CBC News: Sunday airs on CBC-TV at 10:00 am,
and on CBC Newsworld at 9:00 a.m. ET

CBC News: Sunday Night airs on CBC-TV at 10:00 pm, and on CBC Newsworld at 9:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. (ET)


According to a recent Zogby poll, 42% of Americans believe the U.S. government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks. Did the 9/11 Commission fully investigate the events of that day? Is the U.S. government covering up key information about the attacks? Was 9/11 an inside job? CBC News: Sunday talks to the 9/11 Commission and the young student filmmakers behind the internet documentary Loose Change, to get to the heart of what's fueling the public's distrust of the U.S. government and the events of September 11.


  • LEE HAMILTON, co-chair, 9/11 Commission, and co-author of "Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission"
  • DYLAN AVERY, Writer/Director, "Loose Change"
  • DAVID RAY GRIFFIN, theologian, author of "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11"
  • JIM MEIGS, Editor-in-chief, Popular Mechanics, publisher of "9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up To The Facts"
  • BOB McILVAINE, who lost his son Bobby in World Trade Center Tower One


[NB: CBC does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external sites. Links will open in blank window.]

When the second tower collapsed in New York, this father's life collapsed along with it. Canadian Bob Ewart lost his daughter and son in law. Today, as part of the journey forward, Bob Ewart makes the journey back to Ground Zero.


Is Canada safer than it was 5 years ago? We talk to the Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day about whether Canada's national security measures are enough to keep us safe from Terrorist attacks like 9/11.


We meet and hear from Tim Goddard, the father of Captain Nichola Goddard who was killed in action in Afghanistan this past May. What is it like to lose a child to war? Dr. Goddard talks about this, about his daughter's life and about how private grief gets expressed in public. And he talks about how losing his daughter in Afghanistan has shaped the way he sees 9/11 and the direction we have taken since then.

This past week, the developer unveiled the designs for the three new towers to be built at Ground Zero, known as Towers 2, 3 and 4. But why is it taking five years to get this project going? Why have major projects and decisions been sent back to the drawing board time and time again? Carole MacNeil speaks on site with Fredric Bell, the head of the American Institute of Architects in New York

For decades Canada saw peacekeeping as its role on the world stage. But as a result of 9/11, Canadian forces are leading aggressive missions against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Another sign that our military is changing with the times is Canada's new Special Operations Regiment. Steve Puddicomb went out to get the story.

According to a new poll, one out of six Londoners has changed seats on the bus or subway to avoid people who look like they might be Muslim. That says a lot about the world since 9-11. The Muslim community here and abroad has had their lives and their faith under constant scrutiny -- particularly by the Western media. But what about their media? We talked to four prominent Arab journalists to find out how they're covering the fifth anniversary of 9/11, and how their audience perceives it.



From some of the many letters we received in response to this program:

How any rational person looking at the physical evidence and having at least a fundamental knowledge of physics can still believe the governments version is quite clearly incapable of seeing reality. I believe completely and without any reservation whatsoever that the US government murdered all those who died in the crimes committed on 9/11.

This belief is completely consistent with the history of the US...its lies and distortions...and the murder of MILLIONS of innocent human beings in the course of its bloody history. Stephan Harper's government is in bed with the most murderous regime in the history of the planet...and they will continue to murder countless human beings until they are stopped and held accountable for their crimes against humanity.

Brian Tilley,

I am sure that if you were to poll only 1200 people out of 250 million you could get 42% believing anything that could be a conspiracy.
"Loose Change" creators are only looking for the free publicity that you have been duped into giving them.
Shame on you!

The real victims are the ones that perished that day and all others today still affected by the actions of those who wish to destroy our way of life.

Gary Mercer

Dear Mr. Solomon,

I have been very impressed by your journalism over the years. In fact so has the guy who wrote "Bonfire of the Vanities". To wit I wonder if you feel that this was an appropriate time to present your piece about the 11/9 opposing views. I certainly think that it was'nt. We all mourn those people who we were before it happened.Please write me.You are the interviewer!

Blair Davidson

Re: the program "fallout", confirmation is affirmed again and again "truth" prevails all ways, always. Valuable, yet simplistic, as cream coming to the surface", so also "truth". It is "truth" exposing all lies, or falsehoods, and sets us "FREE." God's faithful Love abides forever!

Connie Atkinson

I have to say that I have a real problem with any serious news media giving credence to this 9/11 conspiracy nonsense. As I say this, I would also want people to understand that I am not in any way, shape or form a Bush supporter. However, their is a serious lack of scientific evidence or even scientific procedures in coming up with these far-fetched theories - the likes of witch had not been seen since the moon-landing conspiracy theory.

As a mechanical engineer myself, I feel offended when people forgo all scientific procedures to send forth these kind of theories based on very flimsy evidence at best. Most of the "evidence" brought forth by the 9/11 theorists could easily be explained even with the limited knowledge I possess of structural engineering. As for the others, Popular Mechanics as come up with a very telling article in 2005 which explained every single claim. ..

Even with the overwhelming evidence supporting the story that terrorists brought down the World Trade Center, and not the US government, the theorists still state that it is the government’s burden to prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that their story is the true one. I would surmise that this proof has been brought forth, and that it is the theorists who have not brought any evidence that would justify the kind of support that this theory has had. Clearly, at this point in time, the burden of proof should be on them.

Marc-André Fournier, P.Eng.
Québec, QC

There is one type of cell phone that will work in air planes above 30'000 feet and that is a satelite phone. A normal cell phone of course will not get a signal.

Do a search for satelite cellular phone

Adam Rose

Re: 9/11 Conspiracy

How truly tasteless of CBC to air a show when so many people are still grieving on a significant anniversary of a world tragedy. While I feel everyone has unanswered questions, to air a show on the possibility of the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania not ever having happened, my heart goes out to the families who lost loved ones there, to think there are others who do not even believe they existed let alone possibly saved thousands of other lives.

Perhaps to have aired this show at a later date might have been more beneficial and tactful. Yet again another example of blundering media, worse yet that its Canadian.

W. May

Thank you Evan Solomon for an enlightening and respectful story on 9/11 conspiracy theories.

While I take issue with some elements of the 9/11 commission report and the "official story" I am very critical of what I feel are these fictional conspiracy theories. To answer the question "Is there any merit to these theories?" the answer is actually "no." Journalists and academics need evidence not just to answer questions but also to ask them. When I find $5 missing from my wallet, I have no justification for asking whether the Tooth Fairy or Kim Jong Il stole the money. "Bush did it" is a non sequitor of colossal proportions.

This is just another reminder that framing a story with the "right" questions can be just as misleading as lying outright. Sadly, these conspiracy theories just add to the noise that distracts Americans from the Bush administration's absolutely incompetent handling of the struggle against terrorism and other issues.

Andrew Garib

Dear Evan and Carole:

I wanted to commend you both and the CBC Sunday team for the excellent coverage you have provided today regarding 9/11. I watch you both almost each sunday and today you have absolutely outdone yourselves.

Shayne Ladak
Hamilton, Ontario

How come CBC not show the Miseries of People in Afghanistan and Iraq since 9/11. The Impact this had on their LIVES.

Its not thousands like in USA but Millions died in those Countries due to this Act of someone not from those countries.

It is not only that People in North America suffered but People have and are still suffering in those Countries due to the Actions of One Super Power.

A Khalid
Toronto, ON

I watched your presentation about 911 conspiracy theories with great interest. I had always laughed off the notion that a government would attack its own. I have also long believed Bush to be a liar and in some respects quite mad. seeing your report has caused me to again reconsider the events of September 11 and his actions since. Bush is a liar, a mass murderer and it astounds me that he remains in office.I now have very clear doubts that Bush and his henchmen were not behind this.

John Murray

Congressman Lee Hamilton and others who encourage us to ask questions about 9/11 are correct in doing so. That we should accept the Report of the 9/11 Commission as an unassailable gospel would be unintilligent given the complexities of the events of September 11th 2001 and the myriad of questions that have been left either partially or completely unanswered.

I must say however that while questioning the Commission, its findings, the government and others is well justified, people must take care to ask intelligent questions and give the subject the serious attention that it is due. When conspiracy theorists go off on "half cocked" ideas supported by little or no evidence, then they actually do a disservice to the fact finding process. What I mean by this is that for every kooky theory about 9/11 that gets forwarded, the public's resolve to accept the Commission Report completely and without reserve grows stonger as their willingness to ask questions regarding the events of that day, grows weaker. After all people want answers and don't want to look like clowns in the process. 9/11 is a serious and deserves serious attention, not only due to the memory of those who perrished on that day but due to the fact that sobriety is the only frame of mind through which the questions will ever get answered.

Desmond P. Burton-Williams
Toronto, Ontario

Good Day,

I watched with great interest your conspiacy theory report on 9/11. I find myself fence sitting on the issue. I am interested in some questions which may not have been asked with regards to Building 7.

Let's say there was a conspiracy. This mission, would require a lot of personell to plan and execute. This would leave many loose ends or people "in the know" once the mission was executed. Something this sinister could only be designed by a few. However, the planners could have worked on the mission without realizing the target. D Day is a perfect example.

If Building 7 was a CIA building, this would have been a good place for the planners to work. This way, once they realized what the target actually was, they could have been killed with the collapse of the building.

Here are some questions which maybe should be asked?

How long has the CIA used building 7?

Were they there during the Clinton administration?

Building 7 was evacuated, did anyone die Building 7? If yes, who died and who did they work for?

In your closing remarks you put out the question why did they not just use Iraqi pilots if the intent was to attack Iraq.

I am in the military. A year prior to 9/11 I was on parental leave. My wife's 77 year old German mother was befriended on a flight from Europe by a 50 year old Iraqi Toronto taxi driver(Ali).This man later formed a sexual relationship with my mother in law (now deceased).

I found this weird as she looked like a 77 year old German grandmother and he was a regular 50 year old guy. What I found even more weird was a Toronto taxi driver had the resources to fly to Europe several times in that year. On one trip while visiting her in the Netherlands (where she lived)he took two flights, one to London and one to Hamburg in the same day. This struck me as Goverment money.

I informed CSIS and the US Goverment of this behavior. CSIS conducted a small investigation, yet never reported the findings to us. The US Goverment did not want to hear our claim.

Maybe there were more pilots who never got used on the mission.

I am sure you will get lots of feedback on your story and this email will get lost in a myriad of conspiracy and anti-American mail. On the other hand, maybe one of your young reporters will run with it.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

I enjoyed your story.

JPM Lamontagne

Thank you Evan Solomon, for what was one of the most balanced stories about 9/11 Questions that has ever been on TV. It was a courageous move I wish more of your colleagues would emulate. We stand at a crossroads. In the next few years, either the truth will come out (it was an inside job) and we can begin to take back control of our lives, or we will end up as totally controlled slaves of the state. I would like to see a debate between 9/11 Scholars and supporters of the official story. Evan Solomon would make an excellent moderator. That would be TV worth watching.

Jon Bojicic

There are profound problems with conspiracy theories, a fact that Evan did not regard in his opening segment.

Firstly, they are not really theories at all. A theory is an explanation of something observed which has stood up to all attempts to disprove it. This cannot describe the bunk that was depicted in this segment. These wild and amateur speculations would not last two minutes under informed scrutiny.

Another problem with conspiracy stories arises when one answers the "burden of proof" their authors demand of real researches. Any validation of mainstream theories is just another extension of the "conspiracy" itself. In this way the real scrutiny is constantly deflected.

How utterly frustrating to see such an unbalanced presentation.

Craig Pickthorne

Yes, it's a country of freedoms...including the freedom of the press! However, I believe that this freedom can be one of our greatest enemies. Could what you aired today about the conspiracy behind 9/11 be enabling more terrorism? Could this kind of reporting be very empowering in the wrong minds? Is accusing the US government of murder just expressing one's opinion? Can you just imagine, for a moment, a group of US government people sitting around a large boardroom table planning to blow up buildings to kill thousands of their own people! Keep on imagining: and, no one at that table objecting enouth to expose it!!! In my opinion, there's no Privacy Act in a civilized country capable of doing that. . This is one of the most ridiculous reports I've ever heard aired on public broadcasting. Someone needs to investigate what and who's really behind the invention of the "9/11 conspiracy"! Now, there's a job for you! The reason for this letter is a matter of principle, it is not to support the policies of the United States Government

Kaye Migchelsen
Halifax, Nova Scotia

Dear Mr. Solomon:

In your 9/11 conspiracy theories research, did you investigate the story written by Matthew L Wald that was published in the New York Times on 5/8/04 about the F.A.A Official who scrapped the Tape of 9/11 Controllers' Statements?

The Quality Assurance Manager told investigators he had destroyed the tapes because he thought making it was contrary to F.A.A. policy, which calls for written statements, and because he felt the controllers "were not in the correct frame of mind to have properly consented to the taping" because of the stress of the day.

This happened despite an e-mail message sent by the F.A.A. instructing officials to safeguard all records and adding, "If a question arises whether or not you should retain data, RETAIN IT".

Also, did you investigate the story that appeared in the Conservative French newspaper La Figaro that Osama bin Laden was being treated at a U.S. hospital in Dubai weeks before the 9/11 attacks and the station chief did not only NOT arrest him, but met with him and then reportedly went back to the U.S. for high level meetings in Washington? bin Laden was on the CIA most wanted list at the time.

And there is much more that needs to be examined.

Calvin Preddie

In reference to the part of your show that talked about the nearby building to the World Trade Centre collapsing, I would suggest that the massive weight of tons upon tons of concrete and steel falling from such a height must have shaken the entire island of Manhattan. Such an impact must have damaged the foundations of several nearby buildings so I would think the conspiracy theorists would be more surprised that only one building outside of the two towers fell rather than that it did fall.



Thank you for your well-balanced report on the controversy surrounding the events of Sept. 11, 2001, and thank you for the links on your website. I am an associate member of Scholars for 911 Truth.

One other great anomaly, in my opinion, is the photograph of the woman standing in the hole made by the airplane striking WTC1. This picture appears on page 62 of the U.S. goverment's own NIST report.

Fires hot enough to soften the huge steel members that made up the central core of the WTC towers would have made her position unbearable, i.e., her hair would have been on fire. Her name is known and she was killed in the collapse (demolition) of WTC1.

When I say "huge steel members" I know of what I speak because I have seen them at the International Peace Gardens on the Manitoba/North Dakota border.

Of the hundreds of thousands of pieces of steel that made up the structure of the WTC towers, the U.S. Government claims to have about 230 stored in a warehouse. Outside of that the 10 pieces at the Int. Peace Gardens appear to be the largest single collection. The Manitoba government arranged to get this steel for the 911 Memorial Site. On behalf of Professor Steven Jones of BYU I sent several emails to Premier Doer asking him for help from his government in getting permission to investigate this steel. Although his staff acknowledged receipt of my emails and assured me that I would eventually receive a response, after 6+ months I have still not heard from the Premier of Manitoba.

On Thurday, Sept. 7th, Professor Jones was placed on paid leave while the administration of BYU investigates his activities with the 911 Truth movement. Steven Jones has stated that his problems are restricted to BYU and he has seen no evidence that he has problems with the LDS church leadership. [link]

Again, thank you for your great report on these matters. I will link your website on the ST911 forum.

Chris Poate
Kenora, Ont.

Re: 911 Conspiracy Theory

On the Sunday morning program, Evan Solomon asked the Question: Why were the planes on 9/11 not filled with Iraqi terrorists, but rather with Saudi terrorists?

According to conspiracy theory, the plan was to attack the US through Osama Bin Laden who is a Saudi, and keep the focus on him as the culprit. However, at the same time, according to Paul William Robert, in his book A War Against Truth, Saddam Hussein had approached the United Nations to gain permission to sell his oil in Euros instead of the US dollar. This permission was granted, and the US was in immediate danger of economic disaster. It was not just the Iraqis who were looking at the possibility of selling oil in Euros, so the Americans had to react quickly to stop the chain reaction that this event would cause. Thus the notorious Downing Street Memo. The US and Britain were hard-pressed to come up with a reason to invade Iraq and topple the Saddam regime, therefore the idea of huge hoards of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq was born. It was also imperative that they tie in the 9/11 attacks, to gain international support, which in my opinion they did very poorly, as Canada didn't buy it.

As to 9/11 the reactions to Americans being attacked on their own soil would cause any measures to be okayed by the American people including their personal freedoms being curtailed by the newly introduced Patriot Act. It is not a far jump from there to the invasion of so-called Terrorist countries Iraq, Iran, Syria, and any one else with oil who may deem a threat. There appears to be plans within plans and no-one is telling the truth. The good thing about the war on terrorism for the perps is that it is an excuse for anything and everything forever.


D. R. Ross


I just finished hearing your interview with that man who lost his son-in-law and daughter in the World Trade Centre on September 11th. I thought it was a very sad story, but it was also inspiring. Carol seemed very open to listening to what the man had to say. I think that journalists would also make good counselors, since they’re so good at asking questions and getting people to open up. I remember that day very well. It was a horrible day and I know it’s touched a lot of people.

Keep up your programming and keep playing those video clips of 9/11 so that we never forget what happened on that horrible day. I love your program. I rarely get to listen to it in the morning because I’m at church, but in the evening before I go to bed I listen to it. Keep up the great work!


Ana Gschwend

How sad and typical , the CBC runs a show at this time of the year on the US govt.'s hand in the 911 tragedy, and calling it investigative journalism. The picture of Mr Bush with the word GREED shown several times, it, again and again shows where the Canadian CBC shows are biased against the Republican govt. shame on you.

Lucy Kelly

I have a few comments to make on your 9/11 programming. I think it has been a very informative episode and I am pleased to see that you have put together such an eclectic range of stories. However, I think you have missed the largest conspiracy theory around. I am refering to the theory that Al Qaeda is the all powerful terrorist network pulling the strings behind everything from 9/11 to the insurgency in Iraq. It is a convenient theory for a war on terror, but one that simply ignores the real danger in the world, that this is not one solidified movement but rather an idea that unifies young, angry people in the Middle East and elsewhere to lash out against the west. As long as the media and government label this as one unified movement, we in the west will never fully understand why or who we are fighting or if we should be fighting at all.

Stockwell Day's comments on this issue represent the misguided theory to which I am referring. By asserting Canada is only a target because we are a democracy is not only naive but irresponsible especially when Canadians are dying in Afghanistan. If the people who are sending our troops to fight and die can't demonstrate that they actually understand the conflict, we as Canadians should be asking a lot of questions. Support our troops, yes, but that support should not blindly be extended to those that send them into harms way. Mr. Day’s comment that terrorism originated in Afghanistan are indicative of the short-sighted nature of our policy makers.

My second point is more of a technical issue. You have posted many links that you talked about on the Sunday website, but have not posted the links to any of the opinion polls that you cited in your piece. As an Academic I am far more interested in reading the particulars of those studies than the workings of conspiracy theory promoters. Can you please post them or send me the links.


Ashley Carver
St Mary's University
Halifax, Nova Scotia

As a person who has spent 3yrs investigating 9/11 I found your coverage on this matter very poor. Anybody who has researched the events of 5 yrs ago and possesses some common sense will quickly realize that the official story is a pack of lies.

For God's sake, as documented in the recent film www.911pressfortruth.com, the family members of those victims have publicly gone on record stating that the 9/11 commission has failed them, their govt has lied, 70% of their questions have not been answered and they're demanding for a new but independant inquiry.

Ellen Mariani,a widow of 9/11 victim Neil Mariani, has refused financial compensation from the govt because of a clause she calls the " shut-up and go away clause. Her RICO lawsuit against the Bush administration has now been taken over by the WTC janitor William Rodriguez. On the morning of the attacks he was in the sub-basements possessing keys that nobody else in the bldg had and his testimony pointing to bombs in the building is irrefutable and corroborated by experts,other than those paid off to lie to the public,such as BYU physics professor Steven Jones.

As vice-president of the Canadian Action Party(CAP) I am proud but also sad to say that we are the only candian federal or provincial party that I know of who has publicly stated that the official 9/11 story is one big lie.

Below is a text I put together for CAP which includes an interview with our founder and Canada's former defence minister the Hon. Paul T. Hellyer.

Why is the CBC so apprehensive in exploring and following up on the reports below which have come out in mainstream news.?? Is there fear of what it might reveal? Thus, denigrating high-level individuals and institutions like our govts.

Our democracy, if one could call it so, can not be a viable one with mainstream news such as the CBC lacking the sheer determination to explore issues regardless wherever it made lead them. Before we criticize nations such as Cuba and their lack of 'freedom of the press' we should look at ours.

Michael Pengue

I want to know why no reporters have done any invertiagation on the money from the world trade centre. I think that's the most important question.That's alot of money that just disappeared.....The old question 'follow the money'.

Bonnie Souvie

I enjoy your show.

I have to say that there is a serious problem with the level of professionalism and accuracy throughout the media. Given the tremendous amount of information distributed by the media,and the influence,it would be wise to ascertain the accuracy and relevence of media reports.The damage caused by inaccurate reporting is quite proportionate to alot of violence in the world.For instance,the world needs to know about how Reuters releases innacurate information and pictures.This is not a minor issue.When Reuters releases,for example ,pictures of the Israel\ Lebanese(Hezbollah)conflict that innacurrately depict Israel as the bad guys,the media in general should be made responsible to correct and investigate publically this type of significantly damaging "reporting'.Given that we are in the "information era",media has become a primary weapon for rogue leaders and countries.In honour of those who perished in 911,I would say that the media should be focused on the main issue of the current crisis in the world. That is,the ideological war on democracy by Islamic fundamentalist countries,thier leaders,and a growing majority of Muslims who agree with this 7th century behaviour.To allow these groups to ,distract and manipulate the world through a media ,that is too often driven by profit and ratings instead of accurate and responsible reporting,is an open invitation for the deterioration of all principles of freedom, democracy, human rights and an ever present hope of a peaceful and safe world that we are all entitled to have and share.

There is no perfect path to follow when the military has to be engaged.I think it would be wise not to be over critical of those who are genuinely attempting to guarantee our freedoms and safety.We are used to walking safely in our streets. Many of our "enemies"have never experienced the feeling of "safety",that we take for granted.They will never experience it , if thier corrupt "leaders"can continue to manipulate the media.The media needs to press them for hard answers and they should not be allowed to evade direct questions.Wolf Blitzer recently asked the President of Iraq if he recognizes Israels right to exist.He avoided the answer,despite being asked several times.The Prime Minister of Lebanon was asked if he would disarm Hezbollah,he also did not answer.He avoided the question despite the fact that this was the issue at the forefront of the Israel-Lebanese war.

These are just two recent examples among thousands.

The war on terror has to be won by the media.If the media will not behave responsibly and professionally,than the United Nations,and other groups,even Amnesty International,will further the goals of terrorist groups.


This is how unbelievers react when they are in denial of the glaring facts of such catastrophic events such as 9/11. Untruths are born from people with little or no evidence of their tales that they spin and in this day and age, just about anything can be pawned off given the time.

In their thirst for justification, reasoning and understanding some people will reach out at just about any straw that is thrown out at them and conspiracy theories make excellent straws.

What offends me the most after listening to the young man of "Loose Change" is that rather then giving honour and respect for the people who lost their lives in that catastrophy on 9/11, he has only taken away any meaning that their lives may have meant to us in their memories.

Such comments as "where are the people" or "burden of proof is on somebody elses shoulders not mine" is just not good enough for me as they go about spinning their tales of fabricated fiction. If indeed these events occurred differently then what actually happened then the people purporting these accusations must also prove their case out of respect for the lives of all who parished on that day if for nothing else.

In the end, I find these people who go about attempting to "sell" their conspiracy theories and make reputations for themselves in the process nothing short of appalling and shamefull on their part.

Jerry O'Connor
Calgary, Alberta

Thank you for producing and airing 9/11: Facing the Fallout.

I am a skeptic of the official story of 9/11, and I believe that the evidence questioning the official story warrants much more airing by the mainstream media. Your program was a very good step in this direction.

I believe that further airing of this issue with more related programming about this topic in the future is warranted.

In the US, C-SPAN aired in August 2006 repeatedly four or five times a 90 or 120 minute special on 9/11 Terrorist Attacks (evidence contradicting the official story) discussed at the L.A. June 2006 American Scholars Symposium: 9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda: Facing the Facts.

The importance of this issue is paramount: 9/11 has been the justification of the Wars of Afghanistan and Iraq; the possible threat of future bombing of Iran; the USA PATRIOT act and similar laws in Britain (and Canada?); growing militarization of the police in Canada, US, and Britain; warrantless wiretaps and internet monitoring in the US; growing military budgets; and untold thousands of deaths due to US wars.

We have been told that 9/11 is the day that changed everything. As good as your program was, we need more airtime devoted to this issue. Thirty minutes of airtime is a good start, but we need more airing on CBC and other major networks to discuss the relevant issues related to the evidence behind the 9/11 events.

Given only thirty minutes, it was impossible for you to do more than to scratch the surface of the evidence contradicting the official story of 9/11.

I applaud you for airing this program. I strongly hope that will you go even further than you already have in investigating, covering, and airing this important controversy, and that you will produce and air more programs in the future dedicated to this topic.

Thank you.

J. Schwartz

What an excellant show this morning (Sept10/06)

I still do not understand why President Bush delcared war on Iraq because of the 911 attacks. Iraq was not involved with the Terriorists.

Somewhere deep down in this story is the truth and we will never know the whole truth. When and if someone does find out they will be eliminated very quietly.
I feel sorry for the citizens of the United States because they have a lot of corrupt people in high places running their country, consequently they will eventually, if not already, bare the full effect of these actions.


Barrie Zwicker, author of "TOWERS OF DECEPTION, The media cover-up of 911", recently visited Calgary as part of his cross Canada tour to speak on the media's response to this event. Zwicker, a Canadian television producer (Vision Television) also produced a dvd entitled, "THE GREAT CONSPIRACY: The 911 News Special You Never Saw".

At his talk, he convinced me that it is the Bush government that orchestrated the entire 911 phenomena as justification for the American interference in the Middle East. His research shows considerable evidence to back this up.

In my opinion, the prevarication in your handling of the 911 anniversary story today and who to believe, the official story or the 'conspiracy theorists' was not up to the CBC's usual integrity in it's pursuit of truth. Input from Mr Zwicker and his research could be a good resource for getting closer to understanding the evolution of 911.

From the bio info in the book:

Barrie Zwicker was the first journalist in the world to deeply question the official story of 9/11 on national television. As a writer, tv producer and host, political and environmental activist, he was Director of the International Citizens' Inquiry into 9/11, Phase 2, at the University of Toronto, May, 2004

C. Tierney

Good afternoon,

I watched your program and was especially interested in the documentary about the conspiracy. It sounds as though there could be some truth to it, but when I heard the credits at the end of the piece and they included eastern country names, I wonder. Is it a conspiracy to make it look like a conspiracy???????


Congradulations CBC for finally tackling the 911 event! I was disapointed that in the case of WT7 that PM editor James Meigs was not asked to comment on Larry Siverstein's (the owner of the WTC) orders to "pull" (a demolition term) WT7 which was aired on a PBS documentary. Also why did the FBI confiscate soon after the crash at the Pentagon, security camera tapes from a gas station, hotel and highway that would have clearly shown what had happened. Obviously there are many more unanswered questions that need to be addressed by the mainstream media. More effort is needed to contact informed people like BYU Physics Prof Steven E. Jones.

Thank You
Robert Carlson
Thunder Bay

The feature on Canada's Special Operations Regiment drove home to me once and for all that "my" Canada is dead and gone. We have lost our soul.

The grief and despair these realizations cause are indescribable.

Heartsick in BC

K Scott

9/11 Conspiracies

Evan Solomon's story 9/11 Conspiracies really failed to meet the expectations one has for credible journalism underlining a headlining story on CBC News. There were no real sources for the story; it was a survey based on internet conjecture. I am no fan of President Bush. But this story was silly. In particular, lending credence to an assertion that 40% or 50% of all Americans feel something or other based on someone else's poll of 1200 calls into question a reporter's basic journalistic principles. Get an interview with someone who knows something about something. Having grown up on All the President's Men, I may be starry-eyed about the potential impact of journalism. But I also grew up on the CBC, and, quite honestly, as a Canadian, my expectations for what's supposed to be news are higher than this.

Demetra Christakos

After watching "9/11: TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY" I was wondering why the part about US Governmnet actually planning this whole conspiracy wasn't covered. The part how Cheney with Rumsfeld and other senior US Army Generals followed on planning situations and circumstances that lead to setting up the events of 9/11. Why didn't the any of your researchers provide any referrence to how those cell-phone calls were made (through NSA). What about another plan that was made to take over CUBA? You say you are not biased, but all of your referrences are based on supporters of Bush administration. I thought CBC was unbiased as it provided both sides of the story but this particular show proved me wrong.

Ali Ibrahim

Attention Mr. Solomon:

First off, a vocabulary lesson:

The words "Beg the Question" refer to an informal fallacy of reasoning not 'raises the question'. You beg the question when you skillfully use the point you are trying to prove to prove itself. This is a logical no no but a very popular tactic among conservative politicians and theologians. And relatively easy for someone not trained in logic to fall for. So please, let's not actively contribute to the breakdown of the English language (already afoot) and our ability to reason logically by misusing this very important phrase. Thanks.

As for the presentation of conspiracy theories in the context of 9/11, I'm even more disappointed to find you seriously considering "The Only Game in Town" thesis -- another very common fallacy of reasoning according to which if you don't have an explanation for something and can't prove it wasn't Martians or whatever, then it must have been Martians or whatever.

I've always thought it the moral responsibility of the press to avoid presenting ideas (which are a dime a dozen) to a poorly trained public (training in logic is avoided wherever possible it seems)in ways which will lead it into having false beliefs about the world. At a minimum, this means the press is supposed to vet the information it collects for its factuality before it publishes it not during or after.

While there certainly can be debate between two fact based but incomplete positions (there are plenty of ways to legitimately question or criticize Bush et al here), there can be no debate between a position which has a factual basis and one which does not. Presenting fictional speculation on a par with universal technical and scientific expert opinion is morally irresponsible. This is what we used to think the tabliod, sensationalistic press didn't care about and why that press was tolerable because we value freedom of expression but in no way ethical.

Should the existence of this phenomenon be explored by the press? Of course. But there's nothing new here. So the really interesting story is in the phenomenon itself and why it is so alluring. Then maybe an answer to why the press is so enamoured of "The Only Game in Town" way of thinking about what counts as a story. Really, Evan, so JFK.

Dr. S.M. Turner

Hi, I always injoy watching your program and being informed of what's going on in the world. I am at the moment reading a book called, "and the truth shall set you free" by David Icke and after the firts couple of chapters was going to take it back to the library as it didn't seem to be my kind of literature BUT I continued to the end of chapter 3 and was hooked! It was written in 1995 so I'm a little late but I DO BELIEVE IN HIS CONSPIRACY THEORY and am very interested in the research he and people he quotes have to say. It was a shock to me as I was a child during world war two and looked up to people like Churhill, and Roosevelt, although I never liked Stalin, to read about the documented proof the author has of behind the scenes information. Since the book was written the things that have happened especially to do with the Bush family makes me certainly believe in any conspiracy theory. Maybe you've read the book, if not it's worth a read. I, FOR ONE, DO BELIEVE IN CONSPIRACIES--------MORE THAN ONE!

M. McBride
Maple Ridge, BC

P.S. Why does P.M. Stephen Harper deny that Canada is now at war and no longer the pride of Canada as a peacekeeping nation? I believe our soldiers are just considered expendable to a secret larger desire of Pres. Bush to become leader of the "New Worle Order"!!!!!!

If only the media were so quick and eager to investigating news in a thorough manner as they are to allow conspiracy theorists to expound their views, we might have a better informed public and less gullible public.

Brian Cowan,
Windsor, ON

Just finished watching Carole MacNeil's interview with a father who lost his daughter on 9/11. He spoke of how he has coped with such a tragic loss of a child and how he has come to hug more men and women, to which Carole made the statement "one of the fringe benefits". Did you actually put a thought into your head before you made such a flippant, idiotic remark? Don't think the synapses were firing on that one. Give your head a shake and offer the man an apology for making such a dumb statement.


I was offended and appalled by your coverage on the events of September 11, 2001 and this year’s five year anniversary. Memory is so very clear of the CBC’s repeatedly expressed solidarity with those whose clear opinion was that America got what was coming to it, starting within 24 hours of the event. CBC has given voice to everyone and anyone with an anti-Bush attitude, to every conspiracy theorist, to every radical leftist “journalist” out to trivialize the impact of that attack. You have forevermore disqualified yourselves from any part of the legitimate discussion on the impacts of that day.

That fact that you would be tolerated within camera range of ground zero, only speaks less of your professionalism and more the tolerance and forbearance the society that you love to hate.

Michael Noble

Thank you!
I cannot tell how relieved I am to know that the media (especially our media!) still has some integrity. I firmly believe that there has to be a new investigation into the events of 9/11/2001 - and FINALLY! we have mainstream Canadian journalists doing their job. I suppose I will continue to watch CBC as my faith has been rekindled. Well done.


Thank you for the September 10, 2006 edition of CBC Sunday "9/11: Facing the Fallout." It was a remarkable milestone in mainstream TV journalism about 9/11.

Finally someone had the guts to discuss the collapse of WTC7.

This was far better than anything 9/11 related broadcast on Finnish television so far.

Jukka Sammalvuo
Kuopio, Finland

Good after noon,

The conspiracy is very simple and there was no explosives.

The American administration was looking for a new enemy after the collapse of the Soviet Union. They wanted to keep the American peoples busy and afraid from some unreal enemy. They do not want their people to think and discuss the policies of their government, and the big question is: why the President of the USA must be Irish? Is it the rules of democracy?! They were planning to create the Islam enemy!

The administration was praying for an attack on the soil of the USA. They neglegted the warnings about Al-Qa'idah, because they wanted it to happen. That is why when Mr. Bosh knew about the first plane which hit the first tower, he went to the class, and after he knew about the second flight he continued with the children for seven minutes. He was not shocked as he was supposed to be!

The attack was fatal and not miner as the adminisration had expected. They did not expect the fallout of the towers by any means. They were horified because the American peoples saw the Fallout on the TV without any editing as usual. The fallout of the towers represent the defeat for the American peoples.

Wa'el Darwish


Congratulations. You are finally acting like journalists:)

I have been convinced for a number of years now that 911 was in fact a military covert operation. It is the only logical explanation of the evidence and even more impotantly the cover-up.

You asked David Griffin why 911? and why not iraqi hijackers? A possible answer is that it is much easier to run covert operations with your allies instead of your enemies. The question I would ask is why Iraq and Afghanistan, when the hijackers were Saudi?

And let us not forget the money trail. The 'put options' were way above normal on the days befor 911. Once again the 911 'ommision' commision refused to follow the money, even saying it did not matter. I did follow the money and as journalist I think you will be very surprised indeed as to where it led (yes it all leads to one place, and yes do your own research; hint, Krongard and Bankers trust-AB Brown).

Thank you for the good start, better late then never. I can understand why the mainstream media of the US would help cover up this story, since they are owned by mega corporations whos hands are drenched in the blood of militarism. I could not understand the CBC's silence on this 'the story of the century.'

keep the ball rolling


kai taylor
victoria, BC

All I can say is I am totally amazed at the 9/11 Facing The Fallout piece you guys aired! This was the first time that I know of where the mass media has given so much fair and positive coverage of the 9/11 Truth movement. Great work. Next time don't forget PNAC, Norman Mineta's testimony to Hamilton that Chenney gave a stand down order, interview Kevin Ryan who got fired from Underwriter's Laboratories, interview Webster Tarplay, Richard Andrew Grove, and interview some of the 9/11 Scholars. You guys has Hamilton sweating!! Great job!

Oh and another thing. Jim Meigs is a total liar and a fraud. Popular Mechanics is owned by Hurst, the original yellow journalist. Just the sound of his weasely voice makes me want to puke. Their "debunking" article and book is total propaganda promoting the official story. An impossible fairy tale that defies physics and logic.

Check out Alex Jones' new film Terrorstorm: A History of Government Sponsored Terrorism. There's a high quality version on Google Video for free.


Chris Rye
Hancock, WI

Why didn't you mention the facts that most of tghe Hijackers are still alive?

For the pentagon part of your report why didn't you use the general that used to work on plane crash site and studied Photos of USSR sites and crashes at home and around the world retired now but He stated publicly that no way a plane made the hole in the pentagon.
28-Year Career CIA Official Says 9/11 An Inside Job: Highlights missing Pentagon trillions as potential motive

Norman Mineta's 9/11 testimony would put a damper on your commission guest as they claimed in the report that VP cheney didn't know about a plane coming towards the pentagon until it was too late to shot it down? pure lies watch what Mr. Mineta said to the 9/11 commission. So much so many fraud cases were lost in the destuction of building 7.

The towers were filled with asbestos and would have cost billions to clean up but some how all this didn't matter to the new owner, Mr. Silverstien, who said on TV that they blew it up Pulling it is a demolition term. How'd they get the explosives set so quickly? this takes weeks. But in the weeks leading up to 9/11 they had the buildings shut down. New cables were installed, but the cables had thermite in them.
No investigation so how'd they know who dfid what, why didn't they care who supplied the money?

What about operation Northwoods why didn't you mention the US plan?

I appreciate your telling whzat you have but it needs more. We need a new investigation, tyhis time a full, as full as you can get in five years. Polygraphs would help sort some of the problems out.
Well thxs again , but you might have hurt the truth if you leave it the way it stands. Popular mechcanics was a paid for service to help friends in high places.

ed burwell

Oh ya forgot, Bin Laden's "smoking gun" video names living, uninvolved people? This makes no sense!
plus what muslim wares a gold ring? not Usama bin laden

Two of 19 suspects named by the FBI, Saeed Alghamdi and Ahmed Alghamdi, have the same names as men listed at a housing facility for foreign military trainees at Pensacola. Two others, Hamza Alghamdi and Ahmed Alnami, have names similar to individuals listed in public records as using the same address inside the base. In addition, a man named Saeed Alghamdi graduated from the Defense Language Institute at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, while men with the same names as two other hijackers, Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari, appear as graduates of the U.S. International Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., and the Aerospace Medical School at Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio, respectively.

ed burwell

Regarding the coverage of 9/11 "conspiracy theories" on Sunday September 10th, I offer the following information as feedback to the programme.

Earlier this summer one of the top five scientific publishers in the world, Elsevier Science, published a compendium with the title, "The Hidden History of 9-11-2001", edited by Paul Zarembka, State University of New York at Buffalo. The ten scientific papers are written by academics, and the general conclusion is that the whole event was orchestrated by forces within the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned against.

Check this volume out or visit your University Library for access to it.

Elizabeth Woodworth
Professional Librarian (retired)

Obviously conspiracy theories can be arged for on either side, the most baffling statement made on your program tonight, had very little to do with theories, and everything to do with avoidance. My jaw almost dropped to the floor, when one of the heads of the 9/11 Commission Report, having obviously lost his patience with Evan Soloman, told him that he wanted evidence from him. When did the burden of proof become the concern of the interviewer/investigative journalist? Thay may fall for those diversion tactics in other countries, but here in Canada, we laugh out loud when we hear such ridiculous statements, especially when they come from the mouths of high ranking officials. P.S. Good job on laying out a clear picture of both sides of the argument...the CBC is doing its job as per usual!


Thank you for airing an examination of "9/11" tonight. On my own humble webpage,


I raise this problem with the pancake theory,

"But the fall of each floor supposedly pulverized concrete and steel into fine dust. Of course fine dust doesn't fall very fast and it doesn't weigh very much, so the upper floors could not have exerted much downward energy as they floated off on the wind. Now, could they?"

There is no doubt at all that the official story cannot explain what happened. If A-rab terrorists did not do the crime, the onus shifts to the people making the false acusation and who are profiting enormously. Who are they? Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the U.S. military/industrial complex who may have had some help from their allies.

Critics do not have to prove an alternative explanation. They only have to disprove what has been claimed by officialdom to make their case. That has been done.

Morley Evans

I've just watched Sunday report...the 10PM news Sept.10. I am impressed beyond words, so am consequently unsure of exactly what to put in this e-mail! However I am compelled to write something?! The inteview with the father of the daughter who was killed along with her husband in the World Trade Centre, who had to listen to the 9-11 news report as he was stuck in traffic on his way to Montreal to be with his other daughter and wife etc...was absolutely amazing! It was amazing in that I was so reassured to know that such level headed, compassionate and thought -provoking people such as that father in question exist. The interview itself was so incredibly well done in my opinion that that fact as well compells me to applaud CBC.

Rosalind House Cross
Summerside, PE

Re your Sep 10 coverage of the "conspiracy theories" and their proponets on tonight's program:

One must question your decision to air the items about this - the "Loose Change" item would be better titled "Loose Nuts".

Giving time to odd balls and kooks to spew their ill founded questions and ideas makes me wonder just what the CBC thinks it is doing.

Archie Beare

It’s surprising that it’s even a question that there was a cover up on 9/11 2001 by the U.S. government; of course there was. The facts are right in front of our faces yet we are excepted to believe the most ridiculous lies about one of the biggest atrocities to ever happen in the United States. It gave powerful people in the U.S. an opportunity to gain more power. As a result of 9/11 you we have the most powerful country on earth avoiding international laws with their illegal war and it is creating an even bigger culture of racism. However the saddest part of the whole thing is that it’s not the first time it has happened in the United States, just look into the assassination of JFK. There are political patterns showing major corruption and cover up in the U.S. and something needs to be done. Perhaps the fact that the CBC showed even a glimpse of the truth is the first step.

Ian Ford

I have to take a moment to share my thoughts with Evan Solomon and Carole MacNeil and the crew that were responsible for to-day's program regarding 9-11. I so admired the skill in programming which brilliantly expressed so many different points of view from different perspectives. As a resident of Canada, I feel very proud to hear first hand the fair approach to all sides of the controversy expressed by our CBC. Carol was extremely articulate, but also very sensitive to her reporting as a Canadian in the city of New York where the events took place. Evan, as always, was very positive in his approach to getting the facts articulated by all involved and while he insisted on answers from those in charge, he also managed in his skilful way to allow each participant total freedom in their expression and point of view. I express my thanks to CBC for such an inspirational morning and share great pride in the excellent, honest, open reporting of an event as significant as the retelling of that tragic day.

Madelyn Weingarden
Amherstburg, Ontario

I have some questions and some point to think of.

Does anyone remember the "Domino Effect" from the CITI Bank building in 1978? Who was the contractor to fix that error? Was there other buildings with contracts to "QA" other skyscrapers.
Prior to 911, does anyone remember how many countries, companies and individuals (who were they) from the "DOT COM" financial disaster? Does anyone know how much in total U.S. lost in investments? There was a resession/depression in the late 1990's, so how to create an economic boom? Japan, Europe, Arab Nations and North America was undergoing the most economic resession in history. So how do you pump money back to those major share holders of those industries.
Aside, how does one create an economic virus/drug that will affect any person regardless of income? Like cigarettes and alcohol, oil is also used like a drug. How much did US invest in regular gasoline refineries, while European and UK was already investing and producing clean diesel?

We don’t have the infrastructure or “demand for clean diesel” but it is available in UK and Europe. Is that going to change? Since we currently have this technology today, the clean diesel pumps will out number the regular gasoline pumps.
We would only need clean diesel and demand for fuel would reduce by 2/3. Thus, there would be a surplus of fuel. So, North America would not need the oil reserves from Arab nations. Currently ¼ of all oil consumed in North America originates from Arab Nations and ¼ comes from Canada. Canada and US will be self-sufficient. Cost would dramatically go down that you have never seen before. Cost for oil will be cheaper than fresh water.
Now add more to the mix, clean diesel hybrid electric, this is the next revolution of automobiles which is available today. What will happen to our lives? What would happen to all those people in the oil industry? Who in the U.S. government in the past 8 years have some investment in oil industry?

Patrick Chin

Today I had a discussion with 3 teachers who believe the conspiricy theory and that there was no flight 93 and that no plane went into the pentigon. Surely these two events are easy to prove. There would be passenger lists and families whose loved ones never returned. This is something that could be acertained....Perhaps a few people could be spirited away by the CIA ....but two whole planeloads???Also the telephone calls from the planes. You could have interviews with people who received those calls. I remember, shortly after 9/11 seeing interviews with people who received calls . And who said the planes had reached their flight altitude before the terrorists took over the plane?
I don't believe you have used responsible journalism in this program. It concerns me that you did not debunk the parts of the theory that are easily debunked and that people who are influencing our children are buying into this unreasonable idea.
Are you letting your hatred of George Bush and his administration cloud your judgement?

L Ellenton

Congratulations about this sunday's story on Loose Change and talking about the 911 events in a different perspective! I think it is very gutsy of you to present de video and I really appreciate it.


how could you air such garbage on our national news cast!!

rick eidenmueller

RE: story on 9/11 conspiracy theories.

At the beginning of the program a greiving father was interviewed. He made an outlandish claim - that Americans blew up the Twin towers, themselves. The CBC reporter then stated that there were many Americans who shared this father's claim. To support this idea, a graphic appeared citing that 42 % of Americans believe the truth behind 9/ 11 has not yet been revealed.

Listen up CBC. The fact that 42 % of Americans question the truth of what they've heard so far re 9/11, DOES NOT mean they believe Americans blew up their own towers !!!!!!!! Two link these two events is another example of CBC's very poor journalism.

A handful of twenty year old boys put out a movie called " loose change " on the internet. This movie puts forth "evidence " to back the claim that Americans blew up the towers. To date, there have been 10 MILLION !!!!!!! downloads of this movie. ( I told you Americans were conspiracy nuts ).

I could only stand to watch about half the CBC program tonight. They did a credible job of debunking some of the conspiracy theories but still.........they perpetuated the doubt ( at least for the portion of the program I watched. ) The CBC has a vested interest in playing on doubt ( makes good tv ratings ) and feeding U.S. hating Canadians the ammuntion they need to further their hate of the U.S. No doubt , the CBC program now has many more Canadians believing that the U.S. was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

This is the wacky world of conspiracy theories and the self-serving documentary makers who feed them.

Lou D'Amore

I just watched the piece on the 9/11 conspracies tonight and wow. Kudos to the CBC for having the courage to air that and kudos to the anchor on doing this. Congratualtions, it's good to see that not all our media is filtered and controlled.


Your report TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY was rather weak.

Why ask Lee Hamilton, a magazine editor, or the Loose Change producer about "where are the bodies" in a powered, high speed, vertical jet crash? Why would you not present a retired NTSC expert or experienced aviation engineer that question, since there have already been such crashes before involving both military and civilian jets?

Why did you not show expert engineers, who have already examined the cantilever design of the Twin Towers, who could talk about pancaking and the forces involved.

And what of Bldg 7. Why did you not show us engineering experts to explain how this tower collapsed?

If you are going to ask the questions, why did you stick us with obviously unqualified witnesses to propose answers?

It would have been so much better to hear from qualified people who could answer specific questions with credible answers, than watching thre retired political figure Sen. Hamilton croaking how he doesn't know much of anything of the matters in his report.

Your report proved nothing and left open answers which are easily sought if only you asked the right people. The report does a disservice to current engineering knowledge.

Karen Patrick

Interesting 9/11 conspiracy ...no one told me the CBC was purchased by the National Enquirer. You call that an investigative report? Stop smoking crack, learn how to investigate, the learn how to report.

m drost

CBC & Sunday Night, has hit an all time low.. to allow such narrow & poor taste in judgement to allow the airing of "Loose Change" to sway people that flight 93 was a hoax and the Towers was by explosives within to bring the Towers down etc. Giving air time to this nonsense is like saying the Holocaust did not exist.. It is amusing it followed added features of the NDP claiming their own brand of warped nonsense to further divide this Nation. We need to Support Our Troops and be aware ..indeed September 11th 2001 was real and Terrorism exists today also..

Respected Submitted by a proud Canadian
Barrie, Ontario.

I enjoyed your program on the questions about 9/11 that showed tonight...but one omission startled me...that was that one of the key debunkers of conspiracy theories about 9/11 was the Popular Mechanics article written by Director of Homeland Securities Michael Chertoff's cousin...not exactly a neytral source

Larry Hays

I am writing to give my feedback on your Sunday night news program shown this evening, September 10th. I thought at first that it was going to be a tribute to the people who died on September 11th. Instead your viewers got a full blown story about the various conspiracy theories that have been expounded since the tragedy happened. This was totally inappropriate for the night before the 5th year anniversary and disrespectful to anyone who lost a friend or family member at that time and even to all of us who still find the tragedy distressing.

You have every right to put this program on at any other time of the year and hearing the reasons for the conspiracy theories would be interesting at any other time. But airing it on September 10th, the night before such a major anniversary, is totally inappropriate.

I have always enjoyed CBC news but am rapidly coming to the same conclusion as many people - that it is very biased to the left and very anti American.

An apology would be appropriate I believe!

Jan Kennedy

I was impressed with your sunday show on 9/11 conspiracy theories, but you could have provided some more compelling evidence. Dr. Steven E. Jones(Co-chair of Scholars for 9/11 truth) tested some metal from the WTC and found evidence of thermite residue indicating explossives were used. Unless of course that material is found commonly in sky scrapers. You tell me the likelyhood of that scenario. Furthermore he claimed that the remaining material was removed and shipped to China to be smelted immediately without any testing.

Another interesting topic not examined; why the list of academics supporting some of these views is growing and what do they gain when they put themselves at risk of potentially losing the respect of their peers and possibly their jobs for their "minority-view" opinions?

You could of added that the opinion of the scholars for truth is growing so much so that Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD. (a scholar for 9/11 truth) Won the Democratic Primary in Florida recently!

I just hope that after the next election in the U.S., the case to uncover the truth will be persued!

Great show and keep up the "moderate" approach.


I am extremely proud of CBC for airing a story about the 9\11 and the film "Loose Change" this evening. It has been little over a year since I downloaded this film and thought that everybody should at least have a look. Living in Canada really lets us see things in a different prospective. I remember that mourning waking up and seeing everything that happened from the first broadcast of the first plane crash to everything else. When the buildings fell the first thing I said to myself was that that looked like a controlled demolition. Peter Jenings said the exact samething. Anyways, regardless of how accurate they where in the production of this film they did a great service to people in raising many questions which seem to have been "overlooked". Thank you CBC.

Joseph Clauzel

I just finished watching your 9/11 piece. I am very curious as to your sources, you seemed to have picked the most obtuse angles of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth movement. You have never heard of Alex Jones and his documentary Terrorstorm? or Dr. Stephen Jones(Department of Physics and Astronomy Brigham Young University)with his paper and power point presentation avaliable here.

Building 7 of the WTC is the lynchpin of all the happenings of that day. I have little understanding as to why your report gave it a blatant whitewash by refusing asking anyone that may have a real say in it, like an actual physics professor or a demolitions expert, not some decrepet Bush flunkie who like the rest of the American admistration only knows how to keep lying. The whole discusion is frankly horrible journalism and you should be ashamed.

Know and understand that the corporate controlled media cannot and will not keep the truth from comming out.

Ben Scott

Wonderful. I had the opportunity to view Loose Change during the summer and I found it absolutely fascinating. I hoped some the conspiracies, especially in this video, would be uncovered on the news so that more people could join in and ask these undeniable questions. Well CBC you did it, thanks a lot. I assume in the U.S. they don't allow Dylan Avery's theories to be broadcasted? Anyways I hope your team will have more to follow-up regarding those issues. Keep up the good work..

Natalie Neumann

The idea that the US government orchestrated the 9/11 tragedy is totally ludicrous, of course, and is promoted by crackpots. However, it is hard to believe that there was so much incompetence at all levels all the way through so that an alternative explanation might be that there were some people somewhere in the intel community and government establishment who allowed it to happen to provide an excuse to attack Iraq which had already been planned.

Also, it is ironic that CBC News would make documentarys on the tragedy since it is notorious for its ultra-leftism and has so many people who supported 9/11 it is quite obscene. The satirical joke is that they are so pro-Nazi they must have been in on the planning!

The left has extreme anti-social and attitudes, policys, and behaviour so supports terrorism and is characterized by a very profound, fundamental, and deep-seated inhumanity. The right is the exact opposite.

B. Pelletier

I am watching Sunday Report and the Special Report on 9/11. I find the background music very annoying.

My overall reaction to the subject is that our tax dollars are beter spent elsewhere than supporting a program that dignifies crackpot ideas. Giving such ridiculous concepts substance makes me think that the CBC has descended to the level of tabloid reporting. People died there. Give them dignity and peace.

Nancy Frost

Thank you for finally airing the so-called "Conspiracy Theories" surrounding what happened on 9/11/01. The CBC is the first major broadcaster that I know of to have a full balanced feature article on this topic and you are to be congratulated - even though it took 5 years.

I know time was limited, but you omitted many important questions brought out by "Loose Change" (and Canadian journalist Barry Zwicker's "Great Conspiracy" film which you failed to even mention).

One of the most suspicious facts is that an outrageously high number of "put" options were placed on American and United Airlines (apparently most of the millions of dollars in "earnings" were not claimed). Who placed them? Why were there no reporters from the main stream media willing to investigate?

Another fact you might have mentioned was the fact that 8 of the 19 hijackers turned out to be alive after 9/11. BBC reported that within days of 9/11, and yet the 9/11 Commission still listed these people as hijackers in their final report.

By the way, the Popular Science debunking was itself debunked by Global Outlook magazine. Instead of a magazine editor, why didn't you ask a prominent structural engineer to comment on the demolition theory?

Popular Science is dead srong when they say that cell phones work in jetliners. A Canadian Professor at UWO, Key Dewdney, proved that those phone calls from Flight 93 were never made because it was simply not impossible.

And prominent American military pilots are questioning the ability to be able to fly a jetliner into the Pentagon as described in the official version. Why not interview them?

And another thing, Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC complex, is on public record saying that he ordered the NY Fire Department to "pull" (demolish) WTC Building 7 - see Zwicker's film. He collected billions of dollars in insurance money which he specifically insured against a terrorist attack only 6 months prior to 9/11.

There's lots more questions to unravel around 9/11, but seemingly no major news outlets willing to tackle them. until now.

Thanks again, and I hope you follow this up with more details such as the ones I've provided here.

John Pope

"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists" -J. Edgar Hoover

Re: September 10 program on September 11 Conspiracy Theories

I think airing this program on the eve of the September 11 anniversary lacked judgement. That "Loose Change" kid shrugging his shoulders and saying the burden of proof does not lie on him to explain what "really" happened to the people on Flight 93 is disrespectful to the people who died on that flight and to their families. He's a lightweight and he doesn't deserve airtime on this day.

It's an interesting piece but I didn't want to hear it tonight (some other time).


To Mr. Solomon: Congratulations on showing courage in showing the less known side of the 9/11 tragedy.
It is sad how in current times, in a so called free society we are only exposed to one side of a story, as with the \"official\" explanation for the disaster.
What is even worse is reading seeing how narrow-minded some fellow freedom-lovers really are, as can be seen through the rejection of any claims which negate the alternative explanations for the evenets which had occured.
Once again, good work, and I really hope that you will follow-up with another story on the topic from the \"other\" side.

A Proud Canadian

THANK YOU so much for this program(10/09/06). These are such important questions that have been needed in the mainstream media for some time. I love you CBC!

Rachel Moody

The 9/11 "Conspiracy" theory... or is it...?
Sep10'06... 10pm, CBC News...
Majority of people were responding to what they see with shock and disbelieve... and absorb the disastrous events of 9/11 as presented by the American mass media... people were all hurting and directed their anger against those pointed to as perpetrators by the US Government... by same talken, people gave unconditional support to the Government actions...

With the passage of time, new events were and are, coming to the forth... but the enents of 9/11 will always live in our conscience mind...

The recent devastation of Lebanon by Israel... made many people around the world search for the true cause of the Middle East problems... and when asking the internet this is what we get...

[1] 9/11 was needed by those who control the US Government to justify their war for the Middle East oil [Israel being their beachhead there]... all this, with the blessing of World Governments... below, you can learn who is who... who is controlling who... and why they force these wars upon us...

[2] http://informationclearinghouse.info/
-- please go to date: 08/31/06
-- one of the titles listed on the page under that date is...
Video: Salt Lake City Mayor, Rocky Anderson, Blasts President Bush

[3] http://informationclearinghouse.info/
-- please go to the left hand side bar... look for... Video & Audio Files
-- one of the titles listed at the top is...
Dispatches From The Killing Zone
PS: There is no comparison between the life of the WW-II Jews in Nazi's occupied Warsaw [Warsaw's Ghetto]... and... life of Palestinians under Israel’s occupation... see why...

[4] other revealing websites...
-- see the map at the bottom of the page...
it shows the stages of cancer as it consumes the body of Palestine

[5] and here as it all is seen... through the images of political cartoons...

[6] your may or may not realize this... but most of us came from the same “parents”... Enki and Nin-Khursag... have a look...
http://www.1anunnaki.com/ [[]] http://graal.co.uk/ [[]] http://sitchin.com/ [[]]

Taday’s message delivered by Dalai Lama to crowds in Vancouver, BC... is essentially, the world peace begins with inner peace, tolerance and compassion...

These are my 2cts...
Walt Brodnie

PS: -will we ever learn...? –will we ever change...?
–don’t you think our hope, may be in people like Salt Lake City Mayor, Rocky Anderson...?

I thought your 9-11 tonight was well done EXCEPT for the Conspiracy Theory piece, which was a joke. I was waiting for the theme from "The X Files" to start playing in the background! Pretty thin evidence there, guys...maybe for a really slow news night, but not for a time when people watching the CBC are looking for some rational thinking. It made the guy from Popular Mechanics look like statesman-like in comparison!

Dear Evan Solomon,

I commend you for the report you did and presented on 9/11 this evening but there are many things you left out.

The Popular Mechanics representative lied when he dismissed the idea about explosives in the building. Anyone who knows about the basic laws of physics understands that the towers could have not have come down at free fall speed in 9 seconds. In other words, the towers collapsed at the same velocity as if one dropped a brick from the point of impact from those jetliners. Unlike the brick whose only form of resistance is the air, the towers collapse had to resist more than just the latter: steel beams,concrete,pipes, generators and much much more. Therefore, it had to take much longer than just a few seconds.

Secondly,World Trade Center Construction Manager, Frank A. Demartini,has publicly stated that those towers were designed to take numerous plane crashes. Furthermore, On 9/11, Denmark's DR-1 (Danish television channel) presented an interview with Jens Claus Hansen,a high-ranking officer of the Danish Military Academy. He said,"Additional bombs must have been placed inside the WTC towers--otherwise they would not have collapsed as they actually did."

Kevin Ryan, an executive at Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel used in the construction of the World Trade Center, has questioned the common theory that fuel fires caused the Twin Towers to collapse. He's stated," The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel." He's publicly challenged the official UL and NIST report and eventually fired cause of it. -

You failed to mention Larry Silverstein and his connection to building seven. On April 26, 2001 the Port Authority leased the World trade Center for 99 years to Silverstein Properties and and Westfield America Inc. Silverstein has sued for some $7.1 billion in insurance money, double the amount of the value of the 99 year lease.
-- [Link]
-- [Link]

In addition, he admitted on PBS TV in September of 2002 that he decided to 'pull' (which is understood as detonating in the demolition business) building 7 in the afternoon of 9/11. This is in spite of press reports mentioning that it came down due to a fire. But how could a fire have brought this robust building down which was never hit by any airplane? These fires were relatively small for a structure that was built in case of a doomsday scenario.
-- [Link]

Regarding the Pentagon hit, the website www.stoplying.ca has posted a short interview clip with Maj. Gen. Albert Stubblebine. During the Cold War he was the US militaries expert in imagery interpretation for scientific and technical intelligence. He measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs and analyzing the photo and film data on the Pentagon hit he has come to a strong assertive conclusion that it wasn't a plane that attacked it. Like many of us, he's wanting to see the film footage that has been withheld by the US govt.

What about George Bush's younger brother, Marvin Bush? He was a principal in the company called Securacom. It provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. This should also have been mentioned.
-- [Link]

I hope you and the CBC do not put this issue to rest but expand on this issue for a later broadcast. We've been lied to and the mainstream media is complicit in covering up for the criminals within our own govts.


Lise LaFrance
Montreal, Quebec

In 1933 Adolf Hitler and Herman Goering ordered the SS to burn down the Reichstag in what became the worst false flag attack in history. The Nazi propaganda machine and the German people sadly did not see it this way.

Following the incident Hitler created his own war on terror against communism and passed the Enabling Act. Germany, then a Republic became a Military Police state.

The rest as you know is History.


Kudos for the courage (and professionalism) in your balanced coverage Sunday of competing views for what happened during America's terrorist attacks on five years ago on 11 September 2001.

Perhaps the CBC could offer their American TV bews colleagues periodic workshops on how to regain lost credibility by covering the FULL range of perspectives of critical news stories.

Joseph Tyler

I was glad to see a mainline news service like CBC at least LOOK at a 9/11 conspiracy but of course real truths will not get air time. It is so hard to de-program people to understand that EVERYTHING in government is conspiracy, and not theory either.

Before even getting to 9/11 background is needed. First one must understand that all countries with a central bank are controlled by the "International Banksters". They are predominantly the Houses of Rothschilds and Rockefellers and their thousands of agents - in brief. Even a former governor of the Bank of England let loose some insights on that score and he should know (in the 1930s). And we do know that the famous "Fed" Reserve is NOT a federal govt agency but privately owned.

If you control the purse strings then you control the government - it's that simple. As a Rockefeller once said "I want to own nothing and control everything". They pretty well do - in the Americas. Rothschilds in Europe and elsewhere.

I'm still working towards 9/11 - not digressing really.

The second big general point to understand is the nature of world wars. How do they "happen"? Well they are all engineered for profit. As Edmond Rothschild famously said "I made $100 billion from WW1". How ? Because ALL govts (both sides) involved must borrow from lenders like international banksters, so war is highly profitable. His statement is a matter of history and so is their involvement.

Thirdly we have to examine Albert Pike. Its best to simply point to a web site that gives a good enough summary for now.

Notice WW3. Who are the combattants? Yes, Islam vs Judeo-Chistianity. What do we see since 9/11 - a worldwide confrontation between Islam and Christians. Accident? Coincidence? Only the naive could believe that when the other data are examined.

What is Hegelism? It is at play in every Grand Scheme or conspiracy by the Global Parasites a I call them. I leave it to Google sources to define it. The goal of Hegelism ploys is to continually give up power and control to a select group (elite). With 9/11 a whole slew of freedoms are under atatck in the name of "security", always "security" or "for our own good" or "our protection". In fact it is all a protection racket. That was the very intent of the terrorism in the first place.

With 9/11 we have a GLOBAL shock to the psyche! It DEMANDS that authorities DO something (like revoke freedoms) - textbook Hegelism. Just what is wanted - like Pearl Harbour. Then it pits Islam against the infidels (Jud-Christ) exactly as planned over a century ago as we see a scruffy motley crew of Muslims are all in the driver's seat in the latest unfolding of plans. No conspiracy? Baloney. No brains if you believe that.... or Gullibles Travels. Then we have the Danish cartoons and Indonesians rioting. More Muslim plotters in Toronto and London with new abusive and shocking rules that are injustice itself about the rights of accused persons, secret trials, no lawyer or family contact, etc. It's all the thin edge of a future wedge. Yes Bush "our freedoms are indeed under attack" - but by a secret govt within a govt as they are sometimes called. How many are Bilderbergers one wonders?

When we get to 9/11 ITSELF there is so much that is not touched on. For eample who is Larry Silverman, what did he own, what did he know about WTC7 and when did he know it? Research there alone is very fruitful! He owned all the buildings and ORDERED the demolition of WTC 7 on the SAME DAY in a recorded conversation! He also went to court to get more insurance monies for his losses under a policy he just penned shortly before 9/11. So just HOW would he be in a position to order WTC 7 down if there were no plan? Think it thru, extrapolate without naivete.

All major news media are controlled at the very highest levels as Rockefellers own Reuters and API and censor all releases.

The Popular Mechanics editor was not credible at all. Nor was Lee Hamilton. Anything "official" will all always be a snow job (NIST, the Commission, Pop Mechanics, etc). They are paid mouthpieces to LEND credibility. Just as any SIU investigations into police wrong doing are white washes based on 'protocols' and not moral wrongs (such as shooting a FLEEING robber in the back of the head as happened in Bayview area of Toronto in the spring of 2006. Police were "cleared" of any wrong doing!!!). They are manifestly, blatantly self serving. Bush picked a monster agent Kissinger initially and only later after public outrage did he go with a lesser light in Lee Hamilton. But he was given his marching orders just as the Warren Commission on JFK was decades earlier. No real truths would be found here so why ask them except for comparison perhaps. They were hired or controlled by the villains and have NO credibility. Too much interview time is wasted on them. For that matter Bush himself could be a puppet as most heads of state are - again who controls the purse strings?

When the officials say " no evidence was found to support such and such" that more likely means that if you don't look with an open and honest mind you won't "find" indeed.

Many engineers and physicists point out numerous flaws. First buildings TOPPLE , they do not pancake neatly down in a direct vertical plane.....unless they are expertly set up with explosives. Then there is the rate of fall and collapse under gravity - not credible without the way being cleared and eased by explosives. Then there is the whole issue of temperatures not just on raw steel but steel encased in concrete and fireproof ASBESTOS which happened to be a huge background issue with the WTC owners if you do your homework. The 9/11 event was a tidy solution for certain people, no matter that it will kill more people eventually than actually died in the towers themselves that day!

The squibs are only part of the story which was absolutely not given a remotely credible answer by the twit from Pop Mechanics. (And what on earth happened to Pop Mechanics that an obvious gay is editor for a once staunchly masculine magazine? It reeks as soon as he opens his mouth.) There were other explosions SEEN and heard and photgraphed below the point of collapse and progressing down ahead of the collapse. The nonsense about "things going boom in any fire" are baloney when it occurs many floors below any actual fire!!!!

As for fire in WTC7 -- read the WTC smoking gun and NOT the official sanitized version. Larry Silverman had it "pulled" to use his OWN words. It was NOT hit by a plane and the fire it did have was SET - it did not just spontaneously erupt in sympathy!!

So there was no Conspiracy Theory for sure if one does due diligence. There was instead an actual conspiracy - one in the making for over a century (in general ouline). Welcome to the start of WW3 as it further unfolds. Why use "theory" when findings exist?

I hope it at least raised awareness and curiosity in many to explore further.

I loved Avery's comparison of funding for Clinton's impeachment hearings on his blowjob vs the miserly funding of the blow up job in NYC. :-) That makes it a snow job.

Geoff Essen, London, ON

To give any credence to the outrageous conspiracy theories with respect to 9-11 and that somehow the U.S. federal government was directly reponsible is beyond comprehension. This type of pathetic journalism is more suited to National Enquirer and not to our national broadcaster. You have done the CBC a great disservice by allowing air time for crackpot conspiracy theorists. Shame!

R Sawchuk

Dear Evan Solomon,

I was impressed with you coverage of 9/11 this evening. There were several things that the individual from Popular Mechanics said which were utter nonsense but I will not challenge them here. A friend of my mine under the email lizartisane@hotmail.com has emailed you her response so I will not argue about it here but I will bring up one heavily ignored area about 9/11.

Mohamed Atta/Huffman Aviation/Able Danger/Pakistani Intelligence

Not only was Atta a terrible pilot but he was far from behaving as a fervent believer of radical Islam. Why didn't the main stream press discover what Hopsicker found out on this guy? He was known to indulge in concaine frequently, his buddies included several Germans of non-arabic origin (German intelligence officials?), frequently spent his time at strip bars and for several weeks lived with a prostitute girl-friend. He was also known to have conducted himself as though he'd been in the US for sometime, and other than speaking english well, he spoke other languages.

While the training that Atta and his colleagues received at the U.S. army's flight school is not known, his enrollment at Huffman Aviation is a matter of record. Run by a controversial character named Rudi Dekker, he was operating the facility as he was wanted in his native Holland on charges relating to $3 million worth of fraud.
-Daniel Hopsicker,Terrorland: Mohamed Atta and the 9/11 Flying Circus, www.madcowprod.com

Atta was, as the Kean report stresses, ?the tactical commander of the operation in the United States?...We now learn that Atta was also connected to a top secret operation of the Pentagon?s Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in the US. According to Army reserve Lieutenant-Colonel Anthony Shaffer, a top secret Pentagon project code-named Able Danger had identified Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers as members of an al-Qaida cell more than a year before the attacks...According to Schaffer, when he informed the FBI and urged them to arrest Atta, the Pentagon?s lawyers intervened and protected Atta for reasons that remain unclear..."-Dr. Daniele Ganser-ISN Security Watch,August 27/2005- specializes in secret warfare and is a Senior Researcher at the Center for Security Studies. To read the entire article please visit: [Link]

Why did the head of the Pakistani Intelligence (ISI, which is an affiliate of the CIA) Mahmoud Ahmad instruct Ahmad Umar Sheikh (Ahmad Sheikh is the man accused for the murder of Wall Street journalist, Daniel Pearl)to wire $100,000 to Mohamed Atta (the alleged 9-11 ring leader) on September 10, 2001?

Between September 4-13, in Washington,General Ahmad was meeting with:
Secretary of State Colin Powell (12-13 September)
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage (12-13 September)
Under-Secretary Of State Marc Grossman (prior to September 11)
CIA Director George Tenet ( prior to September 11)
Senator Bob Graham, Chairman of Senate Intelligence Committee (11 September)
Representative Porter Goss ( current CIA Director), Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee (11 September)
Senator John Kyl, Member of the Senate Intelligence Committee (11 September)
Senator Joseph Biden, Chairman of Foreign Relations Committee (13 September)

-- Michel Chossudovsky,War and Globalisation & The Truth Truth Sept. 11,chapter IV,2002 [Link]
---Federal News Service, May 16,2002, Special White House Briefing
-- Miami Herald,16 September 2001.
-- The Times of India,Delhi, 9 October 2001
-- Frontline,10/08/01
-- LA Weekly, 11/09/01
-- M.Ruppert,Crossing the Rubicon:The Decline of the American Empire at the End of Age of Oil,2004

Overall it was a pretty good job when considering the near complete blackout on the 9/11 Truth Movement since the events of five yrs ago, but there is so much more that needs to be said. This issue can not go away and I hope that you will soon air the experts from Scholars For Truth. The time has come for the CBC to stop covering up the lies behind 9/11.


Michele Tremblay
Verdun, Quebec

You've got to be kidding me.

How far CBC news has fallen to air the 9/11 conspiracy theories that it did. Not ahred of evidence was provided, other than the usual CBC anti-American perspective.

This is not journalism, but the anecdotal reporting of the perspectives of malcontents. The fact that a poll indicates that a certain percentage of people believes that the US government is somehow involved in a cover-up is not evidence that there is a cover-up.

The fact that many people have downloaded a film of allegations, not evidence, from the internet, is not evidence that anything in the film is true.

If the CBC cannot provide better reporting than this, I will happily support the de-funding of it, and let the marginal groups that believe in this kind of crap pay for it.

Evan Solomon, the National, and CBC News should be ashamed.

Brad MacBeth

I just watched your program about 9.11. It was disgusting. I thought CBC news world was about news, and facts. Not what could of happend or what might have happened. I can not even express how I feel about this program you showed tonight. All I can say is that I am very unhappy with what I saw. Whom ever was incharge of this program should get a clue, this horrible event happened. CBC news world should not dispute this fact.


There was a lot of information in that story that raises great debate and questions for people to discuss and answer. CBC asking young kids these questions some stuff that they read on the internet is not a good story though, conspiracy theorists look for questions to answer, you being biass and imposing your views in your wordplay is unacceptable though. Raise questions about what happened to the govenrment that day, and listen to how the government cannot keep a plauable story since then is the real problem. Why is so much of the information been classified by the government. The system is flawed, the government, media, corporations need to stop their corrupt ways, people need to stand up to this.

Colin Hood

Thank you. I am so proud of you for airing this story about the growing 9/11 truth movement. You have justified all the work I did last year on getting the CBC back on the air. This type of journalism is why I am proud to be a Canadian and a CBC Viewer. I hope bringing the 9/11 truth movement to the limelight. More intelligent people will realize for themselves the truth, Opposed to manufactured U.S government lies. I noticed the popular mechanics rep was sweating bullets trying to defend his magazines lies. I also enjoyed how you pressed into building 7 and how the commission ignored this issue. I think all of you did a brilliant job with this story. Here I thought the 5th anniversary that was being celebrated would just be more of a celebration of government lies and pro war propaganda nice to see the truth comes out. Really I was getting sick of all the recent movies that dramatize these government lies and brainwash the public into believing them.

I knew we have intelligent people working at the CBC!

Shane Prpich

I found your show so stupid re. the 9/11 conspiracies that I decided to go on your site and write a little note to the editor. It turns out that a lot of other people found your presentation to be untimely, tasteless, and with no investigating reporting whatsoever other than asking questions to people that possibly can't know all the answers.

Congratulations, your show qualifies to air along with other similar stupid shows that we sometimes see on the Space channel and the Discovery channel, and others. It does not quite beat the one that claims the 1969 moon landing was also a hoax. Just keep working at it.

I thought CNN was a news channel that would stop at nothing to get the ratings. My mistake.

Mike Robert
Frankford, ON

When I saw the original footage of the 9/11 attacks on Sep.11-2001, the questions that immediately came to mind were: "Why did the towers fall so easily?, becasue the footage shhowed on small plane hitting a space on the side-it just did not make sense, I thought to myself - Why did they blow up the buildings?

Another question was how the 3rd plane could ever have made it to the Pentagon? US Security/history has always been consistent and clear about any threat, there is an IMMEDIATE response, NO - IF'S; ANDS'; OR BUTS'- plain and simple, so that in itslef was really amazing-that a plane could have got that far..then the reaction and actions when Bush was told..US history and security again was NOT CONSistent-any threat whatsoever to the country, the President is immediately surrounded and taken physically from where he is at the time.

Now for tonight's show-when they interviewed the man that spoke for Popular Mechanics, if you watch his face carefully, his eyes are fluttering, and he swallows and has a hard time keeping composure..the eyes and body language speak so clearly when someone is trying to lie.

For Dylan Avery-he says it as he sees it and it is..he is simply asking the hard questions and all the respondents did not really answer directly, they answered how they saw it-a HUGE difference.

lee Hamilton himself stated that some of Evan Solomons' questions were too hard to answer..if 3000 people die there should be NO questions too hard to answer..

None of the BIG questions were answered, have never been answered..

There is now so much out there that raises questions and is plainly clear that this event in history as is JKF's death and Bobby's death and Martin Luther Kings' death-there are too many questions and not enough answers.

People pay politicians to work for them with tax dollars so they should be asking their politicians to give them answers..not the ones that avoid the questions in the forst place

Joan Miller

HELLO!!! Larry Silverstein ADMITTED he gave the order to "pull" building # 7 in a Sept 2002 PBS documentary entitled America Rebuilds. [Link]

According to demolition experts it takes roughly 2 weeks to wire up a 47 story building like that for a controlled demolition. Building 7 collapsed at roughly 5 in the afternoon or roughly 6 1/2 hours after the collapse of the north and south towers.

Question: How did a demolition crew manage to accomplish a 2 weeks worth of work in that time when virtually all of Manhattan was shut down? No explanation given so far.

But if you apply a little basic common sense the answer I think is: they didn't.

That leads us to this scenario:

Building #7 WTC would have been pre-wired for demolition, in order for that to occur. And if Building #7 was pre-wired for demolition, what are the odds that the north and south tower were also pre-wired for demolition? Better than even? I'd say so!

In essence, Larry Silverstein collected a huge insurance settlement on a building he publicly admitted that he gave the order to demolish or "pull"! DOES THAT AT LEAST SOUND LIKE INSURANCE FRAUD!!!??? HELLO!!!!

So how come you didn't cover this very crucial piece of evidence that anyone, and I mean ANYONE, could easily access with nothing more difficult than a google search?

I mean Jesus Murphy my tax dollars are paying the CBC's budget! I WANT REAL REPORTING THANK YOU!!


Patrick Lepage

Bravo for the documentary about 911!

CBC dare to do a program about the conspiracy around 911.

The documentary was well done.

Thank you CBC


After watching all the CBC coverage of 9/11 this evening there seem to be only two conclusions one can come to. Either the U.S. Administration, Security Services, Intelligence and Military brilliantly orchestrated the Terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, or, in failing to prevent it, they are the biggest bunch of incompetent dunderheads on the Planet.

Warren Graves

Re: Your coverage of the collapse of WTC Building 7 was absolutely UNPRECEDENTED in network television history!

Greetings Evan, Carol, et al.,

I praised your program tonight on another forum and want to repeat my comments here. They are as follows (with some edits for the purposes of brevity and relevance):

"This is THE most fair and balanced coverage of the 9/11 myth to date!!! It also happens to contain THE ONLY real footage of the collapse of WTC Building 7, EVER! That kind of footage is simply never shown, and for very good reason."

[Note to CBC and to viewers/posters here: Any mention, let alone coverage, of WTC 7 causes people to ask questions and raises doubts about the veracity of the official story. Such questions and doubts certainly pose a great threat to the powers that be. Otherwise the CBC wouldn't have been the ONLY mainstream media source to broadcast the collapse of this building a whole 5 years less a day since 9/11.]


"Also, the way the piece was shot, the skeptics were essentially put on the same ground as the official shills and storytellers. Has anyone else even come close to NOT launching at least one ad hominem attack on the skeptics portrayed in their story? I'd give credit to the anchor, Evan Solomon, more than anyone else for this kind of coverage. And I'd certainly thank George Stroumboulopoulos for having Dylan Avery on his show in the first place a few months ago, in another fairly balanced piece- sans footage of WTC 7, of course. It's Dylan's appearance on The Hour which made this all possible, IMHO."


"Everyone should contact Evan Solomon and the CBC, praising them for showing the collapse of WTC 7 and letting them know that no MSM outlet has ever showed it before now. They may not be aware of that fact. And, of course, please tell them they did a spectacular job with their coverage. ;)

My only wish is that this piece is broadcast again and again over the coming months, and even years, instead of being only a one-time event. Again, CBC, Evan Solomon and everyone else at CBC News: Sunday who put this thing together, get the most heartfelt thanks that I can possibly muster!"

Best regards and a million thank you's,

Chris W.

9/11 conspiracy theories....

It would literally take hundreds of people to pull through a plot like this, how could any government trust that they'd all keep their mouths shut? How'd you convince Saudi's to commit suicide for something a US government is after?

Where have they put all the people from the Flight 93? Did they manage to persuade all the family members of those people who made a call from the Flight 93, to lie? Did the US government pay Osama Bin Laden to talk on tape about plans to terrorize it's citizens?

Why do we give a time of day for these theorists?

On another note: As much as we go on and on about the loss and the sorrows and the fears of New Yorkers, we ought to remember that there are innocent people in Irak and Afghanistan, among many other places on the earth, where the carnage is not about one day in history, but ongoing, the losses, fear and tragedy a part of daily life. Nobody pays too much attention to their fate. Who is interviewing them, who gives their suffering a human face? They too, just like us, are living, feeling human beings.

ulla nystrom

I have often wondered what the allure is for conspiracy theories; why people choose to believe that the official versions for catastrophic events are false, and that the perpetrators are in fact closely related to the victims. Some clarity was provided by the head of 911 Commission. He admitted that the official version would have mistakes (shockingly honest), and so, close scrutiny would presumably uncover this. Also, he stated that the conspiracy theories do not need to stand up to the same level of scrutiny as the official versions. This program at least attempted to scrutinize both sides as it were.

Given that the Bush government is widely regarded as being incompetent in preventing or investigating disasters (e.g. Hurricane Katrina), it is absolutely unimaginable to me that they could piece together a scheme requiring the precision of the 9/11 events only 8 months after gaining power. Sometimes the most plausible explanation is in fact correct.

R Brown

It is truly sad when the investigation into the death of thousands of innocent people is so poorly conducted. I, like the growing number of "theorists", are really left with little else to consider concerning the facts that deal with 9/11. People when left to their own investigations and ponderings are of course, going to develop radical views on this subject. This is only because the offical facts are not even satisfactory to 4 kids from New York. If the 9/11 commission cannot even include significant details like the complete destruction of a 47 story building (#7), then how is anyone supposed to feel like the investigation is complete. The 9/11 commission's investigation is as much a "theory" as anything else that I have seen.

Bradley Way

Regarding your story about 9/11 conspiracy theories...why didn't you interview Canadian media critic and journalist Barrie Zwicker? What he says about 9/11 is much more convincing and credible than anything that was said in "Loose Change". The research that went into this story seems very shallow and your story seems to lead the viewers to think that people who believe something different from the official storry of 9/11 are only the lunatic fringe. The guys who made "Loose Change" are amatuers and it shows. Mr. Zwicker is a professional and the ideas he presents are very well thought out and hard to argue with. Please consider doing a story on the questions raised by Barrie Zwicker. Your viewers need to know.

B. Shum


Cannot believe that CBC - the "Canadian Broadcast Organization" that I pay taxes to support - would produce such tabloid trash as the 9/11 show Sunday, Sept. 10, 2006. In doing so, it presented Canadians as conspiracy theorists; Entertaining that the claims of some *internet* bloggers outwiegh other expert presenting facts...

A counter opinion from an objective professional (as opposed to your reference - 'the guys who posted something on the internet that got attention' - if that was the measure, Paris Hilton would be setting our GST....). Please present some facts if your broadcasts if you represent (and are wholly funded) by Canadian taxpayers.

How did two 100+ story stuctures collapse (straight down) after being struck by 188,000lbs of material at 700kph plus the fuel to fly across county? The easy answer (that CBC ignored) Physics. Gravity. Metalurgy...

Prove me wrong. Put that on tape and broadcast it. Show the physics of how a building SHOULD withstand the impact of a fully fuelled jumbo jet instead of throwing up the highly sylized representations from the amatuer 'Net' producers that CBC so liberally quoted...

Worst of all, in nothing of the broadcast did I hear anything of a condemnation of terrorism or anti-western sentiment or anything else, just allegations of western attrocities and conspiracy. I am not a huge fan of the U.S response, nor should the retalliation be sensationalized - in any way.

Were the Taliban also a creation of the US government? I doubt it.

Trust me, I am not a lover of the Bush Government - I am disgusted by their ousting of Bill Clinton (who I admire greatly). Nor do I tollerate the general attack on U.S. "liberallism" (which I support wholly).

I do not have the answers - CBC did little to present to prove that they do either as shown by carefully worded, allegations against others.

Please. Show some objectivity since you represent *CANADA*

Please. Consider your actions before going for 'precious' *sunday* night ratings in Canada.

Please. Review the tennants of journalism before representing Canadian Citizens...

I plan to copy my MP on this.

Thank you.


I have some questions and some point to think of.

* Does anyone remember the "Domino Effect" from the CITI Bank building in 1978? Who was the contractor to fix that error? Was there other buildings with contracts to "QA" other skyscrapers.

* Prior to 911, does anyone remember how many countries, companies and individuals (who were they) from the "DOT COM" financial disaster? Does anyone know how much in total U.S. lost in investments? There was a resession/depression in the late 1990's, so how to create an economic boom? Japan, Europe, Arab Nations and North America was undergoing the most economic resession in history. So how do you pump money back to those major share holders of those industries.

* US Foreign Policy with Iransince 1951 spawns terrorism cells in the next generation of people in the Arab nations. ...

Patrick Chin

Your coverage of the Alternate 911 theories and interview that Solomon made with Hamilton were fantastic. Very good journalism. Very fair and unbiased. Please continue to shed light on the dire need to re-open the 9/11 investigation.

Jason Marks

Thank you for airing this. I created the website, www.truth911.net. It is the first link on the scholars for 9/11 truth's website under the Beginner section. I am a student at UBC in vancouver and tomorrow i will be wearing a loose change t-shirt (as will some 2000 at ground zero) and i will be handing out flyers all day. I would be happy to be interviewed, or help in any way with your 9/11 coverage. My website is fantastic for people who want to learn about 9/11, feel free to mention it as a source, including many free movies like loose change.


To Whom It Concerns:

I watched your 9/11 Conspiracy piece tonight and I am disgusted. I can not believe you would air this on the eve of the fifth anniversary of this tragedy. Not only that, but you air it after showing a two hour documentary chronicling the events leading up to 9/11. What upsets me and angers me the most is you didn’t provide any real evidence or facts.

I have just spent less then 10 minutes researching United flight 93 and have found an article stating after the plane was hijacked, "The flight then reversed direction and began flying eastward at a low altitude." Perhaps the altitude was low enough for cell phones to work.

I agree there are unanswered questions about 9/11 but there is a time and a place. Your segment was more tasteless than the supermarket tabloids.


Derek Fireman
Calgary, AB

So the US government was smart enough to bring down the WTC covertly, but wasn't smart enough to cut a wing-shaped hole in the 'phoney Pentagon' attack?

That Sunday Report story on the 9/11 conspiracy was one of the worst examples of journalism I've ever seen, full of serious logic errors and improper weighting of data. I can not believe that our national broadcaster gave so much time to such a trite set of theories and actually seemed biased to support some conspiracy theory.

First, a survey about the number of people who believe there was a cover-up is no proof at all, except to the popularity of conspiracy theories in the general population. As sad as it might be, losing a child in the WTC collapse does not infer any special expertise or credibility in comment. Second, comparing the opinion of a professional theologian with engineering agencies on equal weighting is just plain silly. Would you have asked NIST to comment on the doctrine of substitutionary atonement? Of course not.

I've got some expertise in a number of the areas you addressed. First, I served with the Canadian Forces fighter force for just over 20 years, primarily within NORAD. I hold an undergraduate degree in engineering and a graduate degree in electrical engineering and a diploma in aerospace engineering. I worked as a research engineer in flight test and development specializing in jet aircraft and weapons performance. This included work with explosives. I participated in a number of aircraft accident investigations and I've visited several high-energy impact sites. Oh, I have a graduate degree in divinity so I know a bit about theology too.

As to why NORAD was slow in responding (taken as proof they were held back by higher orders) why was the charter of NORAD not mentioned? NORAD was constituted to defend North America from attacks from outside our borders and was never intended to defend against internal attacks. NORAD's fighter resources are deployed to be outwards looking, not to respond to events within the continent. Our Canadian primary alert facilities (at least pre-9/11) were on the two coasts. The ADIZ (air defence identification zones) are over the oceans and set up to detect fast unidentified inbound targets. There were no ADIZ-type areas inside the borders.

In the days after 9/11 we underwent significant restructuring in mission and focus as we re-postured to be able to address domestic threats. I can not count the number of visits we made to domestic airfields to assess their ability to host fighter operations - things that just were not needed before. To imply that NORAD was somehow held back demonstrates little understanding as to how the organization was constituted.

The demolition theory is just plain silly. Of course there were puffs of dust and smoke on the lower floors, due to local over-pressures through utility shafts and mechanical spaces. Anyone who has watched a building collapse has seen this phenomena. It is interesting that the conspiracy theorists (from your show a group of 20-something film-makers and a theologian) suggest those small puffs are evidence of demolitions while maintaining that the aircraft impact alone would not be sufficient to explain the structural failure. So a 767 full of Jet-A1 fuel is not enough impact, but a tiny puff of dust & smoke represents an explosion able to bring the building down? This doesn't even require a counter-argument as it is not internally logically consistent.

Demolition of a building requires ballistic cutting of the primary structural members in a sequence to bring about orderly collapse. The structural members of the WTC were cental and around the outer perimeter and would have required significant cutting charges. There is no video evidence of the types of explosions that would be required to bring down such a building.

Assertions that the dynamic impact of upper floors (after the supporting structure failed) upon the lower would not cause failure are not founded in any fact. Buildings are not designed to tolerate overloads of 100 or 200% of the design load - it would be prohibitively expensive. The impact of several floors of material falling into the next floor would immediately place it into a dramatic overload condition.

Your 'Loose Change' producer’s comments about conservation of momentum suggest he needs to do a few more physics courses. Momentum is conserved but that doesn't mean a rippling catastrophic structural failure will suddenly stop. It would continue until the overload condition is resolved, and as subsequent floors failed the overload would have just gotten worse.

WTC Building 7 is a similar story. There is evidence that a primary structural member was damaged secondary to the collapse of the WTC. While the NIST investigation is on-going I expect they will conclude that this damage was responsible for the catastrophic failure of the entire building. Simply put, office buildings are not designed with sufficient structural redundancy to allow the failure of a primary structural member. Once the load paths shift after the initiating failure, the redistribution of forces can place other members into failure or deformation which can lead to a rippling failure. That can be immediate or can develop over some time.

Finally, on the issue of flight 93. When an aircraft impacts the ground at very high speed the effect is like a large bomb exploding. The aircraft structure is completely disrupted, and heavy dense items (engines, landing gear) end up many metres under the bottom of the crater. All that is left are tiny bits of metal - I recall the high-velocity crash of a CF-188 where all I could find for 100 ft around the crater was hand-sized chunks of metal. A similar thing happens to the human body - again I recall a high-speed crash where we had to spend the following weeks separating small bits of flesh from the small bits of airplane. Not very pleasant, but not any proof that the Flt 93 crater was faked.

I am astounded at how poorly that story was reported and how you assigned equal weights to people speaking far from their area of expertise (a theologian and some young film makers) with subject-matter experts. If there is a 'growing' group of academics with contrary opinions where were the structural or forensic engineers that support these somewhat whacky conspiracy ideas? To convince me you'll have to do better than a Professor of Theology. I expect better from the CBC.

Matthew Oliver

9/11 Conspiracy Theories. If anyone wishes to have these "Conspiracy Theories" end, then a true criminal investigation into the events of Sept 11, 2001 must occur.

Let us look into the allegations of insider trading and the unusual number of "put options" in stocks on United Airlines and American Airlines prior to 9/11.

Why did Dan Rather report that Osama bin Laden was in a military hospital in Rawalpindi Pakistan on Sept 10, 2001? Remember he was already wanted for bombing the USS Cole.

Why were four commercial airlines allowed to make U-turns in US airspace. One in particular heading toward the most secure spaces on this planet, the Pentagon. What happened to all of the FAA records and transcripts?

Was the anthrax in the US post ever traced to its source. Why was this not reported?

Why did it take so long for a formal inquiry into 9/11?

Why did the President and the VP appear before the 911 commission together and not under oath?

Why did the Pakistani ISI wire $100K to Mohamed Atta?

As the BBC reports, some of the 9/11 hijackers are "alive and well" How can this be? Is the "official" version of who was involved on 9/11 not also a "theory".

And above all, Que Bono?

Answer these and the "theories will end.

Robert D

Attn Evan

Congrats on a brave attempt to explain 9/11 conspiracy theories but you erred by omitting any reference to forensic economist David Hawkins of White Rock B.C. who is a member of scholars for 9/11 truth and does NOT believe it was (entirely) an inside job - in fact he has developed a cogent analysis of exactly who had weapon, motive and opportunity. You should check it out. ...

This is an excerpt from a recent email of his that also mentions his website:

".... to use diligent scholarship to research weapons, opportunity and motives of the 9/11 perpetrators - which I believe I have identified on their site and my own. http://valis.cjb.cc/HawksCAFE/

"A major suspect for me has proved to be CAI - the Teachers ("TIAA-CREF") national pension fund private equity group - the organization which with two of the UN Oil-for-Food scamster banks funded, IMO, the illegal modifications to Boeing aircraft participating in the bogus 9/11 war games."

John Twigg

There are a great many people who simply think this terrorist incident was just too magnificently convenient to be a coincidence. The crafters of The Patriot Act are on record as having said immediately after it was completed, that all that was required was a terrorist-type disaster on American soil to facilitate the act into law. Why? A new enemy was needed, partly because every fourth job in the U.S. is connected to war industries.

But as well, studies were made and statements after the war to the effect that the U.S. and the West were numerically outnumbered in the world and the only chance they had to consolidate the gains they made after WW II was by building a huge arsenal featuring, among other items, enough nuclear bombs to extinguish all life on Earth. They purposefully exaggerated the extent of the Soviet nuclear capability in order to accomplish this.

In the film, Why We Fight, Richard Perle claims the world will never go back to what it was before the Iraq demolition, no matter who is in power. The will of elites to raw power makes the U.S. Constitution and Congress simply obstacles to be overcome by manoeuvers like " unitary executive" and "signing statements" by which Bush as Commander in Chief can exert extraordinary power in the universal "war on anyone and everyone".

Doris wrench eisler

I was shocked to see that 'story' on the 9/11 conspiracy theory. Are you not embarassed to have even partaken in such cheap tabloid programming? Or using someone whose loss has obviously driven him crazy enough in grief to embrace any crackpot theory as some kind of solace? The cbc (and you-I'm embarassed enough to admit it-my fellow Jew) have sunken to a new low. You looked like a fool. I no longer watch the national, and now I will no longer watch your program.

benson benovoy

CBC should be ashamed of reporting at great length on the 9/11 conspiracy theory based on ridicules statements from uninformed small minded people.

Morten V. Pedersen

I am disturbed that you would waste my time and public money on a story revealing half-baked theories, unproven allegations and ridiculous assertions of complicity of the US Government in the 9/11 tragedy. The item might make good copy for the National Enquirer but not the CBC National News. Indeed it was probably the little remaining credibility of the CBC that gained an audience with the likes of Lee Hamilton. I doubt he would be prepared to repeat the experience.

I expect to see an in-depth report on aliens and crop circles next Sunday night!

Larry Mintz

Bravo for the stories about 9/11, especially the two preceeding the news. It is always important to question your government. Afterall, they work for the people, not the other way around.

For those who doubt whether the U.S.government would kill its own people just so they could have a reason to declare war on Iraq, think about how they conducted themselves in Vietnam. The U.S. kept that war going because war means big bucks to the U.S.economy. And of course, now, the U.S. has a debt in the trillion dollar range; a war in Iraq and/or Afganistan is just what they need. The people of Vietnam did not want the Americans there and from some reports, it doesn't sound like they are wanted in Afganistan either. It is time that we Canadians question our involvement there too instead of believing the reasoning of the U.S, a country which seems determined to always be fighting with someone.

a. adams


Here Is A Web Site Link To Additional Hidden Truth On 9/11 www.Reopen911.org/

Roger L

Your Truth, Lies and Conspiracy documentary is a great starting point for hypothetical discussion on urban myths and popular thinking. However, I always felt that the Bush administration knew something, somewhere was about to happen on 9/11, and the President was safely removed in advance to a non-descript school in faraway Florida.

Is it possible that the third NYC Building #7 might have been another target for airplane impact, and the three buildings of the Trade Centre had already been wired by terrorists for implosion as a Plan B, in case the hijackings failed? I don't recall seeing any reference to this idea being addressed.

Tricia Carswell
Sechelt, BC

Mr. Soloman;

I must commend you (to a certain degree) for at least taking token look at what you call the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11.

The fact that a significant percentage of the population believe that certain individuals and elements of the US government were complicit in the 9/11 attacks and the fact that Mr. Hamilton, on your own show admitted that the commission was destined to fail, should be reason enough to hold a full blown and INDEPENDENT investigation into the events surrounding 9/11.

There are simply too many unanswered questions.

You have also failed to do adequate research in certain segments of your show. How does an editor from Popular Science magazine become an expert on demolition, buliding structures and airline crashes on your show?

Would it not make more sense to talk to real experts? For example, the architects who built the trade towers would know more about the structural integrity of the towers than anyone else. They have stated that the buildings were designed to withstand a hit from a fully loaded )passengers and fuel) airliner. Jet fuel burns at a maximum of 1200 degrees and the titanium/steel column of the trade towers were desogned to withstand at least 1800 degrees.

As for building 7, it is on tape, both video and audio, showing Mr. Silverstein, the owner of the towers and building 7, admitting to "pulling" the building. "Pulling" a building, in demolition terms, means a controlled demolition. Controlled demolitions take weeks to plan and co-ordinate which clearly indicates that its demolition was planned well in advance to take place during a pre determined event.

As for the Pentagon and Shanksville, where are the bodies?, where is the plane wreckage?

The official 9/11 commssion report is more of a conspiracy theory than anything presented on a 9/11 truth website .

So what are you afraid of? Why not dig deeper and find the true answer to the "why" surrounding this event?

It is not the first "false flag" terrorist act. You only need to look to the recently released documents surrounding the attack on Pearl Harbour to find that it hashappened before where certain certain individuals in positions of power have promoted their own greedy and self serving interests at the expense of thousands of innocent lives of their fellow countrymen.

Its time for the truth to come out and its time to root this sort of evil out of our society for good.


G. Baudais
Kelowna, B.C.

I am still in awe of your broadcast tonight about the conspiracy theory related to the World Trade Centre Buildings collapse. I now know why CBC should no longer be an official broadcaster of information in Canada. Adam Soloman you should be ashamed. All of you that produced this segment should be ashamed. I understand that a man lost his son in this tragedy - that many people lost the ones they love in this event. For that we are all sorry. I am certain they would like to understand how this could happen - so would we all. How could you possibly trivialise their tragedy by a story like this. Shame on you. I watched the planes crash into the World Trade Centre buildings. I had been in the World Trade Center buildings. It is absolutely impossible to believe that this was anything beyond what it was - a tragedy comitted by terrorists. How can you give credibility to a story like this by putting it on our National News - I have watched CBC news for a long time but now cannot take it seriously. I cannot give credibility to a popular interest that believes this was some sort of internet video game. The internet is NOT the answer or the truth. It was not very well reported that this story is NOT necessarily the truth. It is incredible that you would automatically believe an internet story - even against the information from another popular magazine and the individual responsible to investigate the issue- and not really try to substantiate the information beyond that. Get off the internet and into reality. I am sorry but I cannot watch the CBC any longer.

dan little

After watching your Sunday Night Report on 9/11, Truth, Lies and Conspiracy, I find that your report is irresponsible and shameful.

Only the CBC, with their high Canadian idealism and anti-Americanism would run such a report. The report is based on so called conspiracy issues which are not backed up in fact in any way.

As a commercial pilot for 33 years and a former aircraft accident investigator, the facts which you subjected the public to are not researched properly but just word of mouth and unsupported theories.

For example to quote “cell phones do not work above 30,000 feet - we tried ours and they did not work." Almost all cell phones today are digital and will not pick up a ground station in the air while moving at high speed, however, analog cell phones will. I have used an analog cell phone over Denver at 35,000 feet and was able to talk to the person on the ground for over 5 minutes.

As an accident investigator, I have been at accidents where aircraft have hit the ground at high speed and left a small impact crater and no identifiable pieces that would suggest that the wreckage was once an aircraft.

To say that the aircraft just disappear or were not there when they did depart an airport and were tracked on radar by ATC is absurd.

Surely, on the eve of such a tragic day, the CBC would be responsible enough to cover the events in a respectful manner, honoring the people and families that lost loved ones and the sacrifices made by the rescue services.

Hopefully in the future, a little more thought and professionalism will go into your broadcasts.

J. Ralphs

I want to thank your show for at least exposing the controversies around 9/11 - a credible step up from CBC Radio One that patronizinglly exploited the C word "conspiracy" rather than dissect substance. Though the e-mail((below) was sent to CBC Radio and was appropriately cutting, please read it for your information and try understand why millions of us are fed up with the mainstream media. Thankyou!!
Among six of the notorious nineteen 911 "hijackers" who are, yes, alive and kicking, Saeed Al-Ghamdi an employee of Tunis Air remarked to the Telegraph, "You can't imagine what it's like to be described as a terrorist and a dead man when you are innocent and alive." I guess poor Mr. Al-Ghamdi must be conjuring up delusions in the world beyond. After all, he can't possibly be alive ' cause the media, Pentagon and FBI tell us it ain't so ! . . . And anything that contradicts the gospel of officialdom, must be - God forbid - a wild conspiracy theory!

Instead of exploiting the hackneyed "C" word, you ought to ask how brain dead and brainwashed do you have to be to be to buy that a bunch of kamazzi box cutters took down the most powerful military industrial intelligence complex in the world . . Not once, not twice, but four times in a single day. How big do the lies have to be not to see through the flagrant and absurd contradictions and transparencies of the 911 weapon of mass deception? How many eye witness accounts aired on 9/11 but, oh so conviently never re-aired, do you have to ignore to imprison yourself in blind denial? . . . Eye witness accounts that decimate the official conspiracy theory on numerous fronts. How corrupt and connected to the Bush regime does the 911 Commission have to be for you ignore that no forensic investigation of 911 was ever carried out and that the white wash is full of distortions and ommissions - like the admitted demolition of key WTC Building 7, to name but one.

The real "C" word we ought to fear is censorship and how the cowardly, comatose media engineer the like in the sheeple of the masses. Those who are illiterate of the litany of documented false flag operations tthroughout history and are too foolish to connect the dots as to the agendas they engender, have no business calling themselves journalists. Democracy can ill afford to be surrendered to dimwits blinded by oh, so convient coincidence theories.

The imfamous Nazi echo never rang more true: " The more often you repeat a lie, the more people will believe it . . .And the bigger the lie, the bigger the ' truth'." The official 911 tale is the king of modern lies . . . but thankfully millions of people are unglueing their eyes to the lies. Oh, and the media's term for these subversives who dare pose glaring questions and skeptically dissect a narrative with more holes in it than Bush's brain . . . conspiracy theorists!

Neither the FBI nor U.S. government have made any retractions of revisions to their final list of alleged 19 hijackers. For more info see current issue (www.GlobalOutlook.ca) What's more, Rex Tomb of the FBI in a quote that should have made headlines around the world, June 6, 06 said, " There is no hard evidence linking bin Laden to 911" ( Also see back issues for Building 7)

Rukshana Enjjineer

What most Americans don't realize is that the upper echelons of the United States government is no longer a government "of , by, and for " the people (See the New World Order). The United States government-as with all other major governments of the world-is under the total domination and control of the Illuminati (architects of the so-called New World Order). The Illuminati's plan to reduce the global population by 4 billion people before the year 2050 was laid out in the Global 2000 report assembled by the Carter administration. in the late 70's.

It should be obvious-that in order to REDUCE the world's population from its present size of six billion down to 2 billion (even over a fifty year span) would require that the majority of people now living would have to be exterminated in some way. The amazing thing about the Illuminati is that they place all their ghastly plans right out in the open for everyone to see, if people would only look and read what they are saying.



It's sad how people form their opinions through the "information" they get from the mainstream media (CNN,ABC, CBS). The people who believe the government would never do this to their own citizens are probably the same people who spend the majority of their nights watching the idiot box.

Reguardless of who we thought pulled off those acts of terror on that day, we all found it odd how three buildings could collapse in the same fashion as a controlled demolishion. That is what sparked my interest to gather more information on the subject. The more you start digging you uncover piles and piles of even more discrepancies and obvious cover ups. After a few years of my own research (trying my best to avoid baised media) I completely believe the government was behind it all. Government sponsored terrorism is nothing new in this world.
Here's a start.




Unfortunnitly I'm just waiting for the day our ation is attacked by the "terrorists" giving us reason to continue to support the war. I pray our government doesn't start using these tactics against us, convicing people to give up their rights for the protection of their government. C'mon people, stop treating your leaders like they're trustworthy saints and stop being afraid to think maybe this is actually possible. I'm suprised how many people don't realize that they're slowing being transformed into sheep.

Vancouver B.C.

Thank you for acknowleging the mountain of doubt that surrounds the official narrative of 9/11. Please count me among the millions who consider US involvement, and subsequent cover-up as proven fact.

To counter the "conspiracy-theories", you presented James Meigs, who was appointed editor in chief of Popular Mechanics magazine in May 2004. He is not a scientist and has no relevant credentials that I am aware of. His chief researcher, who wrote the contentious PM article "debunking" various aspects of common conspiracy theories is 25 year old Benjamin Chertoff, cousin of Michael Chertov, US Secretary of Homeland Security.

Michael Hey
Vancouver BC

Dear CBC Sunday Night,

While I appreciate that SN made a genuine effort to probe a few of the many unanswered questions concerning the 9/11, why did you give Popular Mechanics the final word on each segment? Do you realize that Global Outlook magazine did a full issue debunking PM and that when put one on one with those savy about the physics etc. re. the twin tower collapses etc. PM completely flounders. Why didn't you allow a 9/11 truth scholar to counter their claims? It's interesting that you also failed to mention that Building 7 lease holder Larry Silverstein actually admitted on PBS that they "pulled" Building 7 and "watched it collapse." PM for damage controll claims that he meant to say he pulled fire fighters from the building. What a joke "pull" means demolition and he immediately ended the sentence by saying "watched it collapse". Demolition requires weeks of preparation and no one in the media asked why there were unprecedented black outs the weeks prior to 911 at the WTC nor investigated the Bush family links to security at the WTC. Do this kind of program again but do it fairly this time and allow 911 truth experts to refute PM - better yet put PM one on one with Professor Steven Jones or one of the many 911 truth movement experts. While I'm glad you did give some voice to the 911 truth movement, how you framed the program showed an inbuilt bias for the official conspiracy theory which has never remotely come close to being proven. Sincerely yours,

Natasha Elavia

Hello, I was very pleased to see you cover alternate views of 9/11 on the 10th. Very good journalism. We want more!! If you need some sources, check out www.9/11truth.org, infowars.com, whatreallyhappened.com, inplanesite.com or just search 9/11 truth at video.google.ca Thanks so much, my friends and I will be watching more of you now!

The Sunday News Program was great. It's about time the news media in this country opened its eyes to the invalid answers supplied by the 9 11 Commission Report, and the complete lack of answers surrounding Building 7.

Did you know that Dr. Steven Jones, physics prof. at Brigham Young University, Utah (the guy who found "thermite" and "thermate" residue in the WTC ruins and wrote the paper on Building 7's collapse) has been suspended from teaching with pay?

Prosecution of those who come forward with new information and more questions could fill a whole new program. Another example was Kevin Ryan of the Underwriters Laboratories.

The statements of Lt. Col. Steve O'Brian, Minnisota National Guard, in the documentary "the secret history of 911" are complete news to us. Looks like the makers of this documentary got taken for more than a plane ride with O'Brian.

Viewers must realize, if the EPA officials can LIE about the toxicity of the dust, and cause the pain, suffering and eventual early death of thousands - then there are others who will LIE about what happened on 9 11 and/or what they saw that day. Far less people died that fateful day, than will die, in the future, as a consequence of the toxic dust.

An entire program could be put together on the suffering, death and genocide caused by the USA, Britains and Israeli use of "depleted uranium weapons". The Uranium 238 bombs explode forming nanoparticles of uranium oxide which invade the body lodging deep in cells throughout (like the toxic dust particles less than 0.1 micron), and causes DNA damage, cancers, leukemia, birth defects and miscarriages (to name a few health consequences).

Since August 1990 approximately 1,120,000 USA soldiers have been deployed in the Gulf Area; of these, over 180,000 are now DEAD - the majority from Gulf War Syndrom (depleted uranium contamination). Contacts for information on this are retired US Major Doug Rokke and nuclear geophysict Leuren Moret.

Time to do some more programs on this and the history of the Bin Laden - Bush family business connections; and expose the statements by the pack of crazies (including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz etc) who signed the PNAC document (Project for a New American Century), which called for a catalysing event like a New Pearl Harbour, in order to push forward their empiracle agenda.

When GW Bush said "we should not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories" and "you're either with us or against us", I don't think he expected so many people would clue in. The most outrageous conspiracy surrounding 9 11 is the "official theory".


Kathy Czar
Hanna, AB

The massive amount of circumstantial evidence should be enough for the mass murder conviction of Bushco.

Hard evidence, needed to debunk the officially sanctioned cover-up of the events of 9/11 has been presented by the media all along: right there, hiding in plain sight.

Firstly, and the one that disturbed me from that eventful day, is the toppling, or rather the lack of toppling that had commenced with the upper floors of the south tower. It’s not Rocket Science; to have magnified the compressive forces to such an extent on the “kink” side of the topple, while relieving them on the opposite side, must be chalked up as a miracle and against all known laws of physics.

A second, for the entire world to see, repeatedly if need be, is the rate of fall of the buildings. What did Popular Mechanics have to say about that fact! Ignored it, I suppose? Same as The Commission!

Third. If we are to believe a “Pancake Theory”, one could expect a stack of floors that resemble a stack of pancakes. It is obvious that the thousands of tons of concrete that should have comprised a good part of the “stack” is missing. It is nothing but fine powder scattered around hundreds of acres, and in the lungs of many. Additional energy, in the form of high explosives is one viable explanation as the source of this extra energy required. Because this would require weeks of preparation, it would lead one to suspect and inside-job, as opposed to Usama bin Laden.

High Explosives would also explain the energy required for massive sections of the exterior columns to be blown out and beyond the dust cloud as the towers fall.

One only has to see one event of that day for what it is, and the entire official story becomes just that, a story.

Doug McGowan
Nanton, AB

I personally have not formed an opinion about 9/11 because both sides have legitimate arguments. However, on one hand, I’m skeptical about conspiracy theories, and on the other hand, I’m distrustful of the official storyline. The most I can say is that there’s still a lot of unanswered questions that need to be answered and made public with regards to that infamous day. I rather ‘sit on the fence’ and hopefully one day the truth about what really happened on 9/11/2001 will be made apparent.

Hani Khalid

9/11 was an inside job !

look at the evidence yourself





I watched your program September 10 at 10:00am concerning 911: A Father's Story. The interview was with Bob Ewing. He probably won't remember, but I was a student of Mr. Ewing when he was a teacher at St. Laurent High School in the 1960's. I remember him well and I would like to pass on my deepest sympathies to him, his wife and family. I commend him for his courageous and honest account. He was a a good teacher then, and continues to be one.

I am truly sorry for your loss, Mr. Ewart.

Donna Ross Corbin

I'm all for the idea that things aren't always the way they appear, but your show on 9/11 conspiracies lends too much credence to their arguments. There are so many holes in the 9/11 conspiracy theories that you could drive an aircraft through them. While you did spend time on presenting evidence that refutes the allegations, you don't provide enough detail and you leave enough up to the imagination that the lay viewer may be left with the impression that there is more to their arguments than there really it. For that, you sensationalize these conspiracy theories and add life to an argument which is so far off base it's embarrassing. You should be ashamed of yourselves for airing such a poorly produced piece. I think the timing (the day before the anniversary) is in poor taste as well. I think CBC does great work but your piece damages that reputation. Get your facts straight.

Michael Quintin

Your coverage of the 9/11 myths was terrible. The Program was edited in such a way that it looked like you weren't debunking the myths at all - rather endorsing them. And you also forgot to include the parody of these 9/11 conspiracy theories, www.jewsdidwtc.com

Sam Reynolds

Hi there, I want to commend you for your show about the truth behind 9/11. The footage of WTC 7 itself is damning enough. Please, please do not stop here... you owe it to the country and to the world to do more follow-up pieces. We would not be in Afghanistan if not for the lies of 9/11. Please report on the Able Danger program (many of the 19 alleged hijackers had been under US observation for months prior to 9/11, but nothing was done to arrest them). And the work of John O'Neill (FBI's former leader of investigation into Al Qaida, who resigned one week prior to 9/11 because all of his investigations into Atta and other lead terrorist's was being obstructed by higher up officials).

Circumstantial evidence like this proves US complicity without dabbling in 'conspiracies'.

Thank you again, and please do not back down now.

Jesse Ross

With regards to your 10 Sept, 2006 broadcast on the alternative theories of 9/11, I have to congratulate you on a fair and for the most part unbiased look at what's known as the 9/11 truth movement. I would like to adress some issues that I've read throughout the feedback section of the website.

First, regarding the tarnishing of the memory of those who perished on 9/11, by saying that the government may be responsible. People should look up what William Doyle, head of "Coalition of 9/11 Families", has to say about government complicity in the crime.

Second, regarding the "ridiculous" notion that a "free" nation's government could commit these attrocities on it's own people, I would like people to consider the following events.

1. In 1951, Israel, at the behest of the US government, irradiated 100,000 Sephardic Jewish children with 35000 times the maximum dose of radiation. This was performed under the guise of treating for ringworm. There is a documentary called "The Ringworm Children" available for viewing.

2. The US government did human lab experiments with black men and syphilis, called "The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment". One quote in particular should be noted: “As I see it, we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”

3. In 1962, a document drafted by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer, called Operation Northwoods, called for the sinking of manned US vessels, and blaming Cuba as a pretext for war. It also considered the flying of planes, remotely, and the downing of said planes over the gulf, to blame on Cuba.

As far as the origins of terrorism in the middle east, one only has to look at the CIA's involvement in the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh, and the tactics used. The CIA blew up civilian targets in Iran, and blamed it on Mossadegh.

The most glaring aspect with regards to 9/11 is the border of the US and Mexico. My question is this: If 9/11 were an actual terrorist attack, they would've sealed the southern border on 12 Sept, 2001, to prevent further attacks. Instead, for five years, 150,000 NON-MEXICAN illegals crossed there anually, in addition to the hundreds of thousands of illegal Mexicans.

The true terrorists are the ones in government, that kill hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. You only need to look at such fine examples such as: Mao, Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler. Then there are the other examples, the more modern day killers that run programs like "The School of the Americas", or that kill millions of Iraqi's through UN embargoes, or that rain down toxic death with Depleted Uranium munitions(Israel, US). There is a reason for the Second Amendment in the US, to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government.

As for motive in 9/11, I can find 2.3 trillion reasons. That's the 2.3 trillion(later revamped to 3.5 trillion) dollars that the Pentagon "lost", which was disclosed on Sept 10th, 2001.


Hello Evan and Carole ...

First of all, I want to thank you for your on-going excellent and in-depth coverage of so many issues that are truly relevant to our lives in Canada and in the world. I enjoy the intelligence that you both bring to your interviews.

Secondly, I've been watching and listening to all of the extended coverage surrounding the 5th anniversary of 9/11, and your many touching interviews with people directly affected through personal loss and about the impact of the destruction of the Twin Towers and the airplane crashes into the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania on everyone in North America.

I was also impressed that you interviewed Muslim correspondents to find out how 9/11 affected Muslims around the world and how they view the United States and the general situation today. And because of this one small item from the Muslim point of view, it made me think that there should be at least as much coverage every day through personal stories about 9/11 and its aftermaths from the world outside the US. Sadly, the tragedy of the Twin Towers is repeated day after day in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the numbers of innocent dead in that part of the world far outstripped the number of innocent dead in New York many years ago.

I've seen a clip twice on CBC Newsworld of American soldiers herding an Iraqi family out of their home at gunpoint with their hands up, and was particularly touched by the sight of the little girl in the family, aged about 8 or 9, with absolute terror in her eyes, trying to keep back her tears. Each time I've seen this clip I find it hard not to cry and I think that here is another small person seeing their family humiliated and terrorized, and I wonder how this will affect her and her little brother in the future.

These types of powerful images and stories should also be presented to at least the same extent as the powerful images of the two towers falling and American families grieving for their loved ones. In fact, I think there should be this type of balanced view from both sides in the news every day.

In this way, we will constantly be reminded that everyone in the world is connected by the same hopes and fears, and that those living in other countries are not just numbers or crazed terrorists, but living, breathing, feeling human beings who want peace for their families and the chance to live without fear of invasion. And, hopefully, once we truly see and feel that we are dealing with people and not statistics, we will find other ways to deal with our problems than by invading countries.

Lastly, if the West had expended as much energy on friendly gestures and peaceful assistance to developing countries instead of playing political chess with military might, there might never have been a 9/11 to remember. We in Canada can still choose the path of peace instead of sending our troops to fight in Afghanistan so that the Americans can concentrate on the Iraq fiasco. Our efforts there should be strictly limited to reconstruction and peace-keeping, a role I've always been proud of as a Canadian in the past and hope to be proud of again.

Thanks ....

Deborah Varley

Regarding the Truth, Lies and Conspiracy documentary
I'm astonsihed that the CBC would give this conspiracy theroy any credibility. I will simply put it down to knee-jerk anti-americanism at the CBC. If the US is attacked it's either 1/ a result of American foreign policy or 2/ (even better) the evil US government planned it, presumably to destroy civil liberties. Clearly, there is no procesdure for the US to win - no matter what.
Evan Soloman can't seem to differentiate 2 radically different hypotheses. There are plenty of facts Evan. Perhaps you take a high school course in logic before you spend public money on an irrational documemtary.

Doug Nelson

"Up from the ground come a bubblin' crude, oil that is, Texas tea." That's what the hillbilly president and Lee Hamilton
understand best. 'Cause good 'ole boy Lee got W's daddy off the Iran-Contra rap, the foxes were appointed to guard the
chicken coop. Disingenuous government of transmoralists tethered to the white whale by the oil co. ho's. Lazy journalists,
born yesterday, think Oswald did it, embedded onboard with Ahab, koolaid in hand. No wonder conspiracy theories thrive.

Four plane crashes, not one Transportation Safety Board report. The Rockaway NY crash on Nov 12/01 is on ntsb.gov.
Scan to the top of the NIST statement on #7 WTC quoted by Evan. It says NIST decided to not hire extra staff, but wait until the
WTC #1 & #2 report was done in Oct. 2005. Was the public served in a timely manner? Sounds like the CBC with their lone researcher.

At least The Secret History of 9/11 tries to tell a coherent story. The new #7 WTC tower ( 52 stories) was opened on May 23, 2006,
now 10 percent rented. The investigation of the former building's collapse has just begun. The deadline for proposals for collapse
scenario simulations was in Jan. 2006. What's wrong with this picture? The anonymous team busied themselves with FAQ's.

What right-minded professional would own-up to being one of the investigators and engineers trumped by bare-faced liar-politicians.
Does Evan really think any of the dudes or clerics or Homeland kinfolk that he interviewed would be called as expert witnesses at
an inquiry? Yeah dude, what about the bodies?

What to do when a serious wrinkled brow tells of CIA jails around the world? With wide-eyed childlike innocence the CBC just likes
to watch, and feed the monkey. But don't blame the CBC. It's not their country. A poll said this was a topic to get a share of the
ratings. Besides, their audience uses the internet more than books, and they elected PM Strangelove.

alan bailey

I really liked your program last night. If the conspiracy theory are right and the american army is behind the attack one wonder what the agenda is behing bombing their own people. I did not buy into the rebuttal of the Popular Mechanics guy. What would be interesting though would be to get an engineer from let`s say Sweeden or Germany who have the credentials to really analyse the chemistry and the physics of such an attack on a building. Then the public could have a balanced approach to the conspiry theories. Remember 1968 Chicago riots when the hippies where saying that Nixon was a crook. It turned out they were right. Remember the seventies when the environtalist said that there would be no fishes in the ocean, global warming etc and it turned out they were right. So we should not hastily dismiss the conspiracy theory as they might be right.

Gabrielle Villecourt
Cawston, BC

Shame on the CBC. After watching the moving footage of the struggles of the NYCFD on CBS last night and how 9/11 impacted their lives I watched you Sunday News show. To suggest that the United States purposely destroyed the WTC and masterminded the other attacks is to stretch credibility. To rely on conspiracy theorists and an angry father (whom I have empathy for) and give such theories greater weight and emphasis than people such as the editor or other experts gives journalism a bad name. Attack George Bush if you want for being a bad President, ciriticize the war, state the 9/11 Commission left some questions unanswered. Fine. But to give 40 minutes to conspiracy buffs and not challenge some of their statements (cruise missles at the Pentegon?) is shoddy journalism. The fact that so many people believe it is depressing but it does not make it true (or even credible). I find it sad that a once proud news program has slipped to the level of a tabloid "Hard Copy".

Even worse was the two faced attempt to be sympathetic to 9/11 victims by having the anchor at Ground Zero only to run your lead story. If you want to sling mud with no factual basis at least have the intellectual honesty to do so openly. It was sad and pathetic journalism. Everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves. And to think my taxes go to CBC only heightens the disappointment.

Tim Hutzul

Last night I watched your 9/11/01 coverage of the destruction of the twin towers in New York and the conspiracy theories. I had no idea until last night that a 3rd government (CIA?) building close to the twin towers also collapsed on sept.11.01. I'm flabbergasted to the point of disbelief that the 3rd building collapse ever occurred because the media did not let us know about that 3rd building. The one conspiracy theory I didn't hear aired last night was that perhaps United flight 93, if it hadn't been diverted into a field, was supposed to fly into that 3rd building, hence the 3rd building was programmed to collapse as the twin towers were programmed. Crazy no? I can't believe others than I haven't thought of that. Where are the media when you need them?

charlotte gottschau

CBC has done a great disservice by giving more importance to people who promote conspiracy theories. Canadians and Americans would have appreciated compassion for the survivors of the lost loved ones whose lives were suddenly and abruptly taken away by the terrorist attack on American soil this day five years ago.

It is really mind-boggling to note a subtle bias clearly evident in the segment aired on Sunday on conspiracy theory. Evan Solomon, the co-host of the program, seemed much more eager to agree with the conspiracy theory and by doing so he undermines the essence of impartial journalism.

Somehow, some mainstream media since 9/11 have not missed any opportunity expressing hatred for Bush and America in general in their reporting. That is often reflected in public opinion. One shouldn’t be surprised to see more than 25 percent Canadians believe the President Bush had a hand in the attack. Your program endorses and to certain extent cements such belief.

Jayant Gala
Brossard, QC

Sunday CBC interviewed Lee Hamilton, 911 Commission Co-Chair who said "We looked very carefully at explosives" and their involvement in 911.


WTC 7 was not even included in the 911 Commission Report. How could it have fallen, having had no plane impact and only a spill-over of jet fuel? How could it have fallen so fast and so totally and so neatly ... into its own footprint? A huge building larger in area than WTC 1 and WTC 2 and about half their height. Surely this "method" of "pulling" a building revolutionizes demolition engineering!

Otherwise, just give us one thorough examination of the deep ruins including alleged molten metals (now cooled) under WTC 7. Take a reliable, multi-disciplinary team in, led by MIT and use the procedure and findings to teach Demolition Engineering 100. The cost would be only a few million dollars and the course could be taught initially with tuition fees to defray those costs so that future DE 100 OCW SW could be given to worldwide students free of charge.

The onus of proof is not on those who ask good, honest questions like this. It is on governmental authorities whose duty it is to reassure the public with the answers.


I would like to thank you for airing your Sunday CBC News Special on 9/11. This is a topic that still deserves attention since two wars and a complete change in the social zeitgeist have followed in its wake.

I hadn't heard of Dylan Avery or his documentary "Loose Change" but he seemed to be very informed (more so even then commisioner Lee Hamilton) and I only wish you had allocated more time to his movie.

If you do intend to show Loose Change in its entirety sometime in the future I would be very pleased.

Not long ago, I dismissed all these conspiracy theories about 9/11 but it is now no longer any stretch to say that these theories (such as Avery's) have really caught on and are in many cases quite convincing.

Please keep up the work you are doing on 9/11 and I hope you do another show (or two) concerning the evidence of a cover-up on part of the White House.

Thank you.

Sean Dudley

The CBC Story 9/11: TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY aired on September 10th 2006 was a shameful display of anti-american propoganda and the CBC should apologise for airing this cold hearted story. Airing this story on the eve of one of the worst tradegies in history was not only tasteless but a slap in the face of all who lost loved ones on that tragic day.

In my opinion, siding with the conspirators implies support for the terrorist actions of 911. Let me assure you this story has just strenghtend the resolve of most decent Canadians to work harder to support our American friends and help them through this difficult time. The irony is that if those Canadians who are so Anti-American were ever to suffer a similar tradgedy then those same people would welcome the help of those Americans that they are so eager to ridicule and hate. "Come on let's show a little compassion and forgiveness here!"

Respecfully submitted

Lorne McLean
Calgary, Alberta

Your expose on the 9/11 Consipracy Theories was interesting to watch. It was, however, diffult to listen to the many "theorists" discuss their ideas without yelling back at the TV. I find it extremely irresponsible to call oneself a theorist when the sum total of your contribution is to ask questions about subjects you have no particular education about.

I particularly loathed the young men who created "Loose Change". Of my many critiques, Loose Change's concerns over what happened to flights American Airlines 77 and United 93 were the most disturbing. What a pathetic and disrespectful attempt at fame by claiming the planes did not crash. I can only imagine their next film will discuss sightings of these planes flying in outer space!

A. Richards

As a Canadian citizen studying in the USA, I was gratified to see, for once, a new take on the otherwise stiffled story of 9/11. The atmosphere that I feel here in the United States is a patriotic loyalty that sometimes encourages its citizens to refrain from questioning Official stories. Thank-you for questioning some of the "Unquestioned Answers".

Duane Johnson
Provo, UT

I couldn't believe that CBC.Sunday would give any credence to the idea that the 911 attacks were a conspiracy perpetuated by the Americans on there own people.The idea is offensive,and a bit like broadcasting the views of David Irving about the Holoacaust on the day the Holocaust is remembered.

By all means discuss "Loose Change," but to do so on the eve of 911 is a remarkable lapse in taste.


WITH odgen allied an that tape was fanastic but for some
reason i lost that tape,50,000 people worked there
850 people cleaned those towers


9/11 Conspiracy Theories get too much credence from CBC:
I watched the conspiracy theories section of the 10 Sep edition of the National with some frustration last night. I found it disturbing that the report essentially gave the conspiracy theorists a “free ride”, while subjecting the credible witnesses to difficult questions. By doing so, you allowed the theorists to get away with their trademark “double standard” of not being required to substantiate their claims, while insisting that official reports be totally air-tight. This frustration was (happily) expressed by the 9/11 report commissioner during the report, but was not supported in any way by CBC. I find this deplorable for a responsible news agency – this is something I would expect of FOX News, but not of CBC.

I find this particularly distressing because the attacks of 9/11 have had such a profound effect on Americans. While I am a very proud Canadian, I do not believe in any way that to be very Canadian implies being anti-American. In recent years, there have been many people in public life in Canada (starting with Liberal, Bloc Quebecois, and NDP politicians) who have made much of NOT following the US lead. They have gone so far as to imply that any time we agree with the US, it is not a good thing. Hogwash! A thinking person can pick and choose what they wish to go along with when interacting with friends; the same holds true for countries. Unfortunately, I have seen far too much anti-American slant in CBC reports in recent years.

Point by point, here are the areas that I found to be slanted toward the conspiracy theorists:

First myth: 42% of Americans agree with the conspiracy theorists. Your report started off by stating that a recent survey showed that 42% of Americans believed that some sort of cover-up had happened over 9/11. While I don’t dispute that, I found that it was wrong to infer that this same 42% believed in what the guest conspiracy theorists were claiming during this report. I believe that it is fair to state that almost half of all Americans believe that some things have been covered up. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised myself to learn that some officials had hidden information or bent the truth in an attempt to avoid blame for allowing the attacks to happen. I am convinced, however, that the 42% statistic does not represent the portion of Americans that believe in the far-fetched theories described in your report. Absolutely no attempt was made to specify what question the people had responded to in the survey that was cited; this is critical in understanding what the numbers mean.

Second myth: Cruise Missile strike on the Pentagon. This was given the fairest treatment of all the issues, but I felt that there should have been a summary pointing out that the missile theory was based on erroneous information (using the landing gear exit hole as their basis for the claim). It was also stated that the aircraft was travelling at 530 mph when it hit. Impossible! A commercial airliner cannot attain speeds that high near sea level elevation. Typical airframe limiting speeds are near 330 to 350 knots, and a suicide pilot could perhaps push it to near 400. Speeds of 530 mph are only attainable at high altitudes, where the air pressure is quite low, and an Indicated Airspeed near 250 knots will yield a True Airspeed above 500 knots. I know this for a fact - I was a fighter pilot for 20 years, then instructed on business jets. At the very least, CBC could have found out from the air traffic control radar recordings what the actual speed of the aircraft was as it approached impact.

Third myth: Cellular phones don't work above 30,000 feet. What was the basis of the allegation from the conspiracy theorist? I saw no challenge to the person who alleged this from CBC; how can you let such a wild claim off so easily? To add to my frustration, the reporter then commented that he couldn't get coverage in a test he conducted over the Washington area. By glibly implying that the reporter agreed with the claim that cellular phones don’t work in airplanes (based on a totally unscientific one-off test under unknown conditions), the reporter lent credence to the allegations. Cellular phones DO work at high altitudes; you mentioned it very briefly in your report. Here was a prime example of slant – while you reported that engineers said cellular phones worked, you took pains to include the typical engineering caveat that they worked reasonably well, but not perfectly. I have worked with engineers for decades; I know that it is very rare they will categorically state that something works well all the time. As scientifically rigourous people, they will always caveat whatever they say. Conspiracy theorists, however, will rashly claim that cell phones “don’t work above 30,000 feet,” and you let them make that comment on-air without any mention of whether or not they have any basis for that claim. By their very nature, theorists will not back up what they say (in fact the young film-maker of Loose Change admitted as such, that the burden of proof was not on him).

Fourth myth: Flight 93 did not exist. Based loosely on the cellular phone myth, the theorists then made a leap of logic that made my head spin, and asserted that therefore Flight 93 did not exist. Oh, and of course the “Airphone” conversations were also fabricated. How convenient. The crash site was also cited as “evidence” that no aircraft crashed there. As a former military pilot, I have seen too many photos of near-vertical crash sites that don’t look like much more than a smoking hole – exactly like the images your report showed. There is usually not much to recover in terms of human remains from these high-speed impact zones. What remains is so much compressed and burnt meat.

Fifth myth: The WTC towers could not have fallen without some kind of demolition charges being set off. This was dealt with reasonably well, but your report failed to emphasize one key point. Many of the so-called experts (university professors, etc) that have made these allegations are not in fact experts in the field of structural engineering. If I understood correctly what I saw, the persons making these allegations included a university professor (of Theology!!!) and a young film-maker of unknown academic qualifications. Hardly the basis for these claims. In fairness, however, your insertion of the Popular Mechanics editor’s comments did a lot for the debunking of this myth.

Sixth myth: WTC Tower 7 was dropped by explosives. Again, this myth comes from the simple fact that scientists are curious and cautious with their statements. What I really objected to was the emphasis with which the CBC reporter read the words of the scientific institute. He put the emphasis on “conclusive” rather than “no” in “no conclusive evidence of the use of explosives.” It really stood out for me, as I had read the quote from the screen before the reporter put his slant on it. Shame on him for sowing doubt with his use of emphasis!

Finally, I came away with the distinct impression that the credible witnesses (in my opinion, the 9/11 Commission Chair, Popular Mechanics editor, etc) were given a rough ride, while the conspiracy theorists were allowed to say whatever they wanted to without being called on their opinions by the reporter. I got this impression by watching the portion where the 9/11 Commission Chair showed some frustration in saying that he was being asked numerous detailed questions by the reporter, while I saw nothing from the conspiracy theorists that remotely suggested they had been asked any tough questions.

In summary, I was quite distressed by the way in which CBC gave a voice to these clearly deluded individuals, while somewhat downplaying what I consider to be the truth. I am disappointed by the slant that was allowed to come through in this report, especially given the seriousness of the subject matter. To me, these 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists rank right up there with those that claim the Moon landings never happened, and the Flat Earth Society (although I think the Flat-Earthers are quite tongue-in-cheek, so therefore they deserve some credit for a sense of humour).

I never cease to be amazed by how gullible and easily-confused some people are; by airing this kind of sensationalist report without making it clear that these theories are unsubstantiated, you have helped to perpetuate these myths!

Dan McWilliams

This program was the first real journalism I’ve seen on 9/11 in north American media. You guys are doing a vary good job of excising your freedom of speech, what’s left anyways. Please keep pushing for the truth! And the freedom of journalism!

john pelletier

Thank you for a generally well done program covering some of the facts discussed by the 9/11 Truth movement. However, at one point, you state that Dr. Griffin was unable to give you a good reason why the "hijackers" were Saudis and present this in a way that casts doubt on the 9/11 Truth movement. To me, this fact supports the contention that US neocons planned the attacks, because the US is very deeply involved in Saudi Arabia and could most easily "manufacture" the 19 Middle Eastern patsies it needed there. Furthermore, their behavior immediately prior to 9/11 indicates that they did not know that they were going to die that day and flight instructors who knew them strongly maintain that they did not have the ability to fly those planes. Rational analysis shows that the US neocons' conspiracy theory is the most doubtful of all.

Paul Eagle

Mr. Day quoting from the Book of Bush (referring those who "hate freedom") had me reaching for the Gravol, but it also served to provoke thought.

Bush et al claim that terrorists "hate freedom", yet when one looks at the history of the countries whence these so-called haters of freedom come, we find a single commonality: colonialism.

The various western nations which determined it was their god-given right to invade and conquer the countries which in large part compose the "cradle of civilization", and divvy those lands amongst themselves, had no respect or concern for the rights or freedom of the locals. Nor did they hesitate to rob these countries of their history, culture, and resources.

I rather suspect there's a great deal of residual anger and frustration on the part of these people, not to mention the thinly-veiled threat behind Western policies, which makes it not surprising at all that they're striking back at the nations which oppressed and robbed and continue to manipulate them. Nor is it surprising that it would be a radical, fundamental minority which is prepared to go to extremes. We see radical fundamentalism every time certain Western leaders open their sanctimonious mouths, so why are we so shocked and horrified to hear it coming out of anyone else's mouth?

I'm not defending terrorism on any level -- I don't believe that the taking of innocent lives in ever justifiable -- but it does strike me as ironic (and hypocritical) that people in the West are so eager to demonize the men and women who are, in their own minds, killing and dying in the name of freedom ... THEIR freedom.

D. Secord

Thank you for a good presentation about 9/11 last night.

I particularly appreciated the brief clips re Loose Change, and David Ray Griffin.

I would like to see more information broadcast by you in particular, regarding the apparent controlled demolition of WTC 7. Some very important questions remain unanswered.

An increasing number of Canadians and Americans are becoming more and more suspicious of the official US Government 9/11 "conspiracy theory".

You might be interested in this article;

Bush targets those who question official version of 9/11 as terrorist recruiters. Prison may be next.


... previous training manuals issued by state and federal government bodies which identify whole swathes of the population as potential terrorists. A Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Law Enforcement pamphlet gives the public characteristics to identify terrorists that include buying baby formula, beer, wearing Levi jeans, carrying identifying documents like a drivers license and traveling with women or children.

A Virginia training manual used to help state employees recognize terrorists lists anti-government and property rights activists as terrorists and includes binoculars, video cameras, pads and notebooks in a compendium of terrorist tools.

Shortly after 9/11 a Phoenix FBI manual that was disseminated amongst federal employees at the end of the Clinton term caused waves on the Internet after it was revealed that potential terrorists included, "defenders of the US Constitution against federal government and the UN, " and individuals who "make numerous references to the US Constitution." Lawyers everywhere cowered in fear at being shipped off to Gitmo.

Keep up the good work,


I would very much like to thank you for doing a story on the truth about 9/11. I am a 19 year old Political Science and Economics University student here in Vancouver, and over the summer, I have gone into extensive research on the subject of 9/11, having never previously given any thought to conspiracy theories. I never paid attention before because well, 9/11 was such a huge event that I just naturally assumed that there would be conspiracies. However, when finally I looked into it, and looked at who was saying these things, I couldn't turn away. We have a member of the actual first term of the George W Bush administration, his Chief Economist for the Labour Department, Dr. Morgan Reynolds who disbelieves the "official" story. Also, it would be interesting to note the background of the members of the 9/11 Commission. First off, Henry Kissinger was first appointed to head the commission, but this psparked wide controversy because of his Saudi business dealings and business relationship with the bin Laden family, so instead of declaring his conflicts of interest, he resigned. thomas Kean was appointed chairman (By Bush) and it turns out he has extensive Saudi connections, including with a man accused of being a large financial backer of terrorism as well as being involved with many corporations including Pepsi and Amaerda Hess Oil company, a corproations that has profitted immensely from the "War on Terror". As well as this, the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission (also appointed by Bush), Philip Zelikow, who physically wrote nearly 95% of the final report, was a member of the George W Bush administration, and was a member of the George HW Bush administration in the National Security Council, where he worked clsoely with Condoleeza Rice, and later, co-authored a book with Condoleeza.

To the question raised about why they wouldn't put Iraqis on the planes, instead of Saudis, well this is a complicated question to answer. First off, it turns out that at least 7 of the supposed hijackers have turned up alive in the Middle East and Saudi Arabia and have been giving interviews with the BBC, most of whom said theyw ere pilots for Saudi Airlines and had never even been to the US. Yet, the media has compeltely ignored these claims. You may now be asking, well, who flew the planes. Well, the fact is that the planes used in the attacks, Boeing 757s and 767s, also turn out to be the only commercial jets that have the capability of being overtaken by a remote control system. This is not paranoid fiction, there are "unmanned" planes and military drones everywhere, it has been proven beyond a doubt that commercial jets, namely these ones in particular, have the ability to be controlled remotely. This would account for all the claims made by the flight shcool teachers where the "terrorists" trained, who said that the pilots were incompotent beyond comprehension and were unable to fly a small Cessna plane, whereas they managed to complete near-impossible (for skilled pilots) flight maneuvers. This would also account for the official release of the passenger lists of the United Airlines and American Airlines flights that were used in the attacks thta had NO ARAB NAMES on them. Nor did it have any fake names that would be used by the "hijackers". This would mean that 19 foreigners from the Middle East would have been able to board four separate US commercial flights without any identification whatsoever. So, now to why they wouldn't have made them Iraqi, well, the ultimate plan was not to attack Iraq, that is simply one of the first stages of the plan. The plan is to colonize the Middle East, and in fact, the whole Arab world, spreading from Asia, across the Middle East and into Africa. Why? It just so happens that the Arab world controls the largets reserves of oil in the world. If the plan is to create world empire, which it is, you need to secure resources to build a war machine capable of empire. When you control the worlds energy supplies, you control the world. Saudi Arabia is on this hit list, and when its time comes, (after Syria, Iran) it will either precede or follow Pakistan, and the hijacker excuse will be used to convince the public that Saudi Arabia is a threat to us personally.

Read, "Rebuilding America's Defenses" by the think tank, The Project for the New American Century" in which they detail a plan for massive increases in military spending and to essentially make the US ultimately a militaristic society and to become the unchallenged world empire, and to start by invading countries like Iraq, Iran and North Korea. They then say, however, that becasue it is such a revolutionary change in foreign policy it would be likely to be a long and slow process, "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor" . . . this report was written in September of 2000, the people who wrote it included:

Dick Cheney
Donald Rumsfeld
Paul Wolfowitz (former Deputy Secretary of Defense and currently head of the World Bank)
Jeb Bush
I Lewis (scooter) Libby
and many more, who also ended up being appointed into the White House. Let me ask you this, when several people who see the main purpose and goal of America to be a world empire and to have a massive military force are end up being appointed into the most powerful positions in the world, less than a year after writing this report, do you think that they would simply sit and WAIT for the next Pearl Harbor? What are the chances of another Pearl harbor occuring? Pearl Harbor took place nearly 60 years prior to them being appoitned into office, would they when finally given ultimate power, simply sit and wait in the off chance that another event like that would take place? Just so happened it tok place one year to the month after wiritng the report . . . gee, that was lucky.

Anyway, I thank you for starting to ask questions in the mainstream media. It is necessary if we want to have any hope in preserving our future, not only as a soveriegn nation, but as a civilization.

Thank you

Andrew Marshall

What the hell took you guys so long to look in to the 9/11 alternate theories? This has been going on for 5 years now on the internet and is growing exponentially. Whomever produced that documentary did a terrible disservice to the viewers. You always gave the debunkers the last word making it seem like their statements were true. In fact everything the Popular Mechanics guy said was false. What a schlep? He tells you that telecommunications companies say that the phones work "reasonably well up to 35,000 feet". Yet you guys tried it and saw FIRST HAND THAT THEY DO NOT WORK AT ALL. How did he get his job at a magazine like THAT when he ignores the basic laws of physics? You didn't even interview Steven Jones, Physics Professor of BYU who came out with a paper saying that there is no way a plane could have brought down those towers. Read his findings, you might learn a thing or two. Remember, people who don't believe the story aren't voicing their beliefs or opinions, they are merely showing everyone what the evidence and physics tell us. Evidence and physics don't lie, people do.

You guys didn't dig deep at all either. For one, you didn't tell the viewers that the guy (Philip Zelikow) that headed up the committee to investigate 9/11 is a friend of Bushes. See the conflict of interest? It's like you robbing a store and the lead investigator is your momma. Anyway there are so many factors you ignored that the dumb sheep, I mean viewers, that watch the mainstream news will still be misinformed.

What you need to do is have a 2 hour roundtable discussion from both sides. Have the Popular Mechanics dork on and Lee Hamilton with the big players in all this, like Steven Jones, David Griffin and Alex Jones. Alex Jones even predicted 9/11 would happen in July 2001 as a pretext to war in Iraq to secure oil. It would be great, the people on the official side of 9/11 would be debated so hard in to the ground you would need a whole slew of janitors to scrape them off the floor.

Anyway, the next time you are going to do a documentary like this, contact me or someone who knows what they are talking about and you will be fed indisputable facts from which to work from. Hell I'll do it for free, there's incentive for you.

Carl Thomas

This is how unbelievers react when they are in denial of the glaring facts of such catastrophic events such as 9/11. Untruths are born from people with little or no evidence of their tales that they spin and in this day and age, just about anything can be pawned off given the time.

In their thirst for justification, reasoning and understanding some people will reach out at just about any straw that is thrown out at them and conspiracy theories make excellent straws.

What offends me the most after listening to the young man of "Loose Change" is that rather then giving honour and respect for the people who lost their lives in that catastrophy on 9/11, he has only taken away any meaning that their lives may have meant to us in their memories.

Such comments as "where are the people" or "burden of proof is on somebody elses shoulders not mine" is just not good enough for me as they go about spinning their tales of fabricated fiction. If indeed these events occurred differently then what actually happened then the people purporting these accusations must also prove their case out of respect for the lives of all who parished on that day if for nothing else.

In the end, I find these people who go about attempting to "sell" their conspiracy theories and make reputations for themselves in the process nothing short of appalling and shamefull on their part. To think that your programing of Sunday@CBC would even think that its a good idea to even alot 2 minutes of your time to such trash, nevermind a 1/2 hour is totally unacceptable in my eyes. But as you have shown of this world that we live in, "it takes all kinds" and you have proven this be so. Thats why trash like this you have seen fit to present to the Canadian people will continue to have merit or value (at least in your eyes) for Canadians because we have the CBC to present it. Only in Canada.

Jerry O'Connor
Calgary, Alberta

Dear Mr. Evan Solomon ,

I Can Not Thank You Enough For The 9/11 Journal Documentary ! You Are Part Of A New Generation Of Revolutionary Journalist Who Goes Directly Into The Truth Of Matters !

I Strongly Suggest To Interview (Mr.David Hawkins),...He Is Well Known Through The World For His Intense Research Into The 9/11 Enquires .

Thank You Once More Evan For The Truthful Journal Ducumentary Update On (9/11) !

PS. Here Is (Mr.David Hawkins) Web-Site On (9/11) : www.valis.cjb.cc/HawksCAFE/

Roger L

thank you for addressing the issue of government inadequacy and
ineptitude surrounding the 9/11 event, and for asking for feedback.

my question - have any of the people you've indicted actually seen
the inside of a court of law?

for the earth,


Hallelujah! And congratulations to the courageous news producers at CBC News Sunday.

The mainstream news media's up-take on possible alternative explanations behind the events of September 11, 2001 has been painfully slow. Until now that is. Though I have not yet watched any of the big US networks to see if they too will broadcast similar stories today, I have my doubts. (Hey now there’s an idea: might be interesting to poll each of the big US guys about their views about their coverage – or lack of coverage – about alternative accounts.)

As Noam Chomsky has repeatedly shown, one need only look at the corporate owner names of the big networks to quickly see that their journalistic ethics are very likely being compromised. (And I would include the ownership of Popular Mechanics in that list incidentally.)

Like most Canadians (and perhaps most Americans too), I was raised with the idea that journalists were committed to the impartial pursuit of truth, and that the balanced and fair-handed treatment of alternative views was one means to help unearth that truth. But for the past few years now, I no longer hold such a naïve view.

But your broadcast gives me some hope that not all is lost. It was equally helpful to see the award-winning documentary "Why We Fight” just before watching your broadcast. Its reference to the Gulf of Tonkin incident – a fabrication intended to persuade the US population to support US military intervention into Vietnam – demonstrates that the alternative explanation for the destruction of the twin towers is not without historical precedent. In fact, it is akin to what transpired in Poland in 1939, when the NAZI régime claimed to have been attacked by Poland, only the attacks on the twin towers would certainly eclipse what happened in 1939.

Naturally, I take comfort in the fact that recent opinion polls both in Canada and the United States on the 9/11 question would suggest that I am not alone in having sufficient reason to question what we are being told either.

Though I recognize it must have been enormously difficult for your producers to decide what material to include in your broadcast last night, and what to exclude, I was a little disappointed there was no effort to at least provide a list of say the “Top 10 questions” raised by the Scholars for 9-11 Truth, things like the contention that the airliners that crashed into the towers may have been full-scale remote-controlled drone aircraft made to look like the commercial airliners they were claimed to be, or the questions raised by retired US Air Force pilots about just how difficult it would be even for very experienced pilots to manoeuvre a large airliner to execute the sort of turns and descent it was claimed to have taken to smash into the Pentagon without first belly-sliding along the ground before impact.

If of course any reasonable number of the alternative 9/11 accounts are indeed correct, then it is now up to we the citizens of this democratic régime to connect the dots and ask what larger agenda might be at play in relation to Canada's military intervention in Afghanistan? Have we been duped? These are very serious questions, and it is my sincere hope that journalists (like those with your show) will continue asking the questions that need to be asked if we are to prevent our fellow citizens from being led to the slaughter by ideologically-driven political actors, and unwittingly aided by complacent journalists.

Paul H. LeMay

I am a long time friend of Bob Ewart. I was present at the breakfast where he first got the news of the disaster. While I was very impressed by the interview I do not feel it was right to air it after the segment on the people who believe in conspiracy theories. To, as it were, associate Bob with these publicity seekers did both him and Sunday Night a disservice.

Paul Jones

Has the CBC legal department been researching media complicity in HIGH TREASON, MASS MURDER and CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY lately? Just curious. Insofar as your airing footage of an airplane crash in Pennsylvania is concerned, may I suggest including a modicum of airplane wreckage in the pix? There are 170,000 lbs. of it somewhere in that field, apparently. Use photoshop if it "vapourized". Your friend Meigs informed us that the nice circular hole in an inner ring of the Pentagon was made by a "landing gear strut". It was rotating around its central axis, one must presume and then it also "vapourized" being made of a very light and fragile material that is not available on this planet. In summation I would suggest that the CBC return to its slavering coverage of 15 year old "terrorists" and bombs constructed of Brylcreem and baby formula. You will be more comfortable I assure you.

Gary Parkinson

As the wife of a relative of a victim of 9/11, I wanted to congratulate your staff on the sensitive coverage of the CBC for the 5th anniversary of 9/11 yesterday. Carol McNeil’s stories were ones of hope and moving forward. Constant images of the planes hitting the twin towers has become too much for my husband to watch, as his aunt was on the 97th floor of Tower One that day and her remains never recovered. Those images are tantamount to watching his aunt’s death from afar. I would also like to congratulate you on giving so much coverage to the Canadian families and how they have dealt with 9/11, particularly Cindy Barkway, Maureen Basnicki, Tatiana, Abigail and Bob Ewart. Their stories give us so much hope and the determination to go on with our lives. Mario and I have met them on 2 different occasions at memorials and they handle themselves with such dignity under tragic reminders of that horrific day. We are so proud of them and all the other Canadian families who were affected by 9/11, as we have been since that day. Best wishes to them.

Lynn and Mario Balzan
Brampton, Ontario

The CBC has done a huge disservice to its journalistic reputation by airing a segment on the 9/11 conspiracy theories on the eve of 5th anniversary of that dreadful day. To give any air time to these crackpot theories and those who trumpet them puts the CBC in the same league as a supermarket tabloid. While your report gave the air of balance to the casual observer, it was anything but. Where was any reporting of the background of these four students making such wild allegations? Moreover, why no questioning of the simple fact that the people making these allegations are just university students – not terrorism experts, not engineers, not aviation experts, not even anyone part of that day’s trauma. Worse yet, your reporter, and I use that term loosely, was more inquisitive of the 9/11 commissioner than he was of the students. Does anyone purporting a crackpot theory now get airtime on the CBC? If so, I would like to invite you to the next meeting of sasquatch, the Loch Ness Monster and Puff the Magic Dragon. They’ve been meeting in my basement weekly. I think they’re up to something – possibly conspiracy related.

The CBC failed to even debunk the outrageous ‘myths’ in a fair manner. For example, in showing both sides of the allegation that a plane did not actually fly into the Pentagon, you didn’t even show the security camera footage of a plane actually flying into the Pentagon. To a sane observer, that footage would debunk that myth pretty easily.

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are not worthy of any ounce of serious journalism time – especially when such journalism is funded by the taxpayer. That segment was a disgrace.

Duncan Rayner

As a Canadian living in the U.S. I must applaud your handling of the sensitive issue of 911 Truth. None of the major networks or newspapers here have had the fortitude or will power to do the same. It is of course totally being covered up.

You must know that Lee Hamilton is not a non-partisan choice to investigate this massive crime. Lets go back and examine why:

"......former Congressman Lee Hamilton, chairman of the House select committee investigating the Iran-contra affair, was shown ample evidence against Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, but he did not probe their wrongdoing. Why did Hamilton choose not to investigate? In a late 1980s interview aired on PBS 'Frontline,' Hamilton said that he did not think it would have been 'good for the country' to put the public through another impeachment trial. In Lee Hamilton's view, it was better to keep the public in the dark than to bring to light another Watergate, with all the implied ramifications. When Hamilton was chairman of the House committee investigating Iran-contra, he took the word of senior Reagan administration officials when they claimed Bush and Reagan were 'out of the loop.' Independent counsel Lawrence Walsh and White House records later proved that Reagan and Bush had been very much in the loop. If Hamilton had looked into the matter instead of accepting the Reagan administration's word, the congressional investigation would have shown the public the truth. Hamilton later said he should not have believed the Reagan officials."

Hamilton's two other NIST 911 Commission leaders - Zelikow and Keane have equally partisan, if not worse, backgrounds.

As a Canadian I had no dog in this fight six months ago. I happened upon a video of WTC 7 and that got me looking further. For many a conspiracy of this magnitude would be unimaginable but all you need to do is open your eyes. The Neocons, radical right wing Conservatives, who were known as the "crazies" in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations have taken over the Administration, Defense Dept., and overall Intelligence operations. You need to read their "Project for a New American Century" (PNAC) to understand how this New Pearl Harbour event would play out in Mid-East domination and the creation of a police state in the U.S. The American population, for the better part, is asleep at the wheel. The reason is the unabashed complicity of American Media.

Once again, I thank you CBC Sunday. I think it is only the honest reporting of this crime in other countries around the world that will eventually bring these criminals to justice. The consequence of remaining ignorant about the criminal Bush administration will be a disastrous new heading for world events.

Kevin A.

Greetings Evan,

Congratulations on presenting the special report on so-called conspiracy theories surrounding the events of 9-11-2001. Apparently, the pressure of the ‘truth movement’ has reached a point where the mainstream media can no longer just ignore it.

However, the CBC-TV report was far from satisfying. Although the program tried to be ‘balanced,’ there were a great many details omitted-- details that make the official case increasingly weak. For just one example, it wasn’t mentioned that all the evidence-- the collapsed building material-- was sold and transported overseas before any investigator could examine it. One more: recovery workers came across molten metal in the ruins, days after the event, which could only have occurred with an extreme heat source, far higher than the burning point of aviation fuel.

The CBC’s program touched on a very few points of contention, and left the impression that those were the main sticking points of the ostensible conspiracy theories. In fact, there are literally hundreds of pieces of evidence or circumstance that simply call into doubt or contradict the official obfuscations. Even those Internet video productions cannot cover all the anomalies in 90, fast-paced minutes. It would have been informative for the documentary to mention that fact.

As to the very destruction of the three WTC buildings, it was frustrating to hear the editor of Popular Mechanics state, in effect, with a straight face that it’s obvious the airplanes brought the towers down because the buildings collapsed after the airplanes hit them. The doc made no mention that Steven Jones, professor of physics at Brigham Young University, has gone public against the official theory, and states that the collapses were consistent with the use of demolition explosives.

In short, the documentary left far too much credibility with the official theories, and gave the impression that we can never know the truth, that every traumatic event brings out ‘conspiracy theories’ invented for our mental comfort. These implications are both false. It would be more accurate to state that the bigger the traumatic event, the more vigorously the perpetrators attempt to down-play and ridicule the truth by every means at their disposal-- including revealing a little truth with a lot of bluster.

The TV special was a start, and I appreciate the links on the program website... But, I wish it had been more along the lines of the other documentary, ‘9-11 Toxic Legacy,’ which is to say, more like real ‘investigative journalism!’

John Krzyzewski
Westbank, BC
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. [Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 - 1860)]

I listen to many people who haved travelled abroad and remark about how different the news and media are in foreign countries. As a U.S. citizen I am denied the truth and I no longer feel that my Constitution protects my freedom of speech and right to know the facts. Eighty-two percent of Americans feel that the events of 9/11 are covered-up by our government. There are those who go beyond that, and these are scientists and scholars, and they say that the twin towers were brought down by an inside action. Questions like, "Why wasn't the airforce able to protect us after the first plane hit"? are being asked. People who dare ask are labelled kooks, conspiratorialists, or anti-American. If one tries to kill the questioner, can the lies be far behind?

Amy Bauer

There are a lot of things that don't add up about 9/11, but the way WTC 7 fell is for me the most unsettling.

The answers provided by Jim Meigs (Popolar mechanics) were totally unconvincing and even condescending.

We know that the Bush administration regularly lies to the media and the American people, so when the co-chair of the 9/11 commission says they were set-up to fail, we should all worry.

Josée Lambert

I am an American and I love my country. Today the media has devoted the day to the fifth anniversary of 9/11. I am aghast because after being lied to about the tragedy, after thousands were killed,and rescuers'lives are changed forever because of illness, the media is complcit in re-enacting the horror and extending the cover-up. I cannot bear to watch this criminal event.

Amy Bauer

Subject; Evan Solomon - this and that and conspiracies of varying degrees.

Never attribute to evil what you can to stupidity and apathy, and never attribute to idealism and selfless dedication what you can to ego, greed, and vanity. Never assume evil power-mad people are so dedicated and clever that they will keep secret their aims and role in affecting history. Nor are they likely to succeed at such efforts without overt challenge, embarrassing exposure, and multiple public failures born of inefficiency, competition, transparency and ego.

Perhaps the most important fact to remember is that it is conspiracy THEORISTS who have carried out the worst evils. Hitlerism was based on the fantasy of a conspiratorial nature of Bolshevism , capitalism, and democracy behind which were the Jews. Conspiracy theorists plunged the world into its worst war and sent millions to crematoria.

Conspiracy theories explain events in a way that reassures us that people are basically good -- so good in fact that even the authors of evil turn up amazingly selfless and dedicated. They paint a world where everything works efficiently. These provide us with comfort instead of truth, and open the door to far far greater evils in the real world than they complain of.

In the future, I might suggest, Mr. Solomon could give credence to elegant solutions instead of theories mired in half-truths and charged with emotion.

Jim de Bruijne

We all sympathise and feel for those who lost loved ones in this 9/11 terrible tragedy. However putting on special features on the National every night for a whole week and then subjecting us to another session on the Sunday newscast was way too much. What would the purpose be in repeating coverage of the same event over and over again? I had to turn off the news each night as this section of the newscast began, it was just too much - the endless repetition. Please do not repaeat this amount of coverage again on any one event again.

John N.

My feedback is responding your CBC News Sunday Sept 10 program called "9/11: TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY". I have to say I was quite impressed and surprised by this feature. While I may not necessarily agree with any of the conspiracy theories that were presented, it is always important to examine the "other views" besides the mainstream, no matter how much one may disagree with them. Your feature was balanced and presented some stimulating questions. I do think it is naive to believe that people hiding in the caves of Afghanistan along with 19 hijackers single-handedly brought such chaos to the most powerful nation on this world on 9/11/2001. At a minimum, some powerful figures inside the US had to be involved in some direct way. Some serious questions have to be asked including who may have benefitted and continues to benefit from these attacks financially, politically, and/or otherwise. When 9/11 occurred, people were afraid to ask controversial yet important questions within and outside the US. How can one claim to be living in a free democratic society yet be afraid to raise serious issues even during such a tragedy. The true tests of democracy and freedoms of speech and expressions are not during times of ease and peace...but during times of great stress and conflict. These questions may not have been raised at that time...but now more than ever those that were truly responsible for 9/11 must be brought to justice. Does anyone believe the "official explanations" of 9/11 by those who also argued that there were WMDs in Iraq and that al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were working together...claims which have been repeatedly proven to be fasle? Look at where we are today by those who used such claims...Afghanistan, Iraq...what's next? Each and every single one of us needs to ask questions and get answers. Thank you for presenting such a controversial yet necessary topic. It is when we stop questioning that we will stop finding the truth. Please continue to make me proud of CBC News by continuing to present such mentally stimulating topics that are not necessarily "mainstream" or "popular".

Jim Brown

9/11: TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY: I would like to thank you for the discussion about the conspiracy theory and 9/11. Since December 2005, I red a lot of books by Griffin, Ahmed and Chossudovsky and seen Loose Change video, many many times. I recommend the section EVIDENCES on the www.loosechange911.com website to all readers!

I just purchase the book by Popular Mechanics DEBUNKING, not because Mr. Meigs made sense to me, but I wanted to read more about his view on the collapse of WTC7, his vision about the pancake theory of WTC1 and 2, and the Pentagon attack! The same way I encourage CBC viewers to look at the other EVIDENCES!

As for Mr. Hamilton, Vice Chair of the 911 commission, not to remember if the Official 911 Omission Report mentions the collapse of WTC7 ... is suspicious! The answer: they didn’t cover that aspect: the real question is why? They actually looked at the US official report of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) that could not explain it either? and decided not to include that section. However in 2002, Silverstein the owner of the WTC buildings, made the comment during an interview that he, in the late afternoon of September 11, ordered WTC7 to be PULLED — a controlled demolition term? — and the WTC7 went to dust, ... just like the other 2 towers... and the Giuliani Control Center went down at the same time?!

What people should know is that the order to evacuate the building 7 was given around 9AM — which is curious considering the order given at WTC 1 and 2 that their buildings were safe at 8h46AM? Now for more conspiracies: Was Giuliani aware of the events to leave the building that early when no buildings had ever collapsed from fire? Was Flight 93 supposed to crash in WTC7 to mimic the other towers official theory that plane fuel could collapse buildings without explosives?

I thank you again for this presentation as CNN, Fox and other US news agencies would have never face the truth so closely!

Marcel M. Desrosiers
Gatineau, Quebec

Re: 9/11 Conspiracies

Kudos to CBC for having the nerve to question the official and, in my opinion, wholly unbelievable conspiracy theory. I hope CBC will continue following this issue as the number of people who question it continues to grow.

I do wish CBC had referenced Larry Silverstein's (the WTC leaseholder) comment on PBS that WTC 7 was pulled (an industry term for demolished). In addition, you could have shown the CNN footage from a Florida townhall meeting in November 2001. At that event, Bush said he saw the first plane hit the World Trade Centre and that he thought it was "one bad pilot." However, footage of the first plane hitting the Trade Centre was not aired until September 12 (it was captured by a French documentary crew).

For those of you who dont believe that the U.S. would ever consider attacking it's own people, type in "Operation Northwoods" on Google. Here's just one paragraph:

Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a 1962 plan to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government of Fidel Castro as part of the U.S. government's Operation Mongoose anti-Castro initiative. The plan, which was not implemented, called for various false flag actions, including simulated or real state sponsored terrorism (such as hijacked planes) on U.S. and Cuban soil. The plan was proposed by senior U.S. Department of Defense leaders, including the highest ranking member of the U.S. military, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer.


I would like to congratulate the CBC (and Mr Solomon) for being maybe the only chanel in North America to have given a "fair and balanced" account of the questions that many people raise about what really happened on the 11th of September 2001. It's indeed a very courageous and promissing step forward!

Please, keep on being what you should be (real journalists) and investigate these questions further!!! Find the means and the support to do so and you might regain the respect that your profession has lost, slowly but surely, during the last decades...
But once again, I hope it's just a first step and that you will adress the real problems that the so-called "conspiracy theorists" point at (Building 7 of the WTC and the basic physics of building collapse, the shipping abroad of the steel columns of the Twin Towers without ANY forensic investigation being made on them, the absence of plane wreckage both on the Pentagone site and in Pennsylvania, the unbelievable stories of cellphone calls at 30,000 feet, the fact that many of the 19 alleged highjackers (includng Mohammed Atta) are still alive, etc.). Maybe you will find that the biggest conspiracy theorist of them all is a guy named George (remember Saddam and the WMD?) Thanks!

Please fell free to correct my english if you wish to put this on the web!

Matthieu Saillant

After reading some of the comments blasting the cbc for airing the program and the ill timing of it. Also reading that people with a little bit of critical thought for beleiving the theories are kooks and whack jobs makes me ask the question. Do all of you who beleive the official story also beleive that governments ( even ours ie the Gommrey inquiry )don't lie to us or propagandize our media. All you have to do is watch CNN or Fox news during such conflicts as the Israeli/Lebanon conflict where reporters ask such questions as what does isreal have to do to win and not how can the Lebanese civilians stay out of this conflict so more women and children aren't needlessly killed for for the capture of two soldiers. It's like watching cheerleaders go team go. And shame on the poeple for shaming CBC cuz you obviously weren't paying attention at the end of the fallout piece when when Evan gave out his opinion on an inconsequential part of the equation using that as some sort of proof to bebunk the conspiracies. Now in this day and age it is very disapointing to see so many blindly beleiving what is told to them by there government, the press or the conspiracy theories. Before you form an opinion about something especially about things we are not experts in or privy to inside information do some research, think for yourself and come to your own conclusion. I've done the research on this subject and it doesn't look good for the Bush admin. History shows us time and again that power corrupts and our apperant civilized world is still commiting atrocities over Money, religion, power and imperialism. SO WAKE THE F UP or your childrens children will suffer!!!!!!!

Steve Smith
Calgary AB

i! I didn't watch the 9-11 show, but heard that you did touch on the conspiracy theory, then Jim Meigi came in and basically "refuted" it. You should've let the 9-11 conspiracists refute his claims, instead of making it look like Jim won when he didn't. Here are some websites to go to for more info on 9-11:


Also, the video of Osama "admitting" he was behind the attacks showed him being right-handed, Osama is left-handed (Guardian). How could a plane with a wingspan of 124 ft, length 155 feet, and height 18 feet crash into the Pentagon and leave a hole 26 feet high, 90 feet wide across the 1st floor and 13 feet wide across the 2nd floor, with no debris and no wingmarks (www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm). NYFD's chief arsonist investigator tells TV reportes Sept 12 he thinks "internal explosives" were used "On the last trip up a bomb went off" (L. Cacchioli, firefighter, People Magazine 9/24/01). How were the titanium cockpit voice recorders "inoperable" but Atta's passport was found clean and intact blocks from the WTC? How could documents incriminating Bin Laden be found intact at the WTC when the black box, which was designed to withstand crashes, was damaged beyond belief? (Nexus Magazine,Jan-Feb 2002) Photos and videos of the collapsing towers show flashes from "controlled demolition" explosions as they fell. Firefighters stated that they believed bombs had been set in the buildings. (www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_firefighters.html). 9/11 flight 93 showed no visible plane wreckage at the Pennsylvania crash sight, no fire or firefighter efforts, and no bodies were recovered. How could the passengers disintegrate when fragile paper, plastic, and fabric survived? (thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight93.html) Also, a witness reports of seeing no windows on Flight 175 crashing into the World Trade Centre, there was no debris or wreckage from Flight 77 on the Pentagon lawn, and a Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing at Cleveland Hopkins Airport because they thought there may have been a bomb on board. United identified the plane as flight 93! (Original posting, WCPO TV, Ch 9 website, Cleveland, retracted Aug 04, 2 hours after posting by radio host Dave vonKleist). All these beg the question - Did the U.S. plan it, or simply allow it to happen? I'd suggest you look into it before dismissing it.


As insightful and heartbreaking as your Sunday September 10th broadcast was, the title graphics used to transition to and from commercials seemed terribly inappropriate. The graphics, depicting one of the towers of the World Trade Center collapsing, seemed distasteful, particularly when only moments earlier, Bob Ewart stated that how difficult it is to watch footage of the planes hitting the towers and the towers collapsing.

Could not a more compassionate graphic have been used?


Popular Mechanics has long been a darling of the military/industrial complex.

Every year there are issues glorifying U.S. military technology and this has ben going on since the end of WW 2.

Hardlly the most reliable source to debunk any conspiracy - least of all Project for A New American Century..

Those who think a 757 can bring down a steel re-enforced building should check their history.At 9:49 a.m. on Saturday July 28, 1945, a ten ton B-25 Mitchell bomber flying in a thick fog accidentally crashed into the north side between the 79th and 80th floors, where the offices of the National Catholic Welfare Council were located; one engine (weight about 2 tons) shot through the side opposite the impact and another plummeted down an elevator shaft. The fire was extinguished in 40 minutes. 14 people were killed in the accident.

Following the accident, elevator operator Betty Lou Oliver survived a plunge of 75 stories inside an elevator, and currently holds the Guinness World Record for the longest survived elevator fall recorded.

Croft Woodruff

Congratulations for daring to air your surface scratching (but a tigerly scratch!) extremely important expose on 9/11, shown on Sept.10, 2006.

For those who haven't previously acquainted themselves with many of the absurdities of the official US govt. story, nor the large volume of factual and scientific material that supports the thesis that 9/11 was a diabolical, orchestrated, 'false flag' operation, your program must have come as quite a shock.

What is directly implied by the facts is that the American Administration launched two wars of aggression, as well as a multi-faceted attack on the American Constitution, on the basis of treason, murder and lies.

Nuremberg after WW 2 pronounced aggressive war the supreme crime. The result after 9/11: hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded in Iraq, and the destruction of the health of the Iraqi people and the civilian infrastructure of Iraq. And the death and wounding of unknown thousands in Afghanistan. The Lancet finds a quarter million Iraqi deaths to be a conservative estimate of the death toll; Canadians are killing and being killed in Afghanistan.

To put it mildly, this story must not die; keep going!

Robert Snefjella

I watched your story about the possible conspiracies surrounding the events of September 11. As a viewer, it is my responsibilty to listen to the story and base my opinion on the information presented. While conspiracy theorists may feel they have the responsibility to present their findings and research, I feel it is your responsibility to air appropriate matter for the time. While it was an interesting piece and certainly news worthy, I firmly believe that it was poor judgement to air the piece so close to the anniversary of 9/11. There are thousands of families that are still grieving and the insensitivity of the theories and the theorists themselves show incredible disrespect. I would never argue that a thought provoking piece that may race against the grain of popular belief should be censored, but more suitable timing should have been used by CBC.

Melissa Anstey

I watched your documentary about 9/11 conspiracy theory but everthing revolved around Popular mechanic point of view.You should have done your research first and maybe next show on Sunday advise your audience who owns the magazine;Read this below'
But who is Benjamin Chertoff, the "senior researcher" at Popular Mechanics who is behind the article? American Free Press has learned that he is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

This means that Hearst paid Benjamin Chertoff to write an article supporting the seriously flawed explanation that is based on a practically non-existent investigation of the terror event that directly led to the creation of the massive national security department his "cousin" now heads. This is exactly the kind of "journalism" one would expect to find in a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Because the manager of public relations for Popular Mechanics didn't respond to repeated calls from American Free Press, I called Benjamin Chertoff, the magazine's "senior researcher," directly.

Chertoff said he was the "senior researcher" of the piece. When asked if he was related to Michael Chertoff, he said, "I don't know." Clearly uncomfortable about discussing the matter further, he told me that all questions about the article should be put to the publicist – the one who never answers the phone.

Benjamin's mother in Pelham, New York, however, was more willing to talk. Asked if Benjamin was related to the new Secretary of Homeland Security, Judy said, "Yes, of course, he is a cousin."


Your program presented yesterday (September 10) concerning the events surrounding 9/11 was extremely interesting. I was surprised to find that 42% of Americans believe that the American governmnent had some role in orchestrating the events of that day. Imagine the repercussions such a belief could have on the Republicans in general and Bush specifically. I have long thought similarly, but I figured I was the only one who thought that way; I was wrong.

There is one thing that I would like to bring to your atttention. The conspiracy theory argued in "Loose Change" suggests that Flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon and that Flight 93 did not crash into the ground. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't there supposed to black boxes recovered from the scene of any flight crash? Were the flight recorder boxes for those 2 flights ever recovered and examined? As far as I can recall, I haven't heard anything about black boxes from those flights. It would be interesting to know if any such reports exist. If the black boxes have never been recovered, there is credibility to certain of the conspiracy theories, that is, those 2 flights did not crash as they were reported to have done.

In turn, this raises two questions: What happened to those 2 airplanes? Where are the passengers and crew, assuming no crashes and no deaths? What happened at the WTC Towers is clear; there can be no disputing those crashes. The whole thing is still a mystery and perhaps there is more to the events than we've been told. I really do believe that the American government is in some way involved in those tragedies, and the conspiracy theories make a lot of sense to me.

James Donovan

I enjoyed that program very much. I was particularly impressed by the young person [I forgot his name] when he was talking about the film he had made, called "Loose Change", with not much money. Unfortunately I have not seen the film. I found the speaker [I don't know if he calls himself an engineer] from "Popular Mechanics" a joke. Who would believe him. Whatever he was talking about makes no sense. Even for me as a woman, being an Electronic Technologist, it was NOT logic. But fair enough - you always have to show the other side of the story People have to make up their own mind Please repeat these programs and bring more, because we have to wake up people. They still do NOT know/realize what is coming towards us politically.

Lisa Schwabe

Within the 911 truth movement the article in Popular Mechanics is regarded as a white wash. To refute their spokesman's claims one need go no farther than the evidence presented in "Loose Change".

Case in point: One statement the gentleman from Popular Mechanics made was that (to paraphrase) many things explode in buildings when there are fires to explain away the eye witness reports of explosions in the buildings. That ignores such witnesses such as William Rodrigues' who testified that there were explosions in the basement prior to the planes hitting the towers. That ignores the expert testimony of the firefighters who would know the difference between ordinary explosions of paint cans and what they said were bombs.

All this begs the question: if this were an inside job, what would be the motivation initiating this attack by Americans on their own country? The people conducting these false flag terror events have written about this and these writings can be found on the various websites devoted to 911. See the video "Terror Storm" or the writings of Webster G. Tarpley for details.

I was disappointed in your coverage of this very important matter.

Rob Lewko

The piece on 9/11 was very disappointing.

You start off by acknowledging that 42% of the American public are suspicious of the Official Report on 9/11 and then go on to trash the people who are trying to get at the truth.

Who was that clown from Popular Mechanics? and what are his credentials? If that was an attempt at satire it was far too subtle for me.

I desperately want to be able to rely on an independent reporter of the facts rather than a purveyor of spin. I am losing faith in the CBC.
You are starting to appear to be just another gatekeeper.

Derek Skinner
Canadian Action Party, Victoria

Thank you on the story of Loose Change. All I have to say is "wow very compelling!" I watched the film "Loose Change" then read you interview with Dylan and it urges more questions than answers! For him to take on this project to question his government I would think would bring on a lot more greaf than Fam! I hope he doesn't end up like the author J.H. Hatfield who wrote the book about Goerge W. Bush the making of an American President who ended up dead because of his critical observations!

Murdoch MacKenzie

Dear CBC, I was amazed to watch clips of "Loose Change" on your Sunday night show.Most people with an average balanced outlook should be able to deduce after watching the documentary that the "official 911 report" is no less than a whitewash! I watched Larry Silverstein admit on PBS his decision to Pull Building 7.You would have to be in complete denial not to link this with the many other irregularities that fateful day.It confirmed my fears.I bought 350 copies of "Loose Change" and mailed a copy to every M.P. in Canada.

After five years the cat is out of the bag. How about airing the whole of "Loose Change so viwers can come to their own conclusions?
Well Done,

Kim Beaney

BRAVO! on your 911-truth piece Sunday night. Your show was the first (in the mainstream) to show the controlled demolition of WTC7, a HUGE piece of evidence mysteriously absent from 911 Commission Report. Next time show the footage of Silverstein admitting that he was in on decision that afternoon to 'pull' WTC7! Evan Solomon deserves a medal for standing-tuff with Mr Hamilton's imtimidation tactics and for tolerating that irritating Meigs character from Pop Mechanics. I would highly suggest your editors read Michel Chossudovsky of the website www.globalresearch.ca and have him on the show. Also suggest a subscription to the Canadian produced magazine Global Outlook (an entire issue was recently dedicated to disproving Pop Mechanics hit piece).

Steve Merrill

My name is Richard Roop and I was watching your Sunday special on 9/11. I thought that the show was not bad; I mean not as twisted as the American coverage. I was surprised when I saw clips from Loose Change 911 being played. I love the sound track in Loose Change 911.

I thought that the coverage attempted to spin the topics discussed in Loose Change 911; particularly with building 7 at the world trade center. I have seen clips on the internet and in documentaries (which I trust) where Larry Silverstein said that the fire chief and himself decided to “pull” the building, meaning to demolish it by explosives. In your coverage however you said that you didn’t know why the building fell. Larry Silverstein goes on the air and says that they decided to pull the building and still you guys don’t know why the building fell? I find that hard to believe and hard to swallow.

How could they have possibly arranged the perfect demolition of a building while it was on fire, in a couple of hours with out prior knowledge? This is why the CBC did not spend any time talking about building 7 because is proves that the American government orchestrated all of the tragic events of 9/11.

It is becoming obvious to millions of people that what happened on September 11th 2001 was orchestrated primarily by the America government. The American people are waking up to the reality that the current administration has murdered its way to power (much like the Nazis.) Thanks to declassified government reports; the people can see how the American government has used terrorism in the past and how it is currently reusing these same tactics. It is no secret that the American government has sponsored terrorism to achieve their goals and that they are still doing it.

You will be perceived in history as the reason why America let the real terrorist threat walk away free (George W. Bush). Do you really think that they will get away will their crimes forever? Here is a well known quote from a real President; Abraham Lincoln “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. “ It is too bad that Bush and the Jewish owned media in America don’t know their history.

George Bush is will end up destroying America and possibly the world. He can’t even admit that global warming exists; he is denying the American people’s precious time to prepare themselves for the seemingly biblical plagues that are just ahead due to global warming. There is no debate that global warming exists, New Orleans was under water and Bush says “the fundamental debate continues.” Well New York, Florida, Boston and many other large American cities will soon be under water; what will the government say then? I will be alive to witness it first hand because I am 26. I wonder who they will blame? Osama Bin Laden? Maybe the CBC will show how Al Qaeda caused global warming?

How can Canada support Bush? This is a moral issue; I can only hope that in four years when another hurricane or natural disaster destroys half of America; the American people will finally seek out a worth while government that actually works for them instead of against them.

Here are some quotes from Abraham Lincoln I would like to leave you with; it is too bad however that George W. Bush has already perverted every quote:

Abraham Lincoln:

“Allow the president to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose - and you allow him to make war at pleasure.”

Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.

I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.

Thank you for finally airing opinions and evidence that question what has become known as "The Official Story".

All the physical evidence - as supported by numerous scholars, former intellignce workers and engineers as well the original footage - points to a controlled demolition of Towers I, II and VII. Let me share with your viewers this question: why is it that not a single modern skyscraper has been pulverized due to a fire, either before or since Sept. 11, 2001? Yet on that day it happened THREE TIMES??? Please do yourselves and this country a favor: go back and look at the original footage in slow motion. ANYONE can see explosions occurring several floors below the collapse point.

Abraham Lincoln once said: "I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended on to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts".

Brian Kearney


I was had my finger crossed that you would give fair version of 9/11 theories. But yet you edit it and twist it to make people with theories to be just over emotional kids, who have no idea what there talking about. You didn’t really look into theories or explain them well. You didn’t even allow Dylan to explain reasons behind the theories; you just let him speak his own person feeling on event with out him being able to back up claims. While you gave popular mechanics “editor” a very professional image, he was allowed to talk about why he was right because he had professional explosive experts and etc to emphasize that it is true because he had “experts” look at case. But yet we didn’t get to see these experts or we got to see was “editor” who really didn’t explain it at all except say he spoken with experts, that is not valid argument. Does it ever cross your minds to point out that government gets experts to lie? If they did these attacks you really think there going to get someone to prove them wrong? How old do you think we all are? Your host was joke he was so against conspiracy theories it wasn’t funny the way at end when host asked “why didn’t they just get people from Iraq fly planes”. That’s great way of leaving message in people minds that were idiots and don’t know what where talking about. Then you say all answer on NIST website why don’t you just look there. You could of gotten scientist that could back up conspiracy theories claims, which there are a lot around that have gone out there way prove the theories correct, but you only show editor from popular mechanics who has experts on his side. You never explained the theories on Loose Change you just left theories with editor at end of every argument. Who was saying things like hole at Pentagon was 90 foot, when that is not even true, even by pictures alone the hole wasn’t 90 foot. Look at windows size, measurements of building and even fire truck in front there is no way that 90 foot non government experts have stated this, Dylan just didn’t make it up. You left every question with editor response, giving impression he was right, with Dylan or any body else not being allowed to dispute the claims. The guys is not even an expert, he is editor for a magazine who uses government evidence/claims to back up his story. As I stated above do you really think governments going to emit if they have killed 3000 people please grow up. You have used editing of film to put emphasis that theory has no ground. I know because I’m on my last year as film student so I know tricks to giving edge to person who doesn’t have best case. Guess it all about $$$ and government support you want you don’t want truth all care about people’s lives….

bryce lawson

The Americans think they are the saviour of the world. George Bush said it last night on TV, that the US is leading the fight for freedom and liberty. They are the ones who will decide what is good for every other country in the world. Therefore, they have the right to attack whoever does not agree with their definition of freedom, liberty and democracy. Bush and company are heroes, protecting us from such enemies as Sadam Husein, the Taliban, Al Quaida and Muslim terrorists.

But Bush forgets that the Americans have created many of the problems which exist in the world today. They have marched into country after country, killed the leadership and imposed their politics. No wonder we see so much opposition to the US, and so much negative reaction to their ceaseless invasions of other countries.

Surely there is a better way to resolve conflicts without the use of so much military might. Of course the gun lobby wouldn't like that, because they sell more of their wares when there are wars.

Canada should get out of Afghanistan and other military operations and specialize in peace-keeping. Do we want more war, or less?

Ed Hoyer
Roxboro, PQ

Feeling exhausted after a long hard day on Sunday, September 10th, I went to bed at 9:55----- and then actually got out of bed when I heard that your program was tackling the conspiracy theories around 9/11.
Your host, Evan Solomon did a very good job of asking pertinent questions with the intention of investigating and educating those of us who are baffled by it all. He clearly realizes the critical role that CBC can play in bringing clarity and justice.

I must say though, I went to sleep still baffled.

I sincerely hope that you will continue to pursue the truth because
the ramifications of wars and human suffering is too much grief and guilt for people of conscience to bear. We are overwhelmed!

Pauli Sommer

Thank-you for FINALLY beginning to look at the events of 9-11 and the Omissions, lies and cover-ups by the U.S. Government.

I never have understood why you have not devoted much more time and energy studying this manufactured event.

Everything from the "Project for a New American Century" to all of the evidence that was supressed, destroyed or ignored in regards to 9-11 is more than enough to shatter the official version or at the very least raise serious doubts.

9-11 is a manufactured event that has been used to supress freedoms, start wars and wage ungoing conflict for years to come.

Hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost and Billions apon Billions of dollars have been spent waging this "War on Terror".

9-11 has enabled the conflicts in Afganistan, Irag, Leabanon and unfortunetly soon to be Iran.

This event has been used to persecute Muslims, re-write personal liberty and privacy laws and change the way we look other nations and religions.

Any honest, open minded look at the questions, the piles of contadictory evidence, the complete failure of three huge towers, the inadequate 9-11 Commission Report that was so very biased from the beginning will prove that there is much about this event that we need to know.

Our future depends on getting the truth out!!!!

Alex Bartlett

Thank you for airing the provocative program Sept.10 which opened a few of the large number of questions remaining about the events of 9/11. Evan proved to be a competent interviewer, pressing guests to answer questions, but let some of them (Lee Hamilton) off the hook when they left themselves wide open, saying they were set up to fail and that he didn’t know of Building 7 -- if he didn’t know, being on the Commission, who should know?--, and that they made mistakes which others would answer.

There was no resolution in your program and, of course, there couldn’t be. But there could have been more questions asked, like why was the most well equipped and vigilant air defence system in the history of Planet Earth unable for over two hours, to get itself into the air even long after the entire world was watching live TV coverage of those incredibly horrific events? And why haven’t we heard anything from the air traffic controllers on duty that day, why they either failed to follow standard procedures to immediately notify military command of the hijacked planes, or why the urgent messages that they issued were ignored or countermanded by the military. And why did they hustle off all the material remains of the fallen buildings, which constituted the evidence of one of the most serious crimes in history, to be recycled in India and China before any proper investigation could be made? And on and on.

The overall impression left by your program was that we need to keep pressing for answers to these and many other questions about those events. The Commission’s work was at best incomplete (and admits it), and perhaps incompetent, or possibly even just a cynically contrived whitewash for the White House. The people of America and the world deserve much better. And it is incumbent upon the media to serve both the people and history, and to fulfill their purpose as the beacon of Truth, by rendering a clear verdict of scornful derision upon the official lies of the official story, and pressing for a proper investigation to produce an honest and thorough report.

The grave error underlying the CBC report was to present the picture as merely a two-sided contest between official liars and “conspiracy theorists”. And even this contest is itself quite biased by the presumption of truth attributed to the officials and their spokespersons, and the presumption of misguided and quirky disbelief attributed to sceptics under the snickeringly dismissive stereotype of the “conspiracy theorist” label. But the reality is that something as complex as this cannot be reduced to simply two sides (both of which may well be seriously wrong), and not everyone who cannot accept the official lies is a “conspiracy theorist”.

The problem with many if not most conspiracy theories is that they are often held without solid proof. This does not automatically mean they are wrong, but it does raise the question as to what may constitute a reasonable burden of proof, or circumstantial evidence. But the essential role of the sceptics regarding the official story on 9/11 should not be to produce some provable conspiracy theory, but simply to raise questions and identify the errors and deficiencies in the official story. And in this case of course the collateral evidence is that the administration that so reluctantly and belatedly established the 9/11 commission has demonstrated an almost pathological propensity to lie, and to violate almost every standard of justice and human rights, including their own constitution and the Geneva accord etc. etc.. And the entire American system of government and corporate media have become complicit in accepting the lies and violations of justice by this objectively criminal administration. So an official whitewash is precisely what everyone should have suspected from the so-called investigation, since the known crimes are already too enormous to be acknowledged, and all of the supposed watchdogs are themselves already compromised.

Given the grotesque enormity of the virtually permanent state of war and clash of civilizations that this American administration has inflicted upon the world under the excuse provided by 9/11, it is imperative that the world must engage in a serious study of 9/11, even if that is suppressed within the USA. This is why it is so important for foreign and independent media to do everything they can to ask the serious questions that the American media is not willing to raise. So far it is only the “conspiracy theorists” that have been courageous enough to perform this essential public and historical service in pursuit of the truth. And for this, whether their theories are right or wrong, they deserve our respectful appreciation.

It would have been a refreshing change to have a discussion about “conspiracy theories”, which Evan at least labelled “so-called”, and bring out the fact that “false flag” catastrophes have been a REALITY and not just a theory in the US and other countries, and that such “incidents” have usually led to persuading otherwise reluctant populations to back going to war. When a string of such incidents have been proven, and since this one preceded going to war, and since their own documents stated an intent to go to war and that there was a necessity for another “Pearl Harbour” to get the people to agree, doesn’t it seem reasonable to suspect it was more than just a huge coincidence?

Thanks anyhow for giving at least a small amount of coverage to one of the most electrifying events of modern history.

Diana Jewell
Mission, BC

The decision to produce and to air the conspiracy theory of 9/11 on the eve of the fifth annivesrary of this event was disgraceful. You have joined Jack Layton and his merry band in Never Never Land. Why not come out and sport a NDP button Evan? You disgraced the memory of all those who died in 9/11 and also the memory of our Canadian soldiers who have died in Afghanistan fighting against the real perpretators of 9/11. The editorial in today's National Post says it all.

John Noble

September 11th was a demarcation point in American political
history. Prior to this event, the country was divided after
an election of an ineffectual President and palpably on the verge of social unrest. 911 was responsible for galvanizing
a nation behind an unpopular president. It allowed his
administration to execute their agenda which violated a lot
of rights and freedoms that were the foundation of America.
The great irony is that these pilots were trained in America
by Americans! A tragedy on all fronts.


I do watch Canadian News and some shows pretty regularly even though I live in Michigan. I must say however, I don't know many others here in the USA who also share my interest. In fact most Americans don't really care what Canadians think other than Don Cherry and I remember the heat he took when he said Canada should be supporting America and not France and Germany's opinions on the war in Iraq. Don is one Canadian who could probably run for office here in America and win. I have mixed feelings on the 9/11 coverage I watched on Sunday. I found the conspiracy theories fascinating but lacking much in evidence. I also find a lot of these investigations political and a waste of time. Many mistakes were made before 9/11 and what's important is what we learn from them. It amazes the amount of time Canadians spend in analyzing our President and 9/11 considering it was the USA who was attacked. Most Americans don't even know who runs Canada. Did Political Leaders after 9/11 claim to fast that the air was safe in Manhattan and was it financially motivated? Of course, just as Canadian were also driven by money in their concerns when the WHO declared Toronto as unsafe. Canada went out of their way to promote Toronto as safe being concerned with the effect on the economy. Let he who is sinless cast the first stone. My question for Canada: Are Canadians just as distrusting of their own Government as they are America?

Larry T. Malinowski

Hello, my name is Mikael Larson.

To start off, I would like to thank you for airing clips from Loose Change and discussing the conspiracy on that dreadful day.

I am a supporter of the theory that the US Government had a hand in the attacks.

I look forward to more coming from your station on this subject.

A few key components besides the mammoth pile of scientific evidence are as follows:

-If the US Gov has nothing to hide, why would they release 5 frames of videotape at the pentagon from a video they claimed not to have, when they could extinguish the "no plane hit the pentagon theory" so easily with the MANY videos of that attack???

-Larry Silverstien admits on national TV that they decided to "pull" building 7, (he and the fire dept.), "and then watched the building come down" he said.The official storey says an exploding gas tank lonely pulled off the demolition which was referred to by demolition experts as not only a "controlled demo" but a precise one.(Talented gas tank!).

-Released documents from the US Gov. themselves "Operation Northwoods, shows an intricate plan to attack their own citizens by means of various TERROR attacks outlined in the document. This document and plan went all the way up the chain of command and was only turned down just before it was to be used.

Immediately the commonly held opinion "they wouldn't do that to their own citizens" is destroyed. And the list goes on and on.

I wish the people at your station would take this very seriously.

Many people are working almost daily to bring the REAL terrorists to account for this atrocity. What is needed most of all is an open debate on this issue, and should that opportunity come here in Canada, I personally could arrange for 1 or 2 very well versed and credible persons to participate from the 911 Truth perspective.

What a great opportunity for you. Truly.

this is to Evan Solomon:

i saw the 9/11 show and i thank the cbc for its work in this area, it is more than the american networks have done and i think it is notable.

i am a person who believes that there was a plot at work that day and i think the evidence is "there" to see. it is convoluted and the stuff of cheap spy novels at first glance but that is only because most people do not understand the amercian military and how they operate.

Webster Tarpley (http://www.tarpley.net/) has outlined the machinations of the military over the last 30 years, including the fact that there were at least 20 military exercises going on that day,(many of them fake hijackings), including a FULL AND COMPLETE NUCLEAR ALERT. the fact is that NORAD and the internal command structure that day were compromised by mis-infromation to the extent that they did not know what was real/exercise, what was real and what the hell they were doing. jets were sent out to sea, down to the south etc.

its interesting to note that he feels bush was not in on the plan, and it is noteworthy that he was not whisked away when notified that his country was under attack. that is shocking, impeachable and in contradiction to any protocols for maintaining the safety of the executive branch. where was the secrret service?

tarpley sees fear in bush's face - he sits for about 20 minutes and then gets up and leaves, spending the day at two of the four bases involved in the full nuclear alert.

also i have a 2 hour lecture by a guy named tom barnett (http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/) explaining the big picture role of the amercian military for the last century and going forward to the next that is unapologetic and chilling and outlines the worst fears that world may hold about the amercian military and foreign policy which is, by the way, totally devoted to globalization and so called open market.

based on this lecture (covered by CSpan) he says the world is, right now, divided into two regions: the core (the west, argentina, chile and brazil, south africa, japan)and the gap (the old ussr, china, venezuela, colombia, most of asia)- he points out the the amnerican military has re-deployed its resources in a containment oif this area - that is fact and is easy to see. the plan is to contiune with bring "the war" to these regions, he say there is no end to the war, no withdrawal, total war.

i could go on but i think there is much more to put on the tube for people to talk and think about, because the europeans understand this move, the russians understand it and the chinese as well.

worse of all is that this military machine does not protect amercian foreign policy but rather the policies of the corporate elite and to the best of my knowledge no one has ever voted for that.

i would be happy to provide you with all the video evidence to which i refer and i do believe that it is important for this to get out as information for the public to think about.

i look forward to your reply!

Bryan D Behie

I find it very amusing to read comments, in the negative tone, regarding Carolyn Dunn's interview with Brig. Gen. Fraser.

I do wonder if any of those writing have actually gone to another war ridden country and if they realize the severity of conditions, ie. none or very little sleep, food conditions (or lack thereof), not to mention the danger they are putting themselves in to get the story "back home". Have you ever slept in a bullet proof vest and helmet? I wonder!

I'm ashamed of any Canadian who took Carolyn Dunn's years of experience and turned it into the vein of "requiring practice" on her job. Take the time to find out her experience and how CBC regards her. Until you know what she has seen "over there", then you certainly have no right to comment on it. I'm quite certain you've watched more than one of her stories and know she is not trying to keep up with anyone in the industry ... just doing her job at doing it well I might add.

I'm sure now that all you negative people will be applying to The CBC for the journalist jobs, all will be well with the reporting world.

Great job Carolyn and all those involved! Keep up the good work!

Tracy Cresswell

As someone who, like Bob Mcilvain, questions the official explanation for what really happened on September 11, 2001, I wanted to let you know my thoughts about the program you aired last Sunday concerning 9-11 "conspiracy theories."

On the positive side, I was impressed by the seriousness with which your network treated this topic. THis is the first time, to my knowledge, that a major broadcaster anywhere in North America has appeared to take on these issues in an earnest way. You have tried to tackle some questions that have rarely been brought forward to a mainstream audience.

Raised were issues such as the physical impossibility of yard-wide self-supporting steel core columns being heated to the point where they would weaken at the temperatures that a kerosene fire could generate after less than an hour, "pancaking" skyscrapers at free-fall speed, the failure of aircraft-intercept protocols, the remarkable flying of AA77 into the Pentagon courtesy of a below-par pilot, and the mother of all smoking guns: the WTC7 collapse. As a long time skeptic this is, of course, old hat to me, but it was a true service for neophytes to this kind of inquiry, especially for those who still trust the authority of the mainstream media ( yes, there are a few!)

My cautious praise of this program is largely a result of years of seeing the media dismiss valid questions about this incident, and by media I include the CBC with their most recent hatchet-job on their morning show THE CURRENT, with Susan Ormiston. Personally, I can't honestly say I got very much out of your piece information-wise. I did, however, appreciate Evan's earnestness in interview, as well as Carole's cautions at the end about using the term "conspiracy theory" in reference to valid journalistic inquiry probing profound epoch-shattering events. I also enjoyed the unintentionally humourous spectacle of seeing your "debunker" attempt to ignore anomalies and inconsistencies in a hopeless attempt to justify the standard narrative upheld by the bulk of "official" opinion. If this man had been living in Einstein's day, he probably would have dismissed the Theory of Relativity as 'junk science.'

If you really wish to do this subject matter justice, you really should go beyond the physical evidence, and explore evidence of foreknowledge, complicity and cover-up. The following materials constitute, in my opinion, the most devastating, comprehensive and cogent critique of the official 9-11 narrative. If there is any genuine motivation on the part of the CBC to serve its mandate to the citizens of Canada, you will find everything you need to know in this representative sampling to continue this investigation to its logical conclusion.

(Forgive me, but I won't be holding my breath!)


America's "War on Terrorism" by Michel Chossudovsky
Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11 by Barrie Zwicker
Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil by Michael C Ruppert
THe War on Freedom by Nafeez Ahmed
The Terror Timeline by Paul Thompson

The Great Conspiracy: the 9/11 News Special you Never Saw by Barrie Zwicker
The Truth and Lies of 9-11 by Michael C Ruppert
Denial Stops Here by Michael C Ruppert
Celsius 9/11: World Takeover and the War OF Terror by Jeremy Wright
The Great Deception by Barrie Zwicker

in truth...

Michael Anthony Welch
Winnipeg, Manitoba

Evan Soloman,

Congratulations and thank you on asking some hard questions in your 911 piece this past Sunday. You have to be the first mainstream journalist on this continent to deal with this subject. Even Lee Hamilton was impressed, well annoyed maybe, with your detailed questions. I, and I`m sure many millions of others hope you do a follow up in the near future. Perhaps including the Larry Silverstein video evidence of him telling PBS about the decision to "pull" WTC #7. Also, you might want to show us CNN`s Jamie McIntyre in his initial report from the Pentagon, in which he emphatically stated "that no way was it an airplane that hit the building". Don`t forget about all the U.S TV anchors (Rather,Jennings etc.)whose first reaction was " controlled demolition" as the towers fell.
Lastly, the film of the second plane strike shown on Sunday, clearly shows a helcopter exiting the scene in the top right hand corner. You could point this out too, since it was more than likely involved in the operation.

Thank you and God bless.

Michael Fitzpatrick

To the producers of CBC News Sunday Night,

Thank you for presenting information that questions the official version of the 9/11 Commission Report. I felt you provided balance between those who support the Commissions's report and those who criticize the report and suggest that what happended that day has never been fully investigated.

Even if what happended that day was the result of gross incompetence of the FAA, the Military and the Administration of the US, many have asked, why have no reprisals or punishments been levelled against those persons in charge? The fact that neither individual persons nor institutions were found guilty of massive negligence and incompetence lends creedence to those who point to the Report's glaring discrepencies, misinformation and unpublished evidence as proof that there is a cover-up.

Gale Tyler

9/11: TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY: I would like to thank you for the discussion about the conspiracy theory and 9/11. Since December 2005, I red a lot of books by Griffin, Ahmed and Chossudovsky and seen Loose Change video, many many times. I recommend the section EVIDENCES on the www.loosechange911.com website to all readers!

I just purchase the book by Popular Mechanics DEBUNKING, not because Mr. Meigs made sense to me, but I wanted to read more about his view on the collapse of WTC7, his vision about the pancake theory of WTC1 and 2, and the Pentagon attack! The same way I encourage CBC viewers to look at the other EVIDENCES!

As for Mr. Hamilton, Vice Chair of the 911 commission, not to remember if the Official 911 Omission Report mentions the collapse of WTC7 ... is suspicious! The answer: they didn’t cover that aspect: the real question is why? They actually looked at the US official report of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) that could not explain it either? and decided not to include that section. However in 2002, Silverstein the owner of the WTC buildings, made the comment during an interview that he, in the late afternoon of September 11, ordered WTC7 to be PULLED — a controlled demolition term? — and the WTC7 went to dust, ... just like the other 2 towers... and the Giuliani Control Center went down at the same time?!

What people should know is that the order to evacuate the building 7 was given around 9AM — which is curious considering the order given at WTC 1 and 2 that their buildings were safe at 8h46AM? Now for more conspiracies: Was Giuliani aware of the events to leave the building that early when no buildings had ever collapsed from fire? Was Flight 93 supposed to crash in WTC7 to mimic the other towers official theory that plane fuel could collapse buildings without explosives?

I thank you again for this presentation as CNN, Fox and other US news agencies would have never face the truth so closely!

Marcel M. Desrosiers

The Sept 11 conspiracy theory piece was amazing and informative. it only took 5 years for the media to catch on. thanks for the good work at any rate.

jack b

I cannot begin to express my gratitude for you showing both sides of the 911 story. You have restored my faith in the CBC as a beacon of true journalism. I admire your courageousness in the face of the propaganda that it is relentlessly forced upon us. I hope that you continue to offer this kind of objectivity.

Chris Sherwin
Windsor, Ontario

I have to say that I am extremely disappointed in the CBC for the story that ran on September 10, 2006. The so called "proof" from the crackpots who made "Loose Change" was actually taken seriously by you people. How you could actually show this highly biased and myopic vitriol and still take yourselves seriously, I don't know. I tried to give CBC a chance, but this takes the cake. You can't possible take this seriously, and if you do, then you have to have your heads examined.

I point you to a Canadian who has debunked the claims made in "Loose Change". Mark Iradian made a counter-video called "Screw Loose Change", and if you people have any backbone at all you'll cover this story as well. It’s all well and good to cover one side of the story, but to miss the other side completely is a disservice to the people who died on September 11, 2001. Don't make me ashamed to call myself a Canadian. Be a fair and balanced journalistic news outlet as you claim to be.

PS. Here is the link to the debunking video


Hourra, Hourra! A news show that dares talk about the 9/11 truth movement. The movement is gaining momentum and growing at an exponential rate. As more and more people realize that the 9/11 official story is the biggest conspiracy theory of all, our cry for an independent 9/11 Investigation will get louder and louder.

To the people who still believe the official story I beg of you: look at the facts, investigate them for yourself, watch Loose Change 9/11 on Google video for free. It is more than obvious to any sensible open-minded person that there remains many unanswered questions surrounding 9/11. Is it so outrageous to demand for an independent investigation?

I went to Ground Zero on monday this week. I went to show solidarity with the Truth Movement, and marched along with more than 2000 truth activists. Everyone wore a black t-shirt with "Investigate 9/11" written in white. We carried signs with the following slogans: "9/11 Truth Now", "Ask Questions, Demand Answers", and "We need a new investigation". We marched along church street in fromt of Ground Zero, we marched in silent holding up our banners. Has this march been reported by news outlets? Not much, that is for sure.

We weren't there to insult anyone, though we were repeatedly insulted ourselves, we owe it to the victims to demand answers concerning many questions that remain unresolved from that fateful day.

Patrick Biron

Thank you for producing and airing ‘9/11 Facing the Fallout’.

I wonder why the producers of the program failed to mention the Canadian efforts to get the 9/11 Truth.

CBC staff, and news departments are well aware that in 2004, Toronto hosted the International Citizens Inquiry Into 9/11, Phase 2. http://www.911inquiry.org

It took place over 6 days with the final two at Convocation Hall. Dozens of researchers, journalists, authors and activists took the stage presenting much of the material that your program covered, albeit much more in-depth. The final evening was MC’ed by CBC’s John Corcelli.

There was live video feed from Ed Asner from Hollywood, supporting the Inquiry work, and expressing his extreme skepticism of the official 9/11 story. Another keynote speaker was John Gray, author of ‘Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus’.

Additionally, the Director, and co-founder of the Inquiry was Toronto’s own Barrie Zwicker, life long journalist, media critic for 35 years, and author of the newest 9/11 book ‘Towers of Deception: The Media Cover-up of 9/11’. http://www.newsociety.com/bookid/3932 Barrie Zwicker was recently (august 2006) interviewed on CBC’s The Current, plus was invited back for a follow up.

Further, in 2005 during the CBC lockout, I had organized a 9/11 remembered film festival in Toronto at the Rhino Bar and Grill. I leafleted hundreds of CBC employees, one of which was Hana Gartner. She regretted not being able to attend herself, but perhaps her husband would, because he was ‘all over this’, which in the context of discussing a film festival that shows all the available video challenging the official story of 9/11, I took to mean that he was also skeptical of the official story.

Also there is at least one CBC newsroom employee who has come to many Toronto 9/11 Truth events. This spring, he commented publicly that word in the newsroom was to leave this alone.

And finally, I strongly encourage someone there to look at the live broadcast from CBC newsworld on Sept. 11, 2001. There are many conflicting eyewitness accounts in the early morning like, a car bomb at the state department, and sightings of a low flying helicopter at the Pentagon moments before the explosion. The most startling footage comes between 5:20 pm and 6:20 pm (approximately). If one watches the footage all day long it is clear that in the most used live shot of the twin towers, and then the rubble, building 7 is smack in the centre of the frame. One would think that a live feed with building 7 in the centre of frame, the viewer would have also been shown that footage. That however is not the case. Peter Mansbridge does report that another building has collapsed, but we are not shown the footage which the CBC clearly had access to. The peculiar part is not that CBC didn’t show us the collapse, it is that after 6:00 pm (when Building 7 has already collapsed) Peter says ‘let’s go back to the live shot’ which is what happens, showing us the same shot as before, except building 7 is missing, Then the screen goes black for a second, maybe two, and the supposed live shot returns, and with it building 7. You follow?

I’m happy to present the footage I mention, but I’m sure you have a better copy than mine. One has to assume that the anchor has a monitor that shows exactly what’s going on to air, and that Peter Mansbridge surely should have noticed the magical reappearance of building 7. I don’t know what to make of that section of live footage. Any ideas?

Thanks again. But please do explain why you wouldn’t feature a Canadian, central to the work of 9/11 Truth Seekers, in your program. After all, Barrie Zwicker was the first journalist in North America to go on National TV and openly question the official story of 9/11 (Vision TV Jan 2002).


Kelly Reinhardt

I found your program on 9/11 Conspiracy Theories to be a lazy let-down. One side claims, the other side counters, and you investigate nothing.
To my mind, one large elephant in the room is: How could it possibly be that not one photograph or video clip exists of the alleged plane that hit the pentagon? The official story (at least at one point!)had the jet actually circling and then bearing down on its' target and hitting it's target with pinpoint accuracy (as judged by the complete and total annihilation of plane-parts). On a beautiful early September day, with hundreds of tourists among the thousands of others - and not ONE single bit of visual evidence? Uncanny. Surely that is uncanny. Surely that begs explanation.

A.B. Watson

Loved the questions you raised re 9/11 (the 2001 disaster--not the 1973 one where American thugs overthrew Allende in Chile). In the comments, someone wrote that satellite cell phones will work up there in the air. Alas, not in my experience! Hell, they don't even work that well on land, in my experience in emergency work. So, in my view, those stories of cell phone messages smacks to me of a huge governmental conspiracy. Big Oil has the money, the power and the power of persuasion to do all this. They have the media in their pockets and have been brainwashing people for the last 25 years effectively. You should see their slick presentations of 'humane’ offshore drilling on Vancouver Island: minimum damage, they say, and you would not believe how willing people are to swallow such crap!

Big conspriacies are easy to carry out, when most people are sheep.

I'd sure like CBC reporters--the gutsier ones, willing to go against the Fraser Institute and CEO Rabinovitch—to investigate bankruptcy engineering companies like LaPointe Partners (Bill New, John Sullivan, etc.), and the havoc they create for working people all over the planet--and the future disasters they will wreak. The investigators can start with the pulp mill in Port Alice. The situation was investigated by the RCMP in Canada, and the FBI in the States, but as far as I know, only John Sullivan was charged with fraud, and we have not been able to find out how that case is going--stonewalled at every turn.

Employees collectively lost $19 million in lost wages, pensions, RRSPs, union dues, long-term disabled people were ripped off and so forth. One disabled person committed suicide. Many others have died from stress-related and mill gas-caused ailments.

Richard Bassett and his consortium purchased the mill for a buck (as did LaPointe), renaming it Neucel. He insists that he was the only purchaser, but this is not true. Ormand Smith--a former Production Manager/assistant mill manager knows something about this. A fellow named James Kerr also wanted to buy the mill.

The whole operation does not feel right to us old-timer workers. Injuries are mounting. They got rid of the people that know how to run this industrial museum and the newbies are running it wrong, so the company is losing money. Yet they persist allowing these newbies to continue destroying the $40 million plus maintenance done. They keep on running, and running it wrong! You have to ask "why?". (I finally quit, scared that the newcomers were going to blow the place up.)

Please investigate this situation with an open mind, with no preconceived ideas, for there could be more here than mere corporate pirates ransacking a remote village. I think this is part of a larger conspiracy--either money laundering for the well-hidden pot farms around here, and/or the USA has secretly waged a war of world takeover one company and area at a time, and we're too darn dense to see it. Who knows, but Canada could be renamed Hell's Angels North? The Hell's Angels own nearly all the shake and shingle businesses here on Vancouver Island--and a lot of sawmills and logging operations. I suspect that they have infiltrated the IWA (now Steelworkers) union. There have been rumours that the mill here has hired 4 Hell's Angels members.

None of us here know what the hell is going on about the fight for our lost wages and pension. Maybe you can find out.

Susanne Shaw

In response to the negative response of some viewers to the CBC Sunday
"9/11: TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY", especially those who seem to doubt the reality of ANY conspiracies, let alone such a massive conspiracy as what happened on 9-11 and its consequences to society, I would like to suggest some additional reading.

1) Conspiracy to outlaw HEMP by industry - specifically, Hearst Newspapers and DuPont chemicals - this is from ABC News, NY, 11/90, Hugh Downs report: http://www.druglibrary.org/Schaffer/hemp/downs2.htm

2) Operation Northwoods - Conspiracy by the US government in the 60's to attack the US and blame it on Cuba: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662 (titled: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba)
see also, from the National Security Archives: Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba [includes cover memoranda], March 13, 1962, TOP SECRET, 15 pp.

3) Response to Popular Mechanics Assault on Truth:

Not incidentally, Popular Mechanics is a Hearst-owned magazine. See number one above.

These links, I hope, will open some doubter's eyes and perhaps lead them to ask more questions instead of blindly accepting propaganda. We are living in dangerous times and it's the responsibility of each of us to participate in protecting our rights and freedoms. Using our god-given critical thinking skills is as good a place to start as any!

For CBC, I have a comment and a criticism. I appreciate the effort, but as many others have suggested, it didn't go far enough. CBC, under fire from corporate owned mainstream media (Canwest, in particular) has a responsibility to speak for the people of Canada and to inform Canadians about what is REALLY going on in the world today.

I am still waiting for a hard-hitting, informative piece of reporting from the CBC on the pending absorbtion of Canada into the North American Union and the attempt by corporations and the private individuals who run them to take over our country, our continent, and our world and install a defacto corporate dictatorship.

Sheila J

To the producers of Sunday

Thank you for your fair and balanced program on 9/11 and the need to investigate the allegations of wrong-doing by the US administration as a pretext for starting a war in Iraq. While David Ray Griffen wasn't able to answer why the hijackers were mostly Saudi (though over 45% of Americans still think the alleged hijackers were ALL Iraqi, and 50% believe Saddam plotted 9/11 - thanks to FOX news et al)

The identity of the hijackers and IF there were any at all is in question. I saved this article back in September 2001. It made no sense at all, given I wanted to believe the "official theory" about what happened on 9/11.

Similar stories were covered by leading papers in Italy, Germany, France and Egypt in the months following, including live interviews with at least nine of the alleged hijackers. Of course, it would be good if someone could interview one of the alleged hijackers on CBC. What a facinating story that would make asking someone what it feels like to be presumed dead from ramming a plane into the Pentagon or the Twin Towers when you've been busy making a living in Saudi Arabia over the past five years since your alleged suicide mission.

A year later in 2002 Robert Mueller said that the identify of the hijackers could never be knows, after the manifests (?) of the passengers names on the flights produced no names of any hijackers, and no lab reports produced DNA evidence of the hijackers from Saudi Arabia.

Where is Perry Mason when we need him to blow this story out of the water?

Ray McGinnis

I am so angry and embarrassed by the fact that you aired that vile conspiracy 9/11 trash and continue to waste bandwidth on your website on this story that I've ready to hurl vomit the first time I pass a CBC station when I'm channel surfing. And this is my tax dollars at work to spew out this wild-eyed garbage? Unbelievable and I will do everything in my power to convince our government to cut your funding. This is so outrageous - and to top it off, it was on the eve of the worst attack on American soil ever. You make totally embarassed to be a Canadian.

Vern Martin
Kitchener, ON

I was surprised and disappointed to see the lunatic-fringe 9-11 conspiracy theorists given such serious treatment on last Sunday's show. It seems though that any sort of paranoid theories about the US find a receptive audience at the CBC (witness all those BBC docs aired on the mother corp in the last few years).

I wonder why it is that normally rational CBC reporters lose all perspective when it comes to items that paint the Bush administration in a negative light. Quite an appalling lack of judgement in my opinion, especially considering the timing that the show aired.

Anyway, you've succeeded in providing yet more fodder for the right-wing Canada bashers in the US...


Dave Keenleyside

Thank you for taking up the 9/11 truth issue in such a balanced manner. I fully appreciate the courage it must have required from everyone involved.

One small(?) criticism: You missed a golden opportunity to ask Lee Hamilton about the process/criteria employed to omit from his Commission's final report all facts and testimonies--there were many--contradicting the Bush administration's account of 9/11 events. To the best of my knowledge, Messrs Hamilton and Kean have never answered this question. While Mr. Hamilton places the burden of proof (of conspiracy) on the countertheorists, he appears to accept no burden of truth in his service to Americans.

Again, thank you.

David McIntosh

Evan Solomon. Thank you for your objective, even handed report on the 9/11 truth movement. I was in NYC this past weekend and attended "Truth Movement" seminars, as well as visiting Ground Zero along with a couple thousand others who are still seeking truth. Hence I had to download your show. I have photos of truth seeking people all in black t-shirts imploring "investigate 9/11" (among others) if you are interested. These t-shirts were given out along with 1000 dvds by Dylan and Corey et al. I want you to know that you are held in high esteem among the truth movement for being one of the first of the mainstream media to give the truth movement an objective and infomative expose. In the end it's like Dylan says, "don't take my word for it, ask questions and do your own investigating."

Keep up the great work. Shows like this are the reason CBC has such a high credibility factor at home and abroad.


Arnie Hyma
Bowmanville Ont.

I first came across the 9/11 conspiracy theory 3 years ago when there was a scattering of web sites a couple of videos addressing the anomies of that day. My first thoughts were how could anyone doubt the official story as I was home from work that day and watch the whole thing unfold live on television. Instead of passing it by as just a bunch on nut cases I decided to look into what they were saying and seeing if they could be proven wrong. I figured it would be an easy thing to disprove but much to my surprise the more I researched the more anomies arose. It's not what just happened that fateful day that can be argued as in how the towers fell or what hit the pentagon or if cell phones could be used at 30,000 ft. To me that is just another magic bullet in the JFK shooting, either you believe it or you don't. Its everything that lead up to 9/11 and what transpired afterwards that really points to an inside job. From "Able Danger" to the transfer of giving a shoot down order to Cheney from NORAD command, to Silverstien purchase of the lease on the world trade centers and his insurance polices stipulating terrorist attacks. The power down in the trade centers on the weekend prior to 9/11. The fact that there was a major military drill the day of 9/11 as well as on 7/7 in London. Lets not forget about the Anthrax attacks that was traced back to a US lab and no arrest where made. The put options on United and American Airlines. The fake Bin laden tapes which have been proven to be fake time and time again. Then there is the PNAC document, the patriot act, the lies about WMD's. The list goes on and on...

CBC you have opened the door to the truth to which I give my hat off to you. Please explorer these other anomies as I'm sure you have and report your findings to the public. We owe it to our brave men and women in Afghanistan to know the truth as they are putting their lives on the line and I believe we damn well better make sure it is for the right reasons.

Steve Schilstra
Welland Ont.

Whether I take these 911 conspiracies for uncontested truth is not the point. However, what happened on September 11 has some severe incongruencies. I often try to take a pluralist view when I watch the news.

Why exactly was a US lead invasion taken into Afghanistan? None of the "terrorists" including Bin Laden, were/ are Afghans. Am I the only one that realizes this? Don't tell me that Osama was hiding in an Afghan cave, I don't believe it.

In our technological age you cannot hide. I find it highly implausable that these so-called terrorists have eluded seizure. It doesn't make sense.

Let's remember so historical falsehoods: the Wright brothers flew the first plane, Columbus was the first in the Americas, and the world was once flat.

Does it frighten people to reject the staus quo?

Tragically terrorism has seeped into our children's textbooks. I suppose we have to have some war agenda in a world of diminishing sovereignty. How else could us pawns be kept in check? We would have nothing to justify military budgets used to re-inflate our economies.

Only idiots here are shocked. Only idiots point to a man named Geroge Bush. Newsflash: George Bush is a mere facade for the wealthy interests of America, the Fed banking system, banking and corporate magnates... To engage in a debate here is like speaking to children. You all seem to grasping things superficially, and understand nothing at all. Look past the 6 oclock news. History cannot be condensed into an hour program where flagrant connections are linked.

N Lawrence

In Saturday's Toronto Star, Condeleeza Rice is quoted as saying that Afghanistan was a mistake. If she has said this, then why does Stephen Harper want to become more involved in a futile war. Is it any wonder that other NATO allies are not getting involved.

Anthony Chezzi

I loved the show CBC. Please run it again!!

200+ smoking guns....all supported by mainstream media.

Vietnam was investigated 9 times!


Leo Strauss

Your program last week, Sept. 10, on "so-called 9 11 Conspiracy Theorists" was fantanstic.

Bravo for you, for sticking up for what is right, and not letting others intimidate you into keeping quiet. Your interview with Dylan Avery, et. al. and clips of Loose Change resulted in an all out attack on the video on many North American radio programs the next day. Many misconceptions and lies have been, and continue to be, stated about what is believed by those who question the 911 Commission Official report.

"You know you're over the target, when you start taking flak."

Do more! I as a Canadian citizen want you to do more about this subject.

If people cannot be convinced that American government criminals would harm their own people, just do a story on the use of Depleted Uranium weapons (DU). Of the 1,120,000 US soldiers that have served sinced in the Gulf since 1990 - over 180,000 are now DEAD! Under 3000 have been killed in action. These soldiers are dropping like flies, just like the firefighters and police officers (and other rescue workers) from the World Trade Centers.

I suggest you interview "Leuren Moret" nuclear geophysicist and retired US "Major Doug Rokke" who wrote the regs. governing DU clean-up etc, and "Marion Fulk" nuclear scientist from the Manhatten Project for this story.

When asked if DU was a effective weapon, Dr. Fulk stated that it was the perfect way to kill lost of people.

9 11 WAS an inside job. The orchestrators, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield and all their lackies deserve to be tried and thrown in jail for life. Do not let the likes of "Rex Murphy", and advertisers, stop you from speaking the truths and asking the relevant questions.

Thank you Sunday Night News. Great Job.

Mrs Kathy Czar

Please note, we sent a letter to CBC National News about the slanderous behavior/commentary of Rex Murphy. We wish to now continue this and file a complaint with the CRTC. Here is a copy of our letter to the National. We need a transcript of his commentary.

September 13, 2006

The National

RE: Rex Murphy’s “Two Minute Hate”

Rex Murphy was caught flat-footed after the CBC Sunday News conducted an intense investigation into the 9-11 Truth Movement and the “so-called conspiracy theorists”. Rex Murphy’s hateful behavior was prejudicial and unprofessional. His commentary was dominated by his attack against the messengers behind the 9-11 Truth Movement, who are seeking a new investigation.

Murphy’s “Two Minute Hate”, right out of Orwell’s novel “1984”, wasn’t about who’s right or who’s wrong. His purpose was to label all 9-11 conspiracy theorists as “thought criminals”.

After voicing his naive disbelief, that criminals could exist within the American government capable of harming their own citizens, he made his opinion clear - If anyone speaks up about questions surrounding 9-11, they must be labeled a conspiracy nut and/or terrorist. He echoed the same totalitarian views recently voiced by American media where-in they suggested any 9-11 dissent be outlawed.

In a parrot-like diatribe, he quoted several hateful misconceptions against an identifiable group of people. Unable to deal with facts which have since come forth, he attacked the credibility, background, beliefs and intelligence of American citizens who have formed groups like the American Scholars for 9 11 Truth.

He used his position of power at CBC to carry his hateful message to the public; thereby attempting to intimidate people from examining the discrepancies and questions being asked by 42% of the USA population and many millions around the world.

Leslie and Kathy Czar
Hanna, AB Canada

Regarding 9/11, your Evan Solomon on August 21, 2006 interviewed Lee Hamilton (9/11 Commission) and on September 1, 2006 interviewed Jim Meigs (Poplular Mechanics). During both interviews Evan asked them about the information contained in this email, and both times they could not answer because they had not heard about it. That's because it is new. I only discovered this information July 24, 2006. These are simple yet powerful facts that have yet to be refuted. The intellectually dishonest can only ignore them as they have no answer. That's because facts are facts (no theory here). You be the judge.
Below is the new, updated version 2. Thanks.


Plane Impacts – Indicting New Evidence of 9/11 Complicity and Coverup

On September 11, 2001, the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory seismic stations grouped around New York City reported 2 seismic events for the airplanes “impacting” into the World Trade Center Twin Towers. However, these seismic events were not impacts because the airplanes did not hit the Towers until later per the 9/11 Commission Final Report. The 2 seismic events were actually EXPLOSIONS before the planes crashed!

The explosions were experienced by 37 people in the sub-basement structure of 1 World Trade BEFORE THE PLANE HIT THE BUILDING, and damage from these pre-impact explosions was seen and verified by firefighters that morning.


American Airlines Flight 11
Lamont-Doherty seismic time = 8:46:26
9/11 Commission Report time = 8:46:40
[14 seconds difference]

United Airlines Flight 175
Lamont-Doherty seismic time = 9:02:54
9/11 Commission Report time = 9:03:11
[17 seconds difference]

For the complete report:
“Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II)”
By Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Members, Scholars for 9/11 Truth) [Link]

Craig Furlong

This is in light of your recent coverage of the conspiracy of the official story of 9/11.

Firsly, I applaud for you opening the topic and beginning the process of dialogue. However, it is imperative that you do not stop with your coverage of this subject. There are far too many questions left unaswered and many answers that involve a more specific degree of explanation.

Can you please, please provide a forum (with internet polls) to further discuss the matter? Involve Canadians, because we need a large frum to discuss these issues.

This is the largest story of our time. And only reputable media sources such as the CBC will be able to break the story.

Thank you for your time.

Joshua Ari

Congrats to Evan Solomon for doing the story on the 9/11 truth movement. I found the story to be quite fair and not as biased as I expected. Even Lee Hamiltion admitted they didn't have all the answers. The guy from Popular Mechanics claimed to have all the answers but a little history on the magazine and it's editor points to a close relationship with the government. The guys from Loose Change don't admit they are promoting facts but simply promoting people to ask questions. Flight 93 for example in my opinion was shot down because wreckage was found over 8 miles from the crash site. If the plane fell straight in to the ground wreckage would never have spread that far. The cell phone calls is also a big question. 6 days ago I returned from PEI to Winnipeg and (clandestinely) attempted to make a cell phone call on 8 separate occasions. Not once did I get a signal. As for the Pentagon, I'm on the fence as to what happened but am curious why none of 85 videos taken by survelliance cameras within 1/2 mile of the Pentagon have been released. We've been shown 5 frames from a parking lot that show nothing. The big smoking gun is the collapse of the towers combined with the failure of NORAD and the FAA. I have 2 documentaries I'd like to suggest to you that are far better than Loose Change. "911 Press For Truth" tackles the governement failure and "911 Mysteries" shows the collapses in tremendous detail.

thanks again for your outstanding work.

andy dreger


As conspiracy theories go, the official story wins the prize. I am very grateful that you examined the 911 situation, but the piece would have been stronger if the moral characters of the players involved had been investigated. How can an audience choose who to believe if they have no prior knowledge ofthe trustworthyness of the participants. One good question to start with would be who has the greatest track record of lying to the public? A short analyses of the beginning of the Spanish American war, the attack at Pearl Harbour, the assisination of JFK, the incubater babies in Kuwait, the wmd's of Iraq etc. etc. It appears that their is little reason to believe any "official" story originating in the US. Another question that would have been good to ask is: Who benifited from Sept. 11th. Islamic Jihadists, the American Government, or people with dead relatives and families who want a real investigation and their fellow citizens who want answers? Perhaps the first, most efinently the second, and the third? Well I can't see them getting any benifit from commiting or lying about this act of murder.

Keith Williams

re: INTERVIEW: JIM MEIGS September 1, 2006

Soloman did a reasonable job asking questions; Meigs did a poor job answering them.

Are you going to interview someone from the other side now?
Absolutely necessary for balance. Get David Ray Griffin.

There's photographic evidence that the hole in the Pentagon was only 15-18 feet wide, not 90 feet as claimed by Meigs.

The question as to what hit the Pentagon could have been settled 5 years ago. The gas station across the street had a video camera trained in that direction. The FBI confiscated the video within minutes of the crash despite claiming that nobody had any idea a plane was headed that way.

Why did the U.S. Government refuse to allow any examination of the WTC debris and ship it out of the country immediately? Examination of the debris would have revealed categorically whether there was a controlled demolition or not.

Why did Larry Silverstein confess on camera to a controlled demolition of WTC7?

Why was there such a large amount of unusual activity in the buildings in the weeks preceding 9/11?

The list goes on and on. Literally dozens of points not covered in the Solomon interview, although I give him high marks for trying. He obviously did some research unlike so many others who are lazy or only want to parrot the official conspiracy theory, for which even Robert Mueller says there is no evidence that would stand up in a court of law.


Your report on the 9/11 truth, lies and conspiracy theories seemed fair and balanced. You did however drop the ball when explaining the collapse of the towers. In the interest of educating your viewers, a side by side comparison of a building pulled by implosion would clearly show that squibs are in fact a part of the process. In the interest of fairness to the CBC, thirty one minutes is by no means enough time to explain in any detail the full scope of 9/11. The media in the United States is only starting to view and explore with any depth the questions that should have been asked five years ago. On the day of the attacks there are documented anomalies captured on video from the various media outlets that no one has even begun to investigate. After the strike on the second tower an unmarked helicopter is clearly visible flying out from behind tower one and an unmarked white jet, captured by CNN is seen flying in restricted airspace moments after the hit. Another unmarked white jet was also captured on video flying over Washington D.C in restricted air space moments after the Pentagon was struck. The claim that popular mechanics makes of an aluminum jet penetrating three walls of seven foot thick concrete defies all laws of physics. Look at any airplane crash site minor or major involving a jumbo jet. As you will clearly see the nose section breaks off relatively easy. As for the claim by the NIST on the collapse of the world trade centers, for their theory to actually have a premise, they changed the data in the models until a formula that supported the official government explanation was found. Nova, a program on PBS attempted to duplicate the findings of the NIST and could only do so once the forty interior columns were removed. Video evidence from ground zero clearly shows the interior columns with slag tailings. This may only be accomplished with the use of a substance designed to cut through steel at extreme temperatures. The families of 9/11 need justice and answers; the government of the United States has evidently refused to launch an in-depth investigation. In January of 2005, the United States army revised the civilian inmate labor program, in conjunction with a contract awarded to KBR for the construction of detention camps throughout the United States of America. This is a very chilling development. Why is this not reported by the “main stream media” in the United States? I am not someone who looks for conspiracy at every turn, but the actions of the current administration and the Patriot act, indeed are circumventing the Constitution. This should be troublesome to Canadians.

Neil Purfield

Re: Your Interview of Lee Hamilton on August 21/06

Thank you for interviewing the Co-chair of the 9-11 Commission; it was very informative. I'd like to offer the following critique of Mr. Hamilton's responses to interviewer Mr. Solomon's pertinent questions:

As a doubter of the official story of 9/11, I would be, of course, labelled as a conspiracy nut in an effort to discredit my points. It appears that when the US administration can't fault the evidence, they attempt to discredit the source. But here goes:

Hamilton's responses angered me. Canadian soldiers are killing and being killed because the US administration persuaded us to go to Afghanistan, based upon the official 9/11 story, which is apparently composed of high level lies.

Mr. Hamilton's responses to the toughest questions (posed by Solomon and researched by many US scientists and intellectuals) seems as lame as his whitewash report. Among his excuses for not investigating certain compelling problems with the offical story included, to paraphrase:

"It wasn't in our mandate."

"We didn't have time or staff or enough money."

"We can't answer every question."

"Give me the evidence."

"those people are anti-Bush or anti-government."

"We are not the experts..."

"I don't know."

Many of the most pertinent questions, he refrained from responding to at all, slipping by them slickly.

Surely the murder of 3000 people, including some Canadians, would justify more due diligence.

Some of what he does tell is enlightening, however.

"We were set up to fail" see the 1-year time limit, the $15 million budget.

"Bush and Cheney refused to testify".

"They were afraid we were out to hang someone."

"the FAA and Norad gave us inaccurate information."

"access [to relevant testimony] was an issue right till the end."

Mr. Hamilton's discussion raises more questions than it answers. With all the glaring, unanswered questions, (including, Why was the inquiry so absurdly restricted, financially, legally, and temporally ?), how is it that the most intriguing "unsolved mystery" Hamilton can think of is the motive of the famous "19 Hijackers" ?

This comment illustrates Hamilton's bias of going into the inquiry without an open mind. He had already decided that the offical story was sacrosanct and all he was doing was....what ? he appears unwilling to offend anyone, accuse anyone, even of negligence.

I guess some hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest. Hamilton apparently interpreted his job as to simply confirm the official story and label naysayers as kooks. This despite his co-chair's opening remarks as the commission's mandate:

"...we are charged with giving the American public a full accounting of the events of September 11th..."

All sorts of researchers, scientist and layman alike have provided a plethora of evidence to the international community. Hamilton only had to open his mind and eyes to see it.

If indeed, the American administration was complicit in these attacks, they could not have picked a better politician to slip it under the rug. At best, Hamilton has "cherry-picked" the evidence he wants to hear to avoid controversy. (I've seen individual murder trials with more controversy.) At worst, he is part of the problem and should be charged with obstruction of justice, in the murder of 3000 people.

Bob Gillis


Thank you for finally bringing these questions about 9/11 to the public in an informed and critical way that does not resort to name calling and nonsense. However, I hope that this is the beginning and not the end of an investigation into the facts.

I cannot urge you strongly enough:

Do an investigation into the work of Steven E. Jones and his paper “Why indeed did the WTC towers completely collapse” and present it to the public. To anyone with critical reasoning skills this is the most damning evidence yet that 9/11 was an inside job. I have read it and support its conclusions.

To believe the official story is true you have to believe that the laws of physics were not followed on 9/11.

Somehow a structure which had been standing for about 30 years suddenly can not support its own weight somehow miraculously falls in on itself and at the speed of gravity.

Somehow the towers [and WTC 7] were the first and only steel framed structures in history to completely collapse due to fire.

Somehow this rate of collapse would not be slowed down from the supporting structure, thus contradicting a law of physics known as the “Law of Conservation of momentum”.

Somehow you have to believe with your own two eyes that somehow the building is falling faster than the material shooting out from it at apparently faster than the speed of gravity. This can only be explained by the use of explosives.

You have to ignore the fact that multiple explosions were reported by firefighters, eye-witnesses and media reports that are part of the public record including an explosion in the basement before the first plane hit [see William Rodriquez’s testimony which is discussed in the paper by Steven Jones].

You have to believe that evaporated [!!] steel was somehow “caused” by jet fuel [or any other normal fire] despite the fact that this is scientifically impossible. This steel was found in the basement of WTC7 which was not hit by a plane as well as WTC 1 and 2 [and is in the official reports!]. Explosives can reach the temperature needed to evaporate steel.

In the basements of all the buildings is molten steel with evidence of sulfidation which simply can not be caused or explained by normal fires. It can be explained by a known controlled demolition explosive.

To believe all these things can be caused only by fire and damage alone is to defy common sense. What needs to happen is that people are made aware of these facts so that the truth can come out whatever that may be.

On top all of this you have the physical evidence that Prof. Steven Jones has accumulated that just happens to prove that controlled demolition explosives were used. This evidence is astounding and yet the US Media is largely ignoring it. To me this is disturbing and shocking.

Please, I urge you to investigate these claims for yourself and present them to the public.

Scholars for 9/11 truth where you can view the paper by Prof. Steven Jones:

Concerned Canadian citizen,
Brad Stark

Evan, Great interview about 911 conspiracy theories. I only read the transcripts, sadly missed the interview.

It's amazing how simple facts are simply ignored, and exchanged for rediculous "official claims".

I tried searching for news Items on 3 separate US news websites relating to loosechange911.com and there was not a single match. I tried our CBC site, and found your excellant interview.

Yourself and Carol are the most talented interviewers on TV, and you had real guts to tackle these issues.

Rutherford of 630CHED radio refuses to even watch loosechange911.com, and without watching, debunks it. Sad.

Strombo's pretty good too, but you guys appeal to the mainstream, and that's very important.

Great job,

Mark Meincke

I have one comment for all the people fighting about what really happend or the "truth" of 911. So far I have seen more video and factual evidence supporting the alligation that 9/11 was by the American government, where is the American government's explanation, proof, or information? It's what? "Classified"? Fuck that we all the right to know the truth, if they are not involved why is everything classified, why is all the stuff the American government released to the public circumstantial? And all these controversial documentaries against the American government have the right to continue doing what they are doing, if its bullshit its no different then the rest of the bullshit movies out there, only difference is they are probing for answers, while America is focused on rebuilding, hiding the evidence, and starting a war that is ultimately going to have no good outcome. All I can say to the American government or the rest of you ignorant bastards is prove us wrong, because all the evidence is pointing to you. Good day

Mike Girden

I would just like to comment on the CBC Sunday program of September 10, 2006 about 9/11.

I have been asking myself why would the US Government go to so much trouble to kill thousands of its own people? The concept of even the US Government doing such a thing is a proposal that is hard to believe.

However, I am now asking a new question. On the page about the documnetary, "9/11: TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACY"...

"According to a new poll, one out of six Londoners has changed seats on the bus or subway to avoid people who look like they might be Muslim."

The main reason I can think of for the US to perform such an act upon its own people is to create a brand new enemy. With the cold war over, the US Government needs a new enemy to keep the people in line. Although the above quote refers to people in the UK avoiding people they believe to be muslim, I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing is happening in the USA.

I also believe that if this is indeed true and that the US Government was behind Sept 11th, its real purpose is probably even more sinister that the actual events of Sept 11th itself!

Moncton, NB

I have e-mailed you some time ago and never received a responce. It was about 911. I would like to know why no-one [reporters] are not following the money trail, what happened to the billions of dollars at the trade centre? And what about the Saudi's taking that over months before? This does seem like a conspiracey, something is not right.


I live in Santa Barbara Ca. Everyone I know has reached the same Conclusion. "9-11 was DEFINATELY an INSIDE JOB". I have been investigating 9-11 since the day it happened. I soon realized that the Governments "Official Story" was the most bizarre Conspiracy "Theory" ever told. I immediately began spreading the TRUTH. I burned over a thousand videos(especially Loose Change) and gave copies to anyone who would listen to the facts. To my amazement, the videos became the #1 topic. Everyone I talked to was researching for themselves. I have had hundreds of people thank me for Waking them up to reality. People ask me what they can do to help. I always tell them that once you understand the facts, its your mission to help teach EVERYONE. We all have a voice. We must all speak the TRUTH no matter how sad it is. If everyone would put some time aside to research the facts and teach the people you love, then maybe the World could Unite in the sake of TRUTH. Everyone must "WAKE UP" to the Governments LIES and Dark Secrets before they lead us all to the War of ARMAGEDDON. Once you have found the truth of 9-11, then find out about our Governments Darkest Secret... "Bohemian Grove". Its up to all of us to Save the World from this evil. If you are a Warrior of GOD, then its time to prove it.



CBC-TV MAIN | All external sites will open in a new browser

Jobs | Contact Us | Permissions | Help | RSS | Advertise
Terms of Use | Privacy | Ombudsman | Other Policies
Copyright © CBC 2006

Traces of Missing Women is an ongoing video project dedicated to gathering and sharing the stories of Canada's missing and murdered Native women.

See more web features