is that that most of them have learned from their editors that this is nothing that will get any coverage in print or broadcast, and that there have long been hints from their editors that 9/11 truth is to be taken as forbidden territory, and for a journalist to even show interest in the subject disserves one's career. (Bear in mind that, a little like show business, journalism is a very competitive line of work, and there are plenty of qualified applicants for those positions just waiting in the wings.)

Those are the lowlier reporters I'm talking about, mostly for local news outlets. The big shots of journalism -- the ones who appear on air for the BBC, for example, or European correspondents for The New York Times, are mostly directly working for the CIA, or for the closely allied Her Majesty's Secret Service, or at minimum have gotten to where they are in considerable part because they cheerfully submit to and comply with the expectations, both explicit and implicit, of their superiors. Part of why they're so successful in the competitive world of journalism is because they have a knack for knowing exactly what their superiors expect, even when it would be too embarrassing for their superiors to spell it all out in great detail. To put a negative spin on that, you might say they're great suck-ups to power.

An example of an extremely transparent suck-up to power in the PBS interviewer Charlie Rose. There are countless suck-ups to power in the news business, but generally the successful ones are clever enough to not be patently obvious even to the casual viewer. But Rose gleefully revels in being a suck-up. I have no idea whether the CIA pays Rose for his services, but if it does it's wasting its money, because Rose clearly would delighted to do Project Mockingbird's bidding for free because it's his calling in life to bask in the glow of Establishment power.

Allans2K7,
the video we saw was in fact subtitles and narrated in English, so no worries. Not sure when the DVD will be availble though.
Chiesa and his crew are still working on that.

The unanimity of the European media blackout speaks volumes. Even if 9/11 revisionism was obviously wrong and nutty (which those of us who've spent much time looking into the matter know it obviously isn't), the very fact that some EU parliamentarians were staging this event in the Parliament building would in of itself be newsworthy. If you have enough nuttiness in a grand enough venue, that's newsworthy.

If, say, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair became schizophrenic and insisted he was Napoleon and ended up straightjacketed away in an insane asylum, of course the MSM would trip over itself covering this. They wouldn't think, "Oh, this is just crazy stuff. We shouldn't waste our journalists' time and take up MSM space reporting about it, because it's not about sensible matters."