Village Voice Blog Covers 9/11 Skeptics and Others at Ground Zero on 5th Anniversary

(Photograph by Sarah Ferguson)

Conspiracy Types Lecture Regular Folks at Ground Zero - The Village Voice: Power Plays

The fifth anniversary of 9-11 brought more sorrow and anguish to New York, but also more questioning of the official narrative of the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Hundreds of 9-11 conspiracists paraded across the street from ground zero Monday with their brazen signs—"9-11 WAS A U.S. BLACK OP"—during the solemn reading of the names of the 2,749 who perished in the twin towers. A surprising many people stopped to listen and seriously consider the "proof" offered by members of the so-called 9-11 truth movement, who spent the day lecturing people about how the towers were felled by explosives.
"Well, I do have questions," remarked one woman who came by on her lunch hour. "Like how were these hijackers who could barely fly a Cessna supposed to have piloted big planes into these buildings?"

A manic guy with bleach-blond hair seized on that to launch a rant about the maximum flame temperature of jet fuel and the physics of molten steel, dismissing recent efforts by the U.S. State Department and the National Institute of Standards and Technology to counter such rampant, freeform "expertise" as yet more "propaganda."

"Idiots!" shrieked a man overhearing him. "You guys probably believe Elvis is still alive."

But if people have doubts about what happened, it shouldn’t be surprising considering the lengths the Bush administration has gone to manipulate 9-11 and distort pre-war intelligence to justify the war in Iraq. And when people needed clear information about the air quality downtown, the feds instead gave them false assurances.

Thanks OWN the NWO for the heads up!

good job guys!

good job guys!

the article comes off as a

the article comes off as a pretty bad attack article, but then i realized it is against everyone who was there to protest, altho 9/11 skeptics definately got the brunt.

Even negative articles are good


- It makes to press less afraid to talk about it
- It won't jarr newbies when you tell them about it
- A few might legitimately be interested
- You can always explain that there are nonsencical theories and hard to disprove theories. This is always a good disclaimer to start with so that they don't get you with a 'NO PLANES' later on

Negative articles can turn people away for good, but only in a few cases.


just noticed that the

just noticed that the emporer is standing behind the guy holding the sign.. ;)

LOL... Rise! "There's a



"There's a shadow on the faces of the men who send the guns to the wars that are fought in places where their business interest runs."

Dutch 9/11 truth news article

This is the most radical, outspoken article in the mainstream press anywhere in the western world. It's revolutionary, and it's predominantly MIHOP.
This newspaper is what God knows how many read on the train, the subway and at work. This is the most widely circulated paper in The Netherlands. We're really taking the lead now with Zembla's recent documentary exposing the official version as nonsense, the newly formed political party with its main point being 9/11 truth, and now this.
A genuine breakthrough, and hats off to Metro for that. Another confirmation that the intellectual prisonhouse that is the 9/11 myth is indeed disintegrating. Now it's time to step up and step in.

Translation from the article:
(thanks to Daniel on LC forum)

5 years after 9/11 the mystery is not solved

Pamela Hemelrijk/Metro

"For the government and the greater part of the press it's a done deal: the Twin Towers collapsed due to fire, the perpetrators were 19 suicide terrorists toting box cutters and the brain behind the attacks was Bin Laden.

Yet in the real world the last on 9/11 hasn't been spoken by a long shot: the call for a reopening of the investigation is getting louder and louder. Tens of bestsellers, thousands of websites, and an immeasurable number of experts claim that the official story makes no sense at all. They want answers to their questions. Those answers haven't been forthcoming.
Five delicate questions about 9/11:

1. Did the Twin Towers indeed collapse due to fire?

Not very plausible; never in history has a steel-framed building collapsed due to fire. Not even after an airplane crash. In 1945 an astray B25 bomber struck the Empire State Building, but the building remains standing to this day. The Windsor Building in Madrid as well as the Meridian Plaza in Philadelphia survived intense fires which lasted 19 and 24 hours. And even if the heat was the cause, then how is it possible that the South Tower collapsed (after 56 minutes already), even though it was struck 15 minutes after the strike on the North Tower? Added to that, the fires in the Towers didn't amount to much after 15 minutes. Most of the kerosene exploded outside. Out of the holes came mostly black smoke, and the windows were still intact despite the heat. There were even survivors on the targeted floors. On one of the pictures, a woman is visible on the edge of the hole, and she is unhurt. Therefore it couldn't have been such a hellish inferno up there.

Also, the speed of the collapse is hard to explain. In 10 seconds (free fall speed), everything came down, and 200.000 cubical meters of concrete was pulverized to fine dust. That's how condemned buildings implode, being brought down by specialized companies, skeptics say. Were there explosives in the Twin Towers? If so, they remained unnoticed, because coincidentally, the bomb sniffing dogs were pulled away shortly before. The security company active on the WTC was, coincidentally, headed by Marvin Bush, brother of the president. In any case, there were explosions that day. Not only reporters of CNN and Fox News reported this, also the fire fighters. This is revealed by their mobile phone calls, which were released recently. (“We’ve had another explosion… I repeat: another explosion!”)

2. What happened to WTC Building 7?

A completely unsolved mystery. Building 7, a colossal 47-story office building, wasn't hit by an airliner, nor by falling debris from the Twin Towers. The fires were far less intense than in buildings 5 and 6, which remained standing. Nevertheless, the building collapsed like a house of cards. Whoever watches this on the Internet can't believe his own eyes: it collapses straight-down in 6 seconds onto the surface. Was this also the work of Bin Laden? For a terrorist, Building 7 was the lion's den, not a very practical target for a terrorist attack.

It housed, among others, the offices of the CIA and the Department of Defense. And as for the 23rd floor, 15 million dollars had been spent on a hypermodern Emergency Command Center for mayor Giuliani. The government therefore possessed a bomb-proof crisis center at the heart of Ground zero, which could resist every imaginable disaster, with bullet proof glass, and its own air -and water supply. However, it wasn't used. The entire building was evacuated.

There has not been a single thorough investigation into the enigmatic behavior of Building 7. "Cause unknown", concluded the 9/11 commission, and left it at that. But according to the land lord of the WTC, Larry Silverstein, the building was pulled in deliberation with the fire department, to put down the fires. Who's lying, the 9/11 commission or Silverstein? Or are they both lying?


Where is the wreckage of flight 77?

If it was indeed a jumbo jet, that slammed into the outer wall of the Pentagon, then it must have vaporized entirely. The entry hole made up a mere five meter in diameter, and there is no trace of wreckage of any size. Flight instructors have declared that the hijacker who pulled off this magic trick, had trouble controlling a Cessna. But according to the official story, flight 77 made an acrobatic 330 degree turn, to eventually, soaring inches off the surface, slam into the only section of the Pentagon where no-one was present due to a renovation. And all that without damaging the front lawn.

A dive into the office of Donald Rumsfeld, which was right in the flight path, would have been much easier. Thick books have been written on flight 77. Given the fact that a Boeing, 13 meter in height, 47 in length, with a wing span of 38 meters and a weight of 100 ton could not possibly have vanished into a five meter hole without leaving a trace, critics maintain that it wasn't a Boeing, but a projectile.

Images from security cameras in the surrounding areas could have cleared this up, but those were confiscated by the government and suppressed. The crash was registered by security cameras at the Sheraton Hotel and a gas station. But minutes after the crash, the tapes were confiscated by the FBI. To debunk all the wild rumors, the Pentagon recently released images from its own security cameras. However, those are of such appalling quality that, beside a fireball, almost nothing is visible, let alone a Boeing.

4. Who were the 19 hijackers? Good question.

Three days after the attacks, the government already revealed the names and photos. (One hijacker could even be identified by his passport, which was, if the offcial story is to be believed, retrieved out of the ruins on Ground Zero. In comparison, the black boxes of the two hijacked airliners were never retrieved, which is highly rare). Yet two weeks after the attacks, the BBC already managed to report that Waleed al Shari couldn't have done it, because he was alive and well and located in Casablanca.

Since then, eight other "hijackers" (Abdul Aziz al Amari, Wail al Sheri, Mohand al Sheri, Kalid Almidar, Salem al Hazmi, Saheed al Ghamdi and Ahmed Alnami) were traced alive and well in Mecca, Tunis and Saudi Arabia. The investigation with regard to the perpetrators wasn't quite meticulous, to put it mildly. But if there is no proof who the hijackers were, let alone if they were a part of Al Qaeda then what justification is there for invading Afghanistan and Iraq?

5. Prior Knowledge? It appears that way.

According to Newsweek, several top Pentagon officials canceled their flight plans for the next day. Also, Willy Brown, the mayor of San Francisco, received a warning not to fly on September 11, identified by Pacifica Radio as originating from Condoleezza Rice herself. And then there is the phenomenon of the put-options; investments amounting to a bet shares will fall. In the days preceding the attacks there was a genuine run on shares of Boeing, United Airlines and American Airlines. On September 6, there was 3.150 put-options placed on United Airlines, four times the average. On September 7: 27.294 put-options on Boeing shares, 5 times the average. And on September 10 1516 put-options on American Airlines, or 11 times the average.

The Financial Times concluded that there had been insider trading, and the Justice Department promised a thorough investigation. However, this hasn't happened five years after the fact."

incredible article

Thanks for that translation. I cannot imagine an article such as this ever being published in the United States.

This was posted on the

This was posted on the previous thread, regarding Chavez:

I'm stunned by the comments on this thread.

Here we have a major head-of-state who has done more for his people than any other "leader" on the planet -- actually making an effort to devolve power to his citizens -- and all anyone can say is that "we" might be associated with "radical" or "anti-bush" sentiment...

Again, I'm stunned.

The 911 truth movement has shown an amazing incapacity to follow the proper leads. Instead of focussing on war games and WTC7 and thermate and Jack Abramoff and Dancing Israelis we focus on "no planes' and what hit the Pentagon and cell phones. instead of embracing Stephen Jones we look to quacks like Nico. Instead of welcoming the most astute critics of the official story like Ralph Schoenman we omit them from our discourse.

The comments of Chavez reprresent perhaps the best opportunity yet to challenge the left gatekeepers, yet there is nothing on this thread about an organized email campaign."

I agree. The Chavez factor represents a HUGE development which can challenge the entire "left" in Amerika.

Let us not dismiss this as a footnote.

i agree with just about

i agree with just about everything you said. the fear of being labeled anti-bush or communist because of association with Chavez is ridiculous in my opinion. every time William Rodriquez comes on this site i ask him how the Venezuela leads are going. i also agree that WTC7 needs to be pounded into the ground along with the war games and MOSSAD involvement(im hoping Loose Change Final Cut has something on this). but does anyone here have any clue when Stephen Jones is finally going to "officially" release his findings on thermate? i agree that it would be huge but not until he makes it official.

I told you so

I told you guys big news was coming soon.....

William Rodriguez
Last Survivor of the North Tower
President of the Hispanic Victims Group, Victims Support Group

looking forward to it...  

looking forward to it...  

i cant wait man. i cant

i cant wait man. i cant thank you enough for your work. keep fighting.

"The black boxes of the two

"The black boxes of the two hijacked airliners were never retrieved, which is highly rare"
Please contact Pamela, the author, to correct her. Not retrieving black boxes was unprecedented.

I tend to believe that 911 is a neo-con conspiracy.....

however, my neo-con friend sent me this....

Someone needs to address their points.... they have an explanation for everything....

It is pretty slick. Yeah,

It is pretty slick. Yeah, we need a solid rebuttal on the wargames PDF. I want to know who scheduled them. Regardless, there is no way they were a coincidence. I also want to know if it's true there were no domestic intercepts from the Cold War until 9/11.

- Again, there is no mention of Sibel Edmonds.

- His ISI dismissal is bullshit.

- Nothing on Willie Rodriguez.

- Why has NORAD changed its timeline multiple times and why did the Commissioners consider having Justice do an investigation?

I've addressed one point:

I've addressed one point:

Why don't YOU do one, Pirate?

All I'm saying is.

If you think you can solve whodunit with the evidence afforded to you, that's a shame.

They sure make good scapegoats though.

Or is whipping boy?

"There's a shadow on the faces of the men who send the guns to the wars that are fought in places where their business interest runs."

Loose Change #1 on Google Top100 Video

Loose Change Video is #1 again on Google Top100, another version is #3, and there are seven version total on Top100, and thirteen 9/11 related video overall on Top100. We need to keep clicking the Loose Change video, and keep it on #1. One click a day.

with all due respect...

I don't think loose change is the right video to point people to. I brought copies of EGLS, DRG Speech, and Press for Truth to GZ

"There's a shadow on the faces of the men who send the guns to the wars that are fought in places where their business interest runs."

FNA to The Huf

for getting props on 9/11 Mysteries.

Talk about a verbal Monica.

"There's a shadow on the faces of the men who send the guns to the wars that are fought in places where their business interest runs."

Village Voice Article Off Target

Sarah Ferguson is a psuedo-journalist. Not only does she get Alex Jones completely wrong - (yea right, he's from the LEFT!?), she's completely biased and combines some verisimilitude with total bullshit to mislead the public. She also believes the NIST report adheres to the basic physical laws of science and hasn't herself bothered to check out anything beyond official sources, or to think for herself. She may be a good writer, but she doesn't write non-fiction. She writes fiction in the guise of non-fiction and most likely doesn't even realize it. In a word, she is stupid.

Why does Sarah Ferguson believe the official story without investigating it? How could it be a insult to the Dead and to the Mourners to try to bring the true perpetrators to justice and to inform the public of the hoax? Why does she parrot the government and mainstream Media talking points and lies? Why is fake journalism being promoted by the Village Voice - a supposedly "alternative" news source? Why are mentally conditioned, brainwashed folks allowed to decide what is the narrative?

Sarah Ferguson is an insult to the Dead and to the survivors and to the mourners. Many people who lost loved ones *know* the official story is a lie. (As would anyone who bothers to look and think beyond official sources.) Many mourners and those who lost loved ones were among the people Sarah Fergueson portrays as "[disrespectful] kooks."

Very few people there took exception to the presence of the questioners. I imagine they saw our respectful presense to be in the tradition of American independence of political thought and tolerance of dissent. The reason she called our signs "brazen" could only be because she didn't and doesn't understand from were the genuine shamelessness of the situation comes.

We were allowed there. We did not disrupt. We were integrated into the activities of the day. Sarah Ferguson's reportage shows a mean-spiritedness characterized by a closed mind.

"When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains - however improbable - must be the truth!" - Doyle