BBC 9/11: The Conspiracy Files

CptColumbo said:
That's it. Did you read the response regarding the supposed lack of equal time. Did you also time the amount of time given to each interviewed subject or just count the talking heads?
Click to expand...

Yes I read your response. The 3 CTs featured were shown for approximately 3 minutes each.

Now please tell me why you think the CBC piece is biased.
 
Aphelion said:
Arus808, the Diana episode of the show was 90 minutes long. Odd that they chose to put a large subject like 911 into an hour show.
Click to expand...


I think for a BRITISH organization that something that pertains to BRITAIN would carry more concern and weight in ENGLAND. Something that happens on AMERICAN SOIL dealing with AMERICAN kooks and AMERICAN conspiracy theories, really probably doesn't matter with BRITISH citizens.

They think we are all dumb yanks...and having Alex Jones, Jim Fetzer and Dylan Avery only helps to promote that idea. 60 minutes of dumb yanks is more than enough for them. ;)
 
gumboot said:
That's not bias. That just means the producer isn't stupid.

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

Ok then, it wasn't biased. I will accept your appraisal as a filmmaker.

Could you please tell me in what way you think the BBC has generally become more biased? Could you illustrate the bias in the CBC piece?
 
Aphelion said:
Yes I read your response. The 3 CTs featured were shown for approximately 3 minutes each.
Click to expand...

false. Fetzer was featured more than 5 times with a total of at least 5 minutes
The interviewed witnesses had less than that of screentime.
Alex Jones had a huge lead in

Dylan Avery nearly had 10 minutes of screen time

Now please tell me why you think the CBC piece is biased.
Click to expand...

Not until you answer our questions; you gave excuses. YOU haven't addressed any errors made on the BBC piece.
 
Aphelion said:
Yes I read your response. The 3 CTs featured were shown for approximately 3 minutes each.

Now please tell me why you think the CBC piece is biased.
Click to expand...

This is the explanation I was refering to.

gumboot said:
Your last point there is grossly dishonest. They only actually interviewed one "debunker" - Davin Coburn from PM. The other people they interviewed were not "debunkers" - they were primary sources of information - in most cases addressing things raised by the CTers.

This is something you just don't seem to get. In a REAL investigation, when someone says "X" you go and find X, or people who witnessed X, or people who did X, and you ask them about it. Those people are not debunkers. A debunker would be someone else unrelated to X who said "well X isn't true".

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

Do you get it.
 
Aphelion said:
Could you please tell me in what way you think the BBC has generally become more biased? Could you illustrate the bias in the CBC piece?
Click to expand...

when you can show the errors made in the BBC piece, we will tell you why the CBC film is biased.
 
Aphelion said:
Yes I get it. Gumboot is correct. as a non filmmaker I will not argue with his expertise.
Click to expand...

nope, again you dont get it.

Address the errors made in BBC. We're still waiting. So far, you've made excuses. those are not errors. That's just your misinformed opinions.

Why can't you address the claims made in the BBC piece?
 
Arus808 said:
Of course you're wrong about that because again they used the term "self-confessed"

Please look up this term.
Click to expand...

Dylan denied he said it and the producer did not contradict that.

I have answered every question. Now where is the bias in the CBC documentary?
 
Aphelion said:
Dylan denied he said it and the producer did not contradict that.
Click to expand...

Then that is not an error on th BBC piece's part. IT was Dylan's error. If he lead the filmmakers at the TIME the show was being filmed or mentioned it as a snide comment, and they picked up on it, then that is not BBC's error. If he corrected that satement somewhere else, again that is not BBC's error. The fact that they put self-confessed means that HE mentioned it.

Because WHERE would they get the idea that he is a drop out unless it was SUGGESTED to them that he was (and whom they were interviewing? Dylan himself. he could have corrected them at that point).


I have answered every question. Now where is the bias in the CBC documentary?
Click to expand...


No you haven't .You have yet to point out the errors in the BBC piece. Like what is factually wrong with the BBC piece (i believe that claims was put to you a couple of pages back) If Dylans' self confessed dropout comment is the only "error" you can harp on about, then please say so. That means the piece isn't biased and that you are wrong.

Easy enough.
 
Arus808 said:
Then that is not an error on th BBC piece's part. IT was Dylan's error. If he lead the filmmakers at the TIME the show was being filmed or mentioned it as a snide comment, and they picked up on it, then that is not BBC's error. If he corrected that satement somewhere else, again that is not BBC's error. The fact that they put self-confessed means that HE mentioned it.

Because WHERE would they get the idea that he is a drop out unless it was SUGGESTED to them that he was (and whom they were interviewing? Dylan himself. he could have corrected them at that point).





No you haven't .You have yet to point out the errors in the BBC piece. Like what is factually wrong with the BBC piece (i believe that claims was put to you a couple of pages back) If Dylans' self confessed dropout comment is the only "error" you can harp on about, then please say so. That means the piece isn't biased and that you are wrong.

Easy enough.
Click to expand...


Yes I am wrong. There are no other factual errors and the piece is not biased.

Now would you please illustrate the bias in the CBC piece. Proceed.
 
Aphelion said:
Yes I am wrong. There are no other factual errors and the piece is not biased.
Click to expand...

Cool.. Now I'll torture myself to watch the CBC piece of crap and I'll get to you when IM finished with it

We have it on record that Aphelion agrees with the BBC piece and that its factual

If he goes back on this, then he is a liar.
 
Arus808 said:
Cool.. Now I'll torture myself to watch the CBC piece of crap and I'll get to you when IM finished with it

We have it on record that Aphelion agrees with the BBC piece and that its factual

If he goes back on this, then he is a liar.
Click to expand...

I thought you said you had watched it. If you havent how could you claim it is biased.
 
Aphelion said:
Arus808, the Diana episode of the show was 90 minutes long. Odd that they chose to put a large subject like 911 into an hour show.
Click to expand...

And this is relevant is what way?

Had they wished the BBC could have called in no end of top engineers, scientist and other relevant experts and simply torn your BS apart. They broadcast a documentary aimed at people that have never even heard of your nonsense. It was show to highlight how utterly stupid they and the people who promote them are. They broadcast facts and not unsubstantiated claims and unfounded accusations. This is the job of the self proclaimed Twoof movement.

The BBC, unlike you and the rest of your crowd have now moved on.
 
Aphelion said:
I thought you said you had watched it. If you havent how could you claim it is biased.
Click to expand...

I did watch it. When it first came out. I dont remember specifics, so IM going to rewatch it so I can tell you why specifically its biased and give examples of the bias within it.

unlike you, who make blanket statements of a video being biased and can't support that claim.
 
Aphelion said:
I thought you said you had watched it. If you havent how could you claim it is biased.
Click to expand...
Arus808 said:
I'll answer your question on why the CBC video is biased, once you can show the errors and bias that was presented in the BBC video. I'll rewatch the CBC video once you've answered it.
Click to expand...
You're really not helping subdue criticism of your observational skills, Aphelion, you know that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom