• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

AIA Convention 2015 to vote on AE911T resolution

Oystein

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
18,948
Craig McKee blogs at "Truths and Shadows":

Major coup for AE9/11Truth – American Institute of Architects green lights Building 7 vote

Craig McKee said:
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth ... succeeded in getting a commitment from the largest association of architects in the U.S. to debate and vote on a resolution supporting an investigation into the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 on Sept. 11, 2001.

The vote will take place at the annual convention of the American Institute of Architects, May 14-16, in Atlanta, GA.
...
For any resolution to be considered by convention delegates, it must be sponsored by the AIA’s board of directors or strategic council; a regional, state or local AIA chapter; or 50 AIA members. In this case, the sponsor was AE board member Dan Barnum, who holds the prestigious title of Fellow of the American Institute of Architects. Another 54 AIA members are listed as co-sponsors – all of whom are signatories of the AE9/11Truth petition.

Here is the text of the resolution that was just approved by the AIA resolution committee:

[snip]
...
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the AIA Board of Directors shall adopt a Position Statement, to be published in the AIA Directory of Public Policies and Position Statements, stating:
  • The AIA’s belief that incidents involving the catastrophic failure of buildings and other structures must be investigated using the highest standards of science-based investigation and analysis in order to provide accurate and meaningful information in the development of model building codes;
  • The AIA’s recognition that many members of the architecture profession believe the NIST investigation into the complete collapse of 7 World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, did not adhere to the principles of the scientific method and, as a result, the conclusions of the NIST investigation are fatally flawed;
  • The AIA’s belief that this perspective merits further study; and
  • The AIA’s support for a new investigation into the complete collapse of 7 World Trade Center.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that it is advised that this Position Statement be incorporated as Position Statement #3 under the Construction Industry Regulation Public Policy. The recommended language of this Position Statement is as follows:

World Trade Center 7

The AIA believes that incidents involving the catastrophic failure of buildings and other structures must be investigated using the highest standards of science-based investigation and analysis in order to provide accurate and meaningful information in the development of model building codes. In adherence to the scientific method, investigations should:
  • Consider all available data;
  • Consider hypotheses that most readily explain the available data;
  • Test those hypotheses and analyze the results without bias; and
  • Provide for external review and replication by making all data available.
The AIA recognizes that many members of the architecture profession believe the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigation into the complete collapse of 7 World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, did not adhere to these principles and, as a result, the conclusions of the NIST investigation are fatally flawed. The AIA believes this perspective merits further study and supports a new investigation into the complete collapse of 7 World Trade Center.
​
Have fun.
 
AIA deliberately playing for a big rejection vote???

What do professional organisations have to do to defend themselves against determined malicious attacks by dishonest people?
 
AIA deliberately playing for a big rejection vote???

What do professional organisations have to do to defend themselves against determined malicious attacks by dishonest people?

That's not how I read it.
AIA has rules governing how resolutions and such things are adopted, and AE911T took advantage of the "50 sponsors" rule, so it seems AIA has no choice but to admit the vote.

It simply will be rejected, whether or not AIA has any deliberate play.
 
Im not familiar with their rules but i find this rather interesting. History seems to indicate that the Aia doesn't find ae911truth to be honest, and i would expect that the vote will turn out fruitless save for providing them with a propaganda tool. We will have to see how it plays out
 
IF the resolution passes, and I think it has as much chance as the proverbial frozen water sphere in a hot place, I predict a pause in reaction from AE911T as its signatories orgasm simultaneously.
 
That's not how I read it.
AIA has rules governing how resolutions and such things are adopted, and AE911T took advantage of the "50 sponsors" rule, so it seems AIA has no choice but to admit the vote.

It simply will be rejected, whether or not AIA has any deliberate play.



Yes, it's important to note that the A&E9/11 guys hurdled the lowest barrier to entry to get this vote approved. They didn't convince AIA’s board of directors or strategic council; they didn't convince a regional, state or local AIA chapter; all they did was to (finally?) get 50+ members of their own organization to sign their names to this.


What I find interesting is that it took them so long to even manage that low hurdle. If 50 members is all it takes, why didn't they do this years ago?

I imagine this vote will be the talk of the conference...get togethers in the bar. "Hey, Bob, have you seen this? It's hilarious!"
 
I noticed they don't mention controlled demolition.

  • Consider all available data;
  • Consider hypotheses that most readily explain the available data;
  • Test those hypotheses and analyze the results without bias;
  • Provide for external review and replication by making all data available.

It's funny that AE would include these requirements given the fact they don't follow them. :rolleyes:
 
I noticed they don't mention controlled demolition.



It's funny that AE would include these requirements given the fact they don't follow them. :rolleyes:

AE911 will of course mention the lack of thermite flashes or CD characteristic explosive sounds on record, as part of "all available data".:rolleyes:

As well as, of course, the lack of any other evidence of CD beyond witness statements subject to misinterpretation.
 
I noticed they don't mention controlled demolition.



It's funny that AE would include these requirements given the fact they don't follow them. :rolleyes:

Its their typical back door way of trying to get a larger number of people to support a cause. Make it an issue of investigation of building collapse,,,, but oh,,, my,,, Gawd,,, don't mention the core raison d'etre of AE911T, that 9/11 was a vast, complex conspiracy by a shadowy , extra-governmental group bent on world domination. Don't mention that they want this new investigation because they believe that the towers and #7 were brought down deliberately by explosive and/or thermite for some nefarious reasoning.

Kind of like Scientology spouting off about how bad mainstream psychology is but not broadcasting too loudly about their own core beliefs.
 
AE911 will of course mention the lack of thermite flashes or CD characteristic explosive sounds on record, as part of "all available data".:rolleyes:

As well as, of course, the lack of any other evidence of CD beyond witness statements subject to misinterpretation.

In Trutherville, it seems that AIA members saying "I don't understand this" is considered to be sufficient evidence to support a belief in magical CD devices, while ASCE members saying "I understand this, and here's why" is considered to be evidence of how vast the conspiracy is.
 
...all they did was to (finally?) get 50+ members of their own organization to sign their names to this.

What I find interesting is that it took them so long to even manage that low hurdle. If 50 members is all it takes, why didn't they do this years ago?
...

Quick stats:

They currently have 337 signatures from architects licensed in the USA. 83 of these have the string "AIA" in their title. A further 11 of 122 unlicensed signatories with merely some architecture degree boast AIA membership (usually Associate AIA - perhaps AAIAs cannot sponsor resolutions).

For some reason, not a single of these 94 AIA members has signed after December 2013. There are possibly more AIA members, but they then don't have that in the title.
 
Quick stats:

They currently have 337 signatures from architects licensed in the USA. 83 of these have the string "AIA" in their title. A further 11 of 122 unlicensed signatories with merely some architecture degree boast AIA membership (usually Associate AIA - perhaps AAIAs cannot sponsor resolutions).

For some reason, not a single of these 94 AIA members has signed after December 2013. There are possibly more AIA members, but they then don't have that in the title.



Quick, someone spin this as "Almost half of A&E's members who are also in the AIA don't even support their own position!"


God, this highlights the one thing that really pisses me off about these guys: how *********** passive they are. They profess a belief in some vast evil conspiracy that killed almost 3000 people directly, and started two wars that killed hundreds of thousands more, but they can't even be arsed enough to sign their own damn petition. GaH!

If I believed even a fraction of what they claim to believe, I'd be moving heaven and earth to try to stop the conspiracy. These guys barely even get out of bed.....
 
Who will contact AIA about the end run of BS? Who will tell the media when AIA supports nuts in 911 truth, who claim CD, explosives, and an inside job.
 
When the AIA votes down the item.... will Gage dis affiliate himself from AIA and stop mentioning that he is an AIS member all the time? Will he declare the members paid shills for the inside job guys?
 
I wouldn't be shocked for it to be spun regardless of the outcome. AE911 took advantage of a loop hole to get their crazy resolution in. If they know what they're doing, I'm confident they know how they want to spin the story regardless of the outcome
 
They will raise funds to bring their "delegation" (Gage) and play it up to just before the event. They will make an excuse and move on to the next fund raiser. Rinse and repeat is the AE moto..............


Does anyone really believe they actually want a "new investigation"? :boggled:
 
Last edited:
As I understand it now, the AIA leadership has distanced itself from Gage and has said there will never be an affiliation between them and AE911T. That doesn't stop Gage from using the AIA post-nominal, nor in my opinion should it. As long as he himself remains in good standing in the institute, he is just as entitled as any other member in good standing to do so, as long as by doing so he doesn't imply that AIA endorses his Truther claims. I certainly can't see the AIA censuring Gage for the failure of a resolution he sponsors. Conversely I can't see Gage abandoning AIA over this any more than he has over their other public statements regarding him. I imagine if the resolution fails, it will just be business as usual for both parties.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom