They didn't mention this, or this, or this, or this, or this, or this, or this.

I wonder why? And people don't seem to understand what my problem is.

seems obvious just from the trailer this is another wack hit job, not a serious examination of 9/11. As Jon pointed out, there's a wealth of material, just surrounding the families' efforts to have 9/11 properly investigated, that the OCT is false, that there's been a cover up and that some sort of 'inside job' is the most likely explanation- CBC is apparently not attempting to debunk this, just ignoring it.

Instead of acknowledging the families who were the reason there was even a 9/11 Commission, the producers have mixed questions about the WTC destructions with discredited theories that most 9/11 skeptics don't accept. Polls show that half or more people have questions about 9/11 and support an investigation- questions about 'what' hit the Pentagon and the phone calls are not high on most people's lists, period- but the CBC is pretending they are.

I hope they presented the best evidence of controlled demolition, but considering the trailer shows the show overall is a disingenuous treatment, it doesn't seem likely. Can someone post the audio of the agreement that was recorded by AE911truth.org?

The families asked questions about controlled demolition. The Commission Report presented bogus explanations of the Tower's structure and 'collapse' that relied on NIST/FEMA's info, and omitted mention of WTC 7's total destruction. The NIST reports have been shown to be dishonest. There have been no responses to the evidence published in refereed, peer-reviewed journals- and that despite the wide coverage they've received on the web. I think the evidence of controlled demolition needs to be investigated- it's part of 9/11. But it's pretty telling that MSM focus on that and discredited theories, while ignoring the ignored warnings, obstructed investigations, war games, air defense failures, insider trading, lies and changing stories and the families' struggle for answers, PNAC and the way 9/11 was exploited by and served to benefit the Bush Administration and the MIC. imho, CD evidence is only one part of the big picture.

Most people still get their news/views/info from the TV, but considering that the people who watch this show are unlikely to meet real people raising their fictional representation of 'truthers' questions, it seems likely that any members of their audience with common sense are going to realize this is simply a wack hit job. That MSM are doing wack hit jobs instead of serious investigative journalism raises additional questions about the extent of the cover up and collusion of the media, and will drive more people to use the web and think critically about the info the Establishment puts out.

http://911reports.com
http://www.historycommons.org

I think, need to meet someone "raising their fictional representation of 'truthers' questions" in order to see that it is a "wack hit job." A lot of people still believe that televisions don't lie. That's why I think it's important to have a method of approaching people that LEAST makes us look as the "wack hit jobs" make us look. That's one of the reasons I focus on so many things the media does not. If they are using a consistent PR Campaign against us, in my opinion, it is in our best interests to counter that with a better PR strategy.

is that many smart people working on them recognize the con they are involved in.

"it seems likely that any members of their audience with common sense are going to realize this is simply a wack hit job. That MSM are doing wack hit jobs instead of serious investigative journalism raises additional questions about the extent of the cover up and collusion of the media, and will drive more people to use the web and think critically about the info the Establishment puts out."

Let's hope so. Remember the median IQ is 100.

I implore you to cite those on their comment page for tonight's program.

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/discussion/2009/11/the_unofficial_story.html#258...