Architect says explosive charges were built into WTC towers!

[chek]

[Anthony Lawson]

Wrong Forum

I do apologise for attempting to point out the fact that this topic began with a post that is based on misinformation and a barefaced lie. I was under the impression that the name of the forum was

The British 9/11 Truth Campaign

Clearly my posts are being misdirected to

The British See-How-Many-Posts-You-can-Make Campaign

Sorry.

[Anthony Lawson]

Poster Status

Chek,

You make my point very clearly for me

[chek]

[Anthony Lawson]

Internet Language and Ethics

Yes, I am fairly new to Internet message boards, but I don't see that as a reason for accepting obscene language or people opening subjects with misinformation and lies. I don't like the idea of people hiding behind pseudonyms, either, unless they have a very good reason for doing so, and some of those used on this forum are extremely silly; not demonstrating the kind of seriousness which its subject requires. But that's just my opinion.

My problem with this particular topic is that it began with a lie, and everyone who posted on it seemed to accept that this didn't matter. (I have already explained why I misunderstood your post, and I hope that that can now be put to one side.)

My point was, and is, that if The British 9/11 Truth Campaign allows such blatant falsehoods to go unchecked, it will always be just another message board or chat room where anything goes, including obscenities. Frankly, I don’t know what I’m doing here, anymore, and you’ll probably be glad to hear that I’m thinking about finding another place where the research and effort is more directed, and where people care more about accuracy.

But, before I ‘hang up’, here’s another example of the harm that spreading misinformation could cause. On this topic, Fallious posted an item on Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:02 pm (no subject) saying that he was trying to get in touch with Paul Laffoley, and I presume that if he ever manages to, Laffoley would want some background. Fallious would only have to give him this campaign’s web address, and, if Laffoley took a look at the lies that had been written about him, he would run a mile. The same would go for anyone else considering coming forward with information.

It’s bad enough when interviewers at Fox News, and on other mainstream-media channels scream at serious researchers about their ‘kooky’ views on 9/11, but it would be tragic if such people were to be closed down by some irresponsible posting on a website which professes to want to get at the truth.

That sums up the problem I have with basing posts on falsehoods and lies, and the fact that Micpsi has not even replied to my post says a lot about how concerned he is.

All of your other comments were valid, in fact I was going to point out that thermite could remain embedded in all kinds of situations, practically forever, yet pose no danger (unless deliberately detonated), because of its extremely high ignition temperature. Also, if such practices were to be out in the open, the insurance companies would have been able to come up with get-out clauses. After all, everything is a financial balancing act, and everyone wins as long as profits are maximized, for the shareholders, that is. I would have made all of these points, had I been prepared to let Micpsi’s falsehoods slip through.

[rodin]

[Anthony Lawson]

Still No Reaction to the Lie

See what I mean? Rodin doesn’t understand that I would have written about the properties of themite (before Chec did), had I not been concerned about the falsehoods which were used to begin this topic. The reason for this must be that he didn’t read what I had to say about telling the truth on this website.

Here are a couple of straight questions:

1. Does anyone else out there care that Micpsi’s headline is pure speculation, not fact, and that his introduction contained at least one outright lie?

[Fallious]

[Anthony Lawson]

Points taken,

Okay, Fallious, your points are well taken. I wish you luck with Paul Laffoley, and I hope he hasn't been spooked by the misinformation.

[Fallious]

Just a note regarding this: I've received a reply from Mike Hagan of Orbit Radio.

While he understandably can't provide Pauls contact details, he agrees that getting in contact with junior architects and such is a good direction to move in. He also mentions that Paul will be talking in more detail about his work as a WTC architect in the near future. Something to look forward too.

There is also a fairly brisk dressing down of the collective truth movement for it's general LACK of interest in this fascinating lead, but i'll spare you the details.

"He is an unimpeachable source whose information, when verified, breaks the case..."

So, someone care to help out finding some architects to verify this?

[rodin]

Chek, AL et al

Getting Huffy...

The point of posting is not to prove oneself to be correct. The point of posting is to get at the truth via evidence accumulation and analysis. otherwise good contributers.

Put your egos to bed. Do not expect any credit from posting here. Consider it to be your duty.

[Anthony Lawson]

Locating Architects and Getting Wrapped Over the Knuckles

Good fortune locating some junior architects who worked on the Twin Towers, Fallious, but I think that some on-the-ground gumshoes might be required; you’re talking at least 30 years ago.

My results from e-mailing four or five demolition firms, in order to find out how long it would have taken to set up WTC7 added up to zilch.

When researching whether or not a Boeing 757 could fly, virtually at zero feet, at 530 mph, for 500 yards or so—in order to knock down the light poles and hit the Pentagon at ground level—without ground effect knocking it off course, or causing it to crash prematurely, got me the sum total of zero answers: A couple of referrals then nothing further from Boeing. Four no-replies, two no-comments and four ‘you are not a member’ replies from flying clubs and a couple of flying schools, and an ex-NASA aeronautical engineer, whom I had known in Australia, didn’t want to get involved.


Rodin Wrote:

[Me]

I remember a caller to the Alex Jones mentioning this on air. Jones told him to send him a link. I haven’t heard or seen anything about it on Infowars or Prison Planet since. I’m assuming that Jones and his crew have found no particular interest in the story? I could be wrong though.

[Me]

My initial feeling is that this could be a kind of plan B should the existence of thermate ever be proven and generally accepted as truth. They’ll dig this story up and claim that Bin Laden did it somehow. This Laffoley character could be a disinformant?

Then again, wasn’t it the Bin Laden family that also helped to fund Bush’s first oil company? And didn’t we also hear that the Bush’s vacation with the Bin Ladens? And didn’t we hear from Bush and others about how they’re not worried about capturing Bin Laden anymore? And didn’t the Bin Laden family also benefit (through Bechtel) from this “war on terror” launched as a result of 9/11? Then you add the bob sniffing dogs being removed and Marvin Bush running security and you have all of the makings of a mafia like criminal scandal. Perhaps Bin Laden is real but he was just doing the bidding of the Bush adminsitration all along? Now I'm really confused.

You could easily see where there could be collusion between the Bin Laden family and the Bush family to make this all happen.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/05/news/companies/war_bechtel/index.htm

Bechtel tied to bin Ladens
Osama bin Laden family members invested $10M in an equity fund run by former Bechtel unit.

[rodin]

AL - all I am saying is don't let emotions get the better of you. I remember being indignant that it was not me talking in class as I got the belt. That hurt more than the impact of the leather. I try to never dwell on such matters now. The misleading headline issue - I have not even noted it. I am more interested in whether towers could be prepositioned with thermite in a 100% safe manner. Then to examine if it was done. If it was suggested - does this mean that this is a standard industry practice? Or was WTC 'a special'? If standard industry practice why do we not know about it? (Then again - freemasons can keep big secrets - like the Apollo hoax)

I would agree that most likely this story is a fall-back invention to try to cover for explosive demolition being found out, and to be able to say the Bin Ladens done it.

[rodin]

[Anthony Lawson]

The Importance of the Truth can Never be Overstressed

Rodin,

Trying to correct something does indeed lead one’s energy away from the actual issue—in this case, whether or not thermite or any other kind of demolition agent was built into the World Trade Center buildings—and I agree with just about everything you have written, on that side of things. But let’s get a few other things straight.

No matter how you feel about the truth issue, if this campaign’s website, or any other website, or radio or TV commentator or blogger or main-stream-media writer starts off a thread, or a programme, or an article with what can easily be shown to be false or misleading, then what follows is being built on shaky ground. That is an irrefutable fact.

Even if further research turns up valuable material on the subject of built-in demolition materials, the entire edifice could easily be pulled down by anyone who wants to discredit the research. All they’d need to say, or write, would be: ‘Yes, but the architect that they told us helped Saudi engineers put explosives in the buildings did nothing of the sort.’ Then the writer gives the link to the broadcast, and by the time anyone interested in the theory has found it and listened to it, they’ll be convinced that the entire theory is based on a lie, and they will be unlikely to look past the lie on order to see if the theory which was built on it could still be viable.

This is not about emotions—mine or yours—it is about exposing misinformation, whether mistakenly or maliciously planted. If you don’t think that that is important, then I don’t know what is on a website called: The British 9/11 Truth Campaign.

Even your own sign-off mantra seems to indicate that you agree with me.

[Stefan]

Anthony,
I completley share your concerns, so do a lot of people here, in response this forum is soon to have it's 9/11 campaign branding removed since it is not productive and it is also impossible to know who exactly is posting here and why (disinformation).

Once this done, anyone can post anything they want without it bothering me. As it is anyone can post anything they want AND it bothers the hell out of me; we have the worst of both worlds.

Fingers crossed, before long this will be changed and the forum will be "neutralised" of its damaging effect on the campaign. In the mean time it is very much the responsibility of rationalist posters to continue to publicly demonstrate the minority status of the theories you refer to. After then, they are less than irrelevant to me.

As a separate issue, I would actually be very interested to hear more about a lot of the non-9/11 related issues occasionally brought up here. Right now it gets on my nerves that chem trails, moon landing, UFOs, unconvential weaponry and the like come up here because they are irrelevant. But I would actually love the opportunity to learn more about these issues within the framework of a "general forum" setting, especially as we have experts on the forum here, so I can judge for myself if there's anything there. Once the forum changes I will jump at the chance to hear more on those issues. But right now they are a distraction and worse still are a detriment to what should be a regimented and purposeful campaign, however interesting I might find them on a personal level- they are nothing to do with 9/11 and should not be put in the same context.

In terms of the "poster status" you are the second person to comment on it recently. The status does not really reflect how much a person posts here, more how long they have been posting here. Eventually everyone would be a "mighty poster" regardless of how little or what they post. It isnt a status of anything but how long someone has been posting here. If you note the "Joined..." stat by everyones name it is quite clear to see this.

[Anthony Lawson]

At Last, Genuine Concern About the Truth

Stefan,

Thank you; at last, someone else is showing concern about what this site should be about.

I don’t know where your information comes from, but it is about time something was done to sort things out. Some of the moderators seem to show concern, but others do not. Shortly after this topic appeared, I sent personal messages to several of them, but received only one reply, which pointed out the difficulty of moderating a forum with over 1,000 members. I am sure that it is difficult, however, he did not explain why he was prepared to let the falsehoods with which this topic was begun slip through, after he had been notified that they were there for all to see.

Although the word ‘police’ has unfortunate connotations, these days, they were never expected to monitor and control absolutely everything as it happened; that would have been, and still is, impossible. This is why emergency police boxes and emergency telephone numbers were introduced, so I fail to see why my ‘emergency call’ has gone unanswered, and the lie has been allowed to remain in the first post of what should have been a fascinating area for research.

With regard to the numbers of posts made: you are right, this is accumulative, and we would all end up being Super-Duper posters, or whatever, if we stayed the course. (It actually concerns me that I am now listed as a moderate poster, when so many of my posts have been an attempt to ‘put things right,’ rather than to add to the site’s total of knowledge or research.)

My point had more to do with the number of posts since joining. Chek, for example, with whom I crossed pens over his poor syntax, has made 1,439 posts since September 12, 2006. That is an average of around 6.2 posts per day, and gives one the feeling that the kind of care required to get one’s points accurately across could easily suffer as a result of such volume.

Micpsi, who opened this topic, has made 119 posts since February 13, 2007, and is already a major poster with an average of just under 2 posts per day, yet he hasn’t even bothered to apologise or defend himself for the misinformation he has spread around.

Never mind the quality, feel the volume.

As far as learning more about other issues, it is easy to access all kinds of information, as well as disinformation, on the Internet. Just enter some key words and follow where the trail leads you. Try “free speech” for example. Then try “free speech” + EU.

Take care,

Anthony