1.     28th February 2007. Formal letter of complaint to the BBC.
2.     2nd March 2007. The BBC's reply, (and enclosing blog messages from Richard Porter and Mike Rudin.)
3.     19th March 2007 - formal complaint to Ofcom about BBC.
4.     20th March 2007 - formal complaint to Ofcom about BBC World News program of 11th September 2001.
5.     22nd March 2007 - addendum to letter of 20th March 2007 sent to Ofcom.
6.    23rd March 2007 - letter from Ofcom.
7.     26th March 2007 - Formal letter of complaint to the BBC Governors.
8.     24th April 2007 - BBC's reply to letter to Governors of 26th March 2007.
9.     30th May 2007 - Formal letter of complaint to BBC Editorial Complaints Unit.
10.  18th June 2007 - BBC reply from Editorial Complaints Unit (9 pages).
11.   3rd August 2007 - BBC Trust reply.
12.   20th November 2007 - Letter to BBC Trust, Chairman, Editorial Standards Committee.
13.   21st November 2007 - Addendum to Letter to BBC Trust, Chairman, Editorial Standards Committee.

Editorial Complaints Unit
BBC
Media Centre
MC4C6 Media Village
201 Wood Lane
London W12 7TQ 

Your ref: 14164091 

30^th May 2007 

FORMAL COMPLAINT 

Re: BBC2 -  The Conspiracy Files – 9/11. Panorama 9.0pm – 18th February 2007
Series Producer - The Conspiracy Files: Mike Rudin
Producer of The Conspiracy Files – 9/11: Guy Smith
Narrator: Helen Boaden 

To Whom It May Concern, 

On 28^th February 2007 I sent a formal letter of complaint to the BBC concerning the above program. Their reply dated 2^nd March was an insult to intelligence. It was a stereotype letter that failed to address the points in question.  

I then sent a copy of said complaint to Ofcom on 19^th March. Ofcom replied on 23^rd March, informing that it was not their jurisdiction, and advised that I write to the BBC Governors. I therefore sent further copies to the BBC Governors on 23^rd March.  

A reply was received dated 24^th April from Mr Andrew Martin, from BBC Information, relating to the issue. He failed to address any of the issues in an unbiased way, thereby supporting his colleagues. I replied to Mr Martin’s letter on 10^th May, to which his reply dated 16^th May advised that I write to your department, the Editorial Complaints Unit.  

The BBC code of practice states: “The process has three stages, designed to be straightforward to use and to enable us to address your concerns properly…” 

The two replies received from the BBC thus far were anything but addressing the formal complaint properly. Their bias was weighted in favour of their BBC colleagues. Such bias does not address the writer’s concerns nor the whole issue in question in any way that may be considered as proper. 

I therefore, herewith, submit the formal complaint and trust that the matter will be investigated in a dispassionate way without favour or leanings to your colleagues in question. 
 

Yours sincerely, 
Signed: Philip Dawes 

Enclosures:
Letter to BBC Complaints, 28^th February 2007
Together with Annexes A and B (separate).
Note: Annex B - Captain Karen Deshore interview 7^th November 2001, with website: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110189.PDF 
Letter to Ofcom, 20^th March 2007. 

Addendum

To further substantiate the claim that the producers of said documentary were complicit in creating a deliberately falsified account of the general 9/11 Truth movement in the U.S.A. and around the world, thereby supporting the fraudulent U.S. government claims of that day, and by direct extension, the British government’s conspiratorial complicity in the cover up, it is requested that the BBC Editorial Complaints Unit review the accounts documented on the following website: http://patriotsquestion911.com .   

The PatriotsQuestion911 website contains the following heading categories:

• 100+ Senior Military, Intelligence Services, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials Question the 9/11 Commission Report.

• 130+ Professors Question the 9/11 Commission Report.

• 100+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members Question the 9/11 Commission Report.

• 70+ Entertainment and Media Professions Question the 9/11 Commission Report.

The many well known people named under the categories listed include their photographs, together with their statements, extracts from published articles, speaking engagements or book titles related to the atrocities of 9/11, each questioning the official version of events. The numbers in each category are added to on a weekly basis.

Further, a new website has been created called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:  www.ae911truth.org , put together by Richard Gage, AIA (Member of the American Institute of Architects).  The site was started with a modest sixty architectural and engineering professionals. Their objective is to document the case for the controlled demolition of the World Trade Centre Buildings 1, 2 and 7, thereby refuting the fraudulent cover-ups of the NIST and 9/11 Commission Reports.  

When considering these highly skilled professionals who have formed such a body, announcing that the official U.S. government version of events of that day is a fabrication, it really puts into context the conspiratorial and juvenile version of events proclaimed by Popular Mechanics’, and others of similar dubious claims, so arrogantly trumpeted as the real truth by said BBC producers.

Return to lead page