the public to lie for contrived interviews, causing trust in "Auntie Beeb" to plummet to all time lows.