Several weeks later than expected, the BBC's take on 9/11 conspiracies has finally limped onto our screens.
The first point to make is that although produced by the BBC, this was very much a programme about the US - no European voices - either in favour or against the 9/11 Commission were to be heard. Indeed the tone was arguably set by the fact that after the narrator one of the first voices heard was the booming drawl of Texas snake oil salesman Alex Jones.
If anything the BBC understated the size of the 9/11 industry, concentrating only on several of the bigger names out there - Jones, Jim Fetzer of 9/11 Scholars for Truth and Dylan Avery of Loose Change fame. Other voices - and some of the zanier theories - did not get much of a look in. Of those interviewed Fetzer was a classic example of the American who could not accept that his mighty country could be humbled by a small group of hijackers - Osama Bin Laden lives in a cave, it just could not be!
Several of the key issues to 9/11 "Truth activists" were debated - the attack on the Pentagon, the collapse of WTC 7 and the fate of the fourth plane, Flight 93. Anyone who has tried to debunk some of the dafter 9/11 theories will have some sympathy for the Indiana academic who expressed his shock at the abuse received when he published his findings into the Pentagon attack. We know how he feels! The dangers of web based research were suggested by the anomalies concerning Flight 93 wreckage - many "researchers" had calculated the mileage from crash site to debris by road mileage, using the Internet, not how the crow flies. Some people really do need to get out more beyond their computer screens.
Rather inaccurately the BBC traced the birth of the conspiracy theory back to 1963 and the Dallas
assasination of President Kennedy. In fact conspiracy theories go back centuries. When listening to the explanations of some of the anti-semitic myths that have grown up since 9/11, it is easy to recall that (to take just one example) anti-semitic myths have a depressingly longer history than 40 years. Countless others could be added.
Due to the safe old image of the BBC, the need to reach a nice fluffy middle of the road conclusion was hardly a surprise. Yes there was a conspiracy, but it was of the arse-covering, don't question Capitol Hill variety. Perhaps so - but also being the BBC no hard questions were raised about some of the biggest 9/11 issues. Not what did the Americans knew before hand - what did Saudi Arabia know? What did Pakistan know?
Such questions are not on the BBC's radar. Here they cannot claim ignorance - Senator Bob Graham from the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 was interviewed. Graham has expressed his considerable frustrations at the lack of a desire in Washington to look into the behaviour of Saudi Arabia, but you would never have got that impression from this documentary.
Such questions are on our radar, as they should be for any serious researchers. For the BBC, taking on the likes of Alex Jones using taxpayers money is one thing. Messing with the Saudi's is clearly quite another.....