From what I can see she managed to walk the tightrope of asking tough questions without quite being a Truther. There's
an article by Nick (I'd debate Gravy but I'm too much of an intellectual snob) Levis that cites something Beverly wrote in 2003:
It is my impression that she was pushing more for investigation into building methods and materials than controlled demolition, which is reasonable.
My read is that she really was "asking questions and demanding answers" unlike so many of the folks we encounter.
I agree. And the questions were not anywhere near about 9/11 being an "Inside Job", and more about governmental failures. That second extended excerpt you have sounds very much like she had read Astaneh-Asl's questions about the Towers construction, and to the best of my knowledge, his concerns are completely legitimate.
That's one reason that I see trutherism as having the potential to be honestly damaging: It distracts from legitimate concerns voiced about the Twin Towers' performance. Now, I'm not saying that either NIST or Astaneh-Asl is wrong when I say that. Rather, all I'm doing is pointing out that Astaneh-Asl's
raised issues -
legitimate ones as far as I'm concerned - that have nothing to do with deliberate demolitions, and everything to do with code and construction. Others here disagree on whether they're correctly identified or not - I think I remember some of the engineers here(rwguinn? Or Dave Rogers? I forget) said so when I first posted that opinion. But the point here is not whether Astaneh-Asl or other critics like Quintierre (or even groups with differing but legitimate narratives like Arup) are right or not, the point is that he and others have raised concerns that are worthy of discourse. In the case of Quintiere's issues, they
have been the topic of hearings. But, 9/11 conspiracy peddling raises the possibility of concerns like those to be sidetracked by a red-herring induced wild goose chase. And that would have honest and real ramifications in architecture and building safety/structural engineering.
Yes, I'm well aware that the architectural and engineering communities aren't going to drop what they're doing just to listen to truther hyperventilation. That's why I call it a "potential" for sidetracking, not an actual existant threat. But, as is seen in medical government policy, there are enough vaccine/autism believers in government to cause serious distractions in
that field, and it has the very real potential to cause medical policy diversion and waste of medical research resources. 9/11 conspiracy peddling's nowhere near that level, true, but still, it's potential I'm highlighting here. It
could happen. And that would be a terrible waste and distraction.
