Big story on 9/11 truth movement in New York Magazine

[paulthompson]

This just came out today.

The Ground Zero Grassy Knoll

A new generation of conspiracy theorists is at work on a secret history of New York’s most terrible day.
By Mark Jacobson
New York Magazine

http://www.newyorkmetro.com/news/features/16464/index.html

I haven't had a chance to read it yet. I did search for my name since I'd been interviewed at length for it and found I was reduced to a two sentence mention. D'oh! I guess I'm not controversial or weird or New York enough or something. ;)

By the way, don't use the print view, it doesn't show the whole thing.

If nothing else, it's a very lengthy and comprehensive feature article.

Anyone want to try posting it at Latest Breaking News and see how long it last there? ;)

By the way, Nick, looks like you're lumped in with Nico again - you're only a couple of paragraphs apart in this story. The fates just seem to keep bringing you two together. ;)

[Loose Nuke]

1. "There's no such thing as bad publicity"

So much relevant info mixed in with nutty sounding stuff. The buzz is getting louder, the MSM can't stop talking about people talking about 9/11. You are weird and controversial, Paul, so it must be you're not NY enuf ; )

Catch all the mainstream 9/11 truth/conspiracy coverage at http://www.911truth.org/index.php?topic=media

[reprehensor]

4. You're right.

But it is a hit piece.

However, you never know what bit of information will make someone go... WTF!

[medienanalyse]

2. you offer too much information, Paul

so you are reduced.

Conspiravy theories are nicely documented. Not information. They should have concentrated on your theory about the Saudi perpetrators - but you did not work it out yet. Or were it Pakistanis ? :-)))

Be proud.

[JackieO]

3. big chance to discuss 9/11 outside of the dungeon:

you can even recommend it :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x198145

[Kevin Fenton]

5. It's pretty good

There's a bit of the "look at those wierd conspiracy theorists" about it, but he does make an attempt to sort the wheat from the chaff, panning Nico Haupt and mildly coming out in support of the demolition of 7:

"Hours later, I sat down beside another, impossibly weary firefighter. Covered with dust, he was drinking a bottle of Poland Spring water. Half his squad was missing. They’d gone into the South Tower and never come out. Then, almost as a non sequitur, the fireman indicated the building in front of us, maybe 400 yards away.

“That building is coming down,” he said with a drained casualness.

“Really?” I asked. At 47 stories, it would be a skyscraper in most cities, centerpiece of the horizon. But in New York, it was nothing but a nondescript box with fire coming out of the windows. “When?”

“Tonight . . . Maybe tomorrow morning.”

This was around 5:15 p.m. I know because five minutes later, at 5:20, the building, 7 World Trade Center, crumbled.

“Shit!” I screamed, unsure which way to run, because who knows which way these things fall. As it turned out, I wasn’t in any danger, since 7 WTC appeared to drop straight down. I still have dreams about the moment. Even then, the event is oddly undramatic, just a building falling.

[petgoat]

6. not bad

These alone were worth reading the whole thing.

"Sitting with a fireman , Morales called out, “If I had somebody in this mess, I’d wanna get those motherfuckers.” It was then, Morales says, that the fireman whispered, “Hey, that’s not it. You wanna know something? Bush and bin Laden have the same banker.”

Lorie Van Auken: “At first, we widows didn’t want to be seen with conspiracy people. But they kept showing up. They cared more than those supposedly doing the investigating. If you ask me, they’re just Americans, looking for the truth, which is supposed to be our right.”

[Bushwick Bill]

7. I agree.

It is a pretty fair introduction to the issues, and while the crazier aspects may not deserve attention, I think it helps put people who want to investigate this on alert as to the differing theories out there. I would like to have seen some mention of how General Ahmad, Sibel Edmonds, Indira Singh, and Able Danger fit in the picture.

[JackRiddler]

8. au contraire...

(Nick here.) I'm quite happy with the story. Well, I'm happy with the 60-70 percent of it that actually relates to 9/11 or the truth movement, as opposed to Da Vinci Code and How to Fold a 20 Dollar Bill. A friend of mine may have, ahem, had occasion to talk with the author at some length, and successfully convince him of the importance of certain points.

And when you read the part that also mentions Nico, you'll see that we are not at all lumped together.

NOW ARCHIVED WITH COMMENT AT:
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060320164312944

What may be the best coverage ever for the 9/11 truth movement in a US corporate medium was published as a feature story by Mark Jacobson in the current issue of New York magazine. Jacobson (or his editor) wrap the subject in the familiar defusing language: "Conspiracy theorists run amok... Ground Zero grassy knoll... wild-eyed nuts..." But this is not the usual attack piece. The 8,000-word article fairly summarizes several key arguments underlying 9/11 skepticism, with a bit of extraneous apocrypha tossed in, apparently for color. More significant surely is the inclusion of a dozen books and web sites by name, including this one. (One current and one former regional 911Truth.org director figure in the piece.)

Jacobson describes his own Ground Zero experience, of being warned on the evening of Sept. 11 that WTC 7 was about to fall, seeing it collapse, and still dreaming about it to this day. NIST head investigator Shyam Sunder is forced to admit to Jacobson that he cannot account for the collapse of Seven.

Jacobson provides details of a lecture by Webster Tarpley to 200 people in Manhattan (as part of a weekly series held nearly every Sunday at St. Mark's Church). He quotes September 11th relative Monica Gabrielle on her realization about the much-disparaged "conspiracy theorists." "They cared more than those supposedly doing the investigating," Gabrielle says. "If you ask me they’re just Americans, looking for the truth, which is supposed to be our right."

Lest you forget, New Yorkers are exercising their right to demand truth at Ground Zero and the offices of Eliot Spitzer, starting at high noon this Wednesday. If you're anywhere nearby, we hope to see you there. (nl)

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060320164312944

[paulthompson]

9. Yup

I generally agree with that assessment. If people want hit pieces, compared to most others this is a walk in the park. This here below is quite possibly my favorite hit piece, just for the sheer chutzpah of lumping space aliens in with concerns about the role of Middle East oil influencing US politics:

Aliens blamed for September 11 by conspiracy fans

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/09/05/wloon05.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/09/05/ixworld.html

Though this one is probably even more amusing:

The Unbelievers

The Swiss. The CIA. Israelis. Big Oil. The Antichrist, even. With Sept. 11, the politically paranoid hit the jackpot. But many of their conspiracy theories are chilling, even dangerous, and they're catching on fast

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/ottawacitizen090102.html

And I was just joking about the Nico thing. :)

[HamdenRice]

10. Congratulations to Paul -- the "undisputed gold standard"

:toast:

It may be only a short reference, but the article calls your work the "undisputed gold standard for Truth research". We all owe you a huge debt of gratitude for your work!