Under the guise of telling us everything we needed to know, NBC television coverage on 9/11 withheld and suppressed vital information; specifically, that all the Boeing planes-in-question can fly, navigate, and even land themselves without anyone at all in the cockpit (source).Oops.
So, how is that important?
It does not change what actually happened on 9/11, but it changes our view of how 9/11 was reported and perceived, and thus what we think actually happened: the networks kept a certain possibility from ever entering our minds while, at the same time, painting for us in our minds a picture of "the evildoers" we were supposed to fear and loathe for an unimaginably horrible crime which was being drilled into our heads. The combination of not having been informed of any other possibility plus our (once-)trusted network reporters telling us "who dunnit" and how, under very stressful, emotional circumstances, made "the hijackers" seem totally real, making belief in them seem not only reasonable but certainly true beyond any reasonable doubt.
Yet we still, to this day, have no hard evidence to substantiate the government+media's legend of "evil suicidal Muslim hijackers". Their supposed existence had become established without any proof, by and in the media. The belief in "Muslim hijackers" is based upon a mass perception and some very flimsy evidence, plus some clearly fraudulent evidence. On the other hand we have plenty of indications that 9/11 was not, and could not have been, perpetrated by "Muslim hijackers". So you can see how important it was to have gotten out in front and generate a faultily-built mass certitude about "Muslim hijackers" (which has since then been reinforced by Hollywood and the TV networks), like a kind of flat-earth disease -- what "everybody knows" must be true, right?
But there is more evidence on this 1 web site that the mass perception regarding who perpetrated 9/11 is based upon unsound logic, than exists anywhere, in total, in support of the widespread but mistaken belief that "19 Muslim hijackers" can be blamed for what happened on 9/11.
That's some powerful gatekeeping! By excluding one possibility, another possibility had become an unquestionable unshakable solid truth in the minds of tens of millions of people, just like that. And since that possibility had then become the object of much cogitation, and so much emotion, how could it possibly not be real?
Is this an example of gatekeeping that is so powerful that its effect can be considered permanent in the minds of many people? Have the emotions resulting from the horrific lies caused some people's brains to become etched so deeply that, for them, contrary thoughts are no longer even possible?
Do you suppose Robert Hagar intentionally deceived his audience, or had he just been taken in by the horrendous surrealism of the story he was covering? And what about Jim Tillman, and that Neil Livingstone?