AIA Convention resolution - the 3rd try. Rebuttals, please!

[jaydeehess]

Bringing this back to AIA, when is the convention again?

[LSSBB]

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

Bringing this back to AIA, when is the convention again?

We'll, there's always the AIA website.

Conference on Architecture is April 27-29
https://www.aia.org/articles/25406-p...ule-around-a17

Leadership conference is March 8-10
https://www.aia.org/events/26611-grassroots-2017

[Sabretooth]

Quote:

(14) WHEREAS, NIST’s computer model — which terminates less than two seconds into the seven-second collapse — fails to replicate the observed structural behavior, showing large deformations to WTC 7’s exterior not observed in the videos, while not showing the observed period of free fall; and

(15) WHEREAS, NIST omitted critical structural features of WTC 7 from its computer model, which, in the opinion of independent engineers, if corrected, would show that the initiating failure reported by NIST had zero probability of occurring; and

This little gripe of theirs always bothered me.

If Gage & friends want to really show some conviction in their opposition, why not use the gobs of dollars they've collected and build their own computer models instead of draining the coffers on crappy little pamphlets?

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by Sabretooth

This little gripe of theirs always bothered me.

If Gage & friends want to really show some conviction in their opposition, why not use the gobs of dollars they've collected and build their own computer models instead of draining the coffers on crappy little pamphlets?

Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?

This is the project they got this statement from:

Quote:

WHEREAS, NIST omitted critical structural features of WTC 7 from its computer model, which, in the opinion of independent engineers, if corrected, would show that the initiating failure reported by NIST had zero probability of occurring

Funny how they determined that without actually finishing the project............

[Brainster]

What still bugs me about WTC 7 is that it's a tiny footnote to the events of the day. Nobody died in WTC 7's collapse. The absurd focus on WTC-7 among the truthers is that it is really just a gateway to claiming that if WTC-7 was a CD, then WTC1 and WTC2's collapses were CD as well.

[Oystein]

So what to do about this resolution proposal?
Do we have a way of influencing the vote that the AIA delegates will take?

I wonder if pointing out Gage's flirt with holocaust deniers is a path to showing the AIA members what a crackpot he is - his recent visit to the Nation of Islam, where he spoke alongside the anti-semites Kevin Barrett and Christopher Bollyn - and was very coy about it (no news that I have seen).
We might also point them to his 2015 buddy Rudy Dent, a lover of Adolf Hitler, who is the only FDNY veteran to ever side with those whackjobs.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Oystein

So what to do about this resolution proposal?
Do we have a way of influencing the vote that the AIA delegates will take?

I'd say do nothing. What's the upside?

[Sabretooth]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?

Nope, haven't heard. But I've been out of the 9/11 loop for a while. I stopped diving into the forums around the same time Chewy got banned. Now I just stop by once in a while to see what kind of trolling is still floating around.

[Mark F]

Originally Posted by Brainster

What still bugs me about WTC 7 is that it's a tiny footnote to the events of the day. Nobody died in WTC 7's collapse. The absurd focus on WTC-7 among the truthers is that it is really just a gateway to claiming that if WTC-7 was a CD, then WTC1 and WTC2's collapses were CD as well.

Or a distraction from the rather obvious fact there was no CD in 1 and 2, no missiles at the Pentagon and no shootdowns in Shanksville.

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Hi Sabretooth,

haven't you heard that they are shelling out US$ 200,000 to the University of Alaska civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey to do exactly that - build their own computer models of WTC7, in a 2-year project?

Worth noting that there isn't anything out there I have seen substantiating the claims re how much they are spending on this project. They have two grad students at a public university in one of the lowest cost areas of the country working on this part time. If they spent more than $50k on this project in total, then that would just show their fiscal acumen is on par with their logical abilities.

[benthamitemetric]

According to the AIA 2017 convention rules, the AE911Truth 2017 WTC7 resolution (17-5) was voted on yesterday Wednesday, April 26, 2017, between 2:45 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. As of the time of this post, there is no update from AE911Truth to its followers re the status of resolution 17-5 and so I think it's fair to say that it failed and likely by an embarrassingly large margin that they cannot even pretend to claim represents progress in their efforts to persuade professionals.

+100 internet karma points to the individual who can find the exact vote tally!

[Oystein]

Four hours later - it's lunchtime now in Orlando - still no hurray.
I emailed Pamela Day, the AIA Corporate Secretary and Managing Director in charge of organizing the Business Meeting, and asked her the voting result. Since she is at the Convention, I consider it likely that I will have to wait for a reply, if I get one at all.

[Redwood]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Four hours later - it's lunchtime now in Orlando - still no hurray.
I emailed Pamela Day, the AIA Corporate Secretary and Managing Director in charge of organizing the Business Meeting, and asked her the voting result. Since she is at the Convention, I consider it likely that I will have to wait for a reply, if I get one at all.

I tingle with excitement.

[MileHighMadness]

Resolution 17-5: Investigation of the Total Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, sponsored by Daniel Barnum, FAIA, and 50 Members of the Institute, failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions). The resolution’s sponsors questioned the conclusions offered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in 2008 about the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. They argued that the Institute should support “a new investigation into the total collapse of WTC7.”

[beachnut]

2015 - AE911 Truth (the movement of idiotic lies) reported late this afternoon that the AIA convention in Atlanta voted 160 in favor, but 3892 opposed to its resolution, i.e., it was rejected by 96% of the votes!

2016 - Resolution 16-3, which was sponsored by 97 AIA members affiliated with AE911Truth(Liars and Fools), garnered 11% of the delegates’ votes, losing 529 to 4,176. The 11% tally represents nearly a threefold increase over the 4% won last year.

2017 - failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions)

If sane/rational people studied what the resolution uses as evidence, (path of most resistance, own footprint, symmetrical collapse, etc), the vote would be limited the fringe few insane cult members in AE911t.

Are there 182 members who are paranoid, or did they fail to study

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by beachnut

2015 - AE911 Truth (the movement of idiotic lies) reported late this afternoon that the AIA convention in Atlanta voted 160 in favor, but 3892 opposed to its resolution, i.e., it was rejected by 96% of the votes!

2016 - Resolution 16-3, which was sponsored by 97 AIA members affiliated with AE911Truth(Liars and Fools), garnered 11% of the delegates’ votes, losing 529 to 4,176. The 11% tally represents nearly a threefold increase over the 4% won last year.

2017 - failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions)

If sane/rational people studied what the resolution uses as evidence, (path of most resistance, own footprint, symmetrical collapse, etc), the vote would be limited the fringe few insane cult members in AE911t.

Are there 182 members who are paranoid, or did they fail to study

Being generous an not counting abstentions as rejections of AE911Truth's resolution (and I think there is a good argument you should), this makes this year's result essentially a mirror image of 2015's and a substantial reduction in support from 2016's results (which were still pitiful for AE911Truth).

2015: 96.1% of delegates voted against the resolution
2016: 88.8% of delegates voted against the resolution
2017: 95.8% of delegates voted against the resolution

And, remember, the resolution itself isn't nearly as whackadoodle as we know AE911Truth's theories to actually be; it is a watered-down, dressed-up version that does not ask delegates to reach any conclusion re AE911Truth's controlled demolition theories. Can you imagine how poorly an honest resolution that actually represented AE911Truth's claims would fare?

Tony--why hasn't AE911Truth posted the results of this vote or the results of Iran's investigation into the Plasco collapse on its website? You all can raise funds off of these issues, but you don't feel you owe it to your followers to tell them the outcomes? Why does your organization so consistently withhold certain relevant but extremely inconvenient truths from its followers? Are you ever going to tell them about the availability of the Aegis expert or WAI studies of WTC7?

Are any of the non-Tony truthers out there still willing to donate money to AE911Truth after these last two years of its deliberate suppression of relevant and pressing info? Why do you think they want their donors ignorant?

[Cosmic Yak]

Here's an idea.
Perhaps the 182 who voted for this resolution can get together and write a paper in which they detail their evidence for CD, and which they can then submit for peer review?
100 words each wouldn't be too hard, and it would make a nice fat document to smack us "officlal believers" in the face with, as well as salvaging their reputations.
Tony, fonebone et al, get on the phone, guys! Triumph and vindication await you!

[pgimeno]

Originally Posted by pgimeno

In light of the recent happenings in Iran...

Quote:

WHEREAS, prior to and since September 11, 2001, no steel-framed high-rise
has ever suffered a total collapse, except buildings demolished through the
procedure known as controlled demolition; and

No longer true.

Especially after the Plasco fire official investigation's conclusion, they should have modified this point before the presentation. Did they? Or did they just lie?

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by MileHighMadness

Resolution 17-5: Investigation of the Total Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, sponsored by Daniel Barnum, FAIA, and 50 Members of the Institute, failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions). The resolution’s sponsors questioned the conclusions offered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in 2008 about the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. They argued that the Institute should support “a new investigation into the total collapse of WTC7.”

Link: https://www.aia.org/articles/82671-n...ward-in-a-time

I can't fail to note that ALL other resolutions passed - all but one with large margins in favor:

Originally Posted by AIA

Resolution 17-1: Where Architects Stand: A Statement of Our Values, sponsored by the AIA Board of Directors, passed with 4436 votes in favor, and 90 votes against (with 16 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-2: Emeritus Membership—Proposed Amendments to the Institute Bylaws, sponsored by AIA California Council, passed with 4436 votes in favor, and 77 votes against (with 18 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-3: Housing Humanity—Elevating the Human Experience, sponsored by AIA California Council (and co-authored by AIA Chicago and AIA Illinois), passed with 4358 votes in favor, and 86 votes against (with 70 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-4: Specialty Credentialing, sponsored by AIA California Council, passed with 2227 votes in favor, and 2096 votes against (with 187 abstentions). ...

Resolution 17-5: Investigation of the Total Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, sponsored by Daniel Barnum, FAIA, and 50 Members of the Institute, failed with 4113 votes against and 182 votes in favor (with 179 abstentions).

Bylaw Amendment 17-A: Appointment of Delegates ... passed with 4352 votes in favor, and 168 votes against (with 40 abstentions).

Bylaw Amendment 17-B: Technical Amendments to the Institute Bylaws ... passed with 4535 votes in favor, and 8 votes against (with 24 abstentions).

Resolution[s] 17-6 [through -13 all] ... passed by acclamation, with a clear majority saying aye.

17-4 got only 51.5% of the non-abstentions, all others got 96+% "Yes" votes.


Seems like the vast majority of AIA members can tell whether a proposal is contentious, or nonsense, or simply right.
The AE911Truth proposal evidently is not contentious in the minds of America's architects - it's obvious nonsense.

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by pgimeno

Especially after the Plasco fire official investigation's conclusion, they should have modified this point before the presentation. Did they? Or did they just lie?

They lied. You can find the full text of the resolution in the rules packet here. The third whereas clause reads:

Quote:

WHEREAS, prior to and since September 11, 2001, no steel-framed highrise has ever suffered a total collapse, except buildings demolished through the procedure known as controlled demolition;

(pg 34 of the doc/pg 36 of the pdf)

[Oystein]

The failure of the AIA leadership to inform their members and the public of this utter and unequivocal failure is quite enigmatic. They are not silent on their various social media outlets:

• On Facebook, they had 2 posts within the last 24 hours (here and here), none with an AIA theme, while their last announcement of the AIA Convention activity (2.5 days ago) spawned several comments from fans asking for the result, and not getting an answer
• On Twitter, they tweeted yesterday: "15 most commonly asked questions of AE911Truth about the destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11. http://www.ae911truth.org/news/faqs.html ", while probably the top most FAQ currently is "what's the result?"
• On Youtube, they uploaded a French version about this NIST outsider Peter Ketcham yesterday, when I remember that in past years they would upload mobile phone videos from the Convention while it was on.

Nothing, of course, on their homepage, no newsletter either.

[Trojan]

Originally Posted by beachnut

Are there 182 members who are paranoid, or did they fail to study

Or dozed off and thought they were voting for another resolution

[gerdbonk]

That's it, then, right? Three strikes and all that?

[pgimeno]

Quite possibly. Gage surely knows better than to invest money in a lost cause that doesn't produce dividends.

[rwguinn]

Originally Posted by pgimeno

... Gage surely knows better than to invest money in a lost cause that doesn't produce dividends.

Presents as fact that which has no evidence in support...

[DGM]

I just noticed something. AE did not have a booth at this event.

http://fp.exhibitor.conferenceonarch...070.1493314865

Short on dollars?

[MileHighMadness]

Napoleon - Waterloo 1815
Gage - AIA 2017

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by DGM

I just noticed something. AE did not have a booth at this event.

http://fp.exhibitor.conferenceonarch...070.1493314865

Short on dollars?

In previous years, the Business Meeting (where the voting takes place) was on the last day of the Convention. This year, it was held before the Convention opened its exhibitions. I guess that the booth's purpose was to sway unprepared, ignorant delegates - with the voting already done, a booth makes little sense then.

[Pinch]

Originally Posted by gerdbonk

That's it, then, right? Three strikes and all that?

You'd like to think so. I mean, the AE 911 dolts, in their own write up, state that "...the AIA is a respected voice on matters concerning the built environment and on larger issues such as social equity and human rights."

Now that this "respected voice" has unequivocally and without question rejected this tripe for a third year running, in numbers matching the first initial rejection (meaning AE 911 has gone *backwards* from last year), they should drop this. Fat chance, though. As long as there is a golden goose to pimp and the most gullible of this world's people to keep shoveling cash and coin to Gage, it'll continue.

[gerdbonk]

I know these were member-sponsored, but will the AIA continue to allow similar resolutions?

[DaveThomasNMSR]

but hey, I'm in a snarky mood today!

[DGM]

Still no official statement from AE...........

[Oystein]

Incredible - 7 hours ago, there was a new post on AE911Truth's Facebook page - and STILL no hint of the devestating defeat they took at the AIA Convention! One lone commenter (out of 18) dared to ask for the result.

And what a long post it is. Lot's to parse and expose to deserved ridicule. Just two things that fit here:

Originally Posted by AE911Truth

The evidence that's been collected, and presented to audiences all around the world over the past 11 years, clearly shows that explosives were used to completely destroy all of these buildings.

Then why did you not say this clearly in your resolution proposal? Perhaps you would have scored 0% then?

Originally Posted by AE911Truth

These are some AE911Truth key staff and board members responsible for our current level of success:
Richard Gage
...[and six more named]

This is rich, coming on the heels of the crushing failure in Orlando.
Richard, Dan, Kelly, Tom, Ted, Roland, Andy: You are responsible for your current level of FAILURE!

[benthamitemetric]

Tony spent part of his weekend trying to spin the news to the 10-15 people who still post on the 911Truth subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/911truth/co...on_voted_down/

AE911Truth's Message: Pay no attention to the 96% of AIA folks who won't even vote for a new technical study, folks; just trust us when we say that the AIA membership actually knows WTC7 was a controlled demolition! Keep giving us money so Richard Gage can keep making all this "progress" towards the "truth." And, speaking of the truth, don't ask us about the Plasco building investigation outcome, or for any information about the two fulsome investigation reports done by WAI or the Aegis experts. We're just as interested in providing you with that information as we are in letting you know about our failure at the AIA convention. Oh, and prepare yourself to forget everything we told you the Hulsey report was going to be (a fulsome examination to determine the cause of the WTC7 collapse). It's just going to be a technical critique of a few aspects of the NIST reports, which is exactly what we promised it wouldn't be. And it won't be peer reviewed (except by a "panel" we select so that we can fool people who don't understand what peer review is) and published; we're just going to use it to raise money--money that we will use so Richard Gage can keep making all this "progress" towards the "truth."

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by Oystein

Incredible - 7 hours ago, there was a new post on AE911Truth's Facebook page - and STILL no hint of the devestating defeat they took at the AIA Convention! ....
Richard, Dan, Kelly, Tom, Ted, Roland, Andy: You are responsible for your current level of FAILURE!

LOL, and the graphic they use for the post not only uses a fake Buddha quote, but also even managed to spell Buddha incorrectly. If these guys weren't in the business of fleecing ignorant people, I would actually feel bad for them seeing these levels of ineptitude. Can't even get the little things right.

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

Tony spent part of his weekend trying to spin the news to the 10-15 people who still post on the 911Truth subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/911truth/co...on_voted_down/

AE911Truth's Message: Pay no attention to the 96% of AIA folks who won't even vote for a new technical study, folks; just trust us when we say that the AIA membership actually knows WTC7 was a controlled demolition! Keep giving us money so Richard Gage can keep making all this "progress" towards the "truth." And, speaking of the truth, don't ask us about the Plasco building investigation outcome, or for any information about the two fulsome investigation reports done by WAI or the Aegis experts. We're just as interested in providing you with that information as we are in letting you know about our failure at the AIA convention. Oh, and prepare yourself to forget everything we told you the Hulsey report was going to be (a fulsome examination to determine the cause of the WTC7 collapse). It's just going to be a technical critique of a few aspects of the NIST reports, which is exactly what we promised it wouldn't be. And it won't be peer reviewed (except by a "panel" we select so that we can fool people who don't understand what peer review is) and published; we're just going to use it to raise money--money that we will use so Richard Gage can keep making all this "progress" towards the "truth."

Yet another pie-in-the-face ending for the Troofers. My personal favorite was Truth Burn (a decade ago). An artist designed a big metal sign with the word "Truth" on it. He planned to use thermite to burn the two legs of the sign so it would collapse. Oh, and it was going to take place at Burning Man. Sounded great, so the Troofers threw thousands of dollars at him (the number I recall was $20,000, but I can't verify that right now).

What did they do? Well, it was windy that evening and so they burned about 80 lbs of thermite in a pot under the sign, and Richard Gage gave a little speech.

As one of the Troofers said in a great comment on 9-11 Flogger:

Quote:

What the hell was that?..........I would have rather seen a sugar cube sky scraper filled with firecrackers.

[benthamitemetric]

Originally Posted by Brainster

Yet another pie-in-the-face ending for the Troofers. My personal favorite was Truth Burn (a decade ago). An artist designed a big metal sign with the word "Truth" on it. He planned to use thermite to burn the two legs of the sign so it would collapse. Oh, and it was going to take place at Burning Man. Sounded great, so the Troofers threw thousands of dollars at him (the number I recall was $20,000, but I can't verify that right now).

What did they do? Well, it was windy that evening and so they burned about 80 lbs of thermite in a pot under the sign, and Richard Gage gave a little speech.

As one of the Troofers said in a great comment on 9-11 Flogger:

Oh man, I had never seen or even heard about that. Great public demonstration of (1) there was nothing that looked anything like gigantic thermite charges going off at ground zero, and (2) even allowing for a spectacular visual display the likes of which was completely absent on 9-11, they couldn't figure out how to make it actually cut slender steel columns in a predictable way. At least they are consistent in their inanity. Too bad they still manage to separate people from their money with this abject nonsense.

[cantonear1968]

Originally Posted by DGM

I just noticed something. AE did not have a booth at this event.

http://fp.exhibitor.conferenceonarch...070.1493314865

Short on dollars?

Originally Posted by Oystein

In previous years, the Business Meeting (where the voting takes place) was on the last day of the Convention. This year, it was held before the Convention opened its exhibitions. I guess that the booth's purpose was to sway unprepared, ignorant delegates - with the voting already done, a booth makes little sense then.

They're saying they were denied booth space.

From facebook:

Originally Posted by AE911T

Among the topics discussed are:....(2) this year's denial to AE911Truth of exhibit booth space on the convention floor

https://www.facebook.com/ae911truth/...type=3&theater

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by cantonear1968

They're saying they were denied booth space.

From facebook:


https://www.facebook.com/ae911truth/...type=3&theater

Fringe nuts come out and post on AE911t, exposing the type of paranoia and ignorance required to believe Richard Gage's failed claims.

Maybe Gage is a agent for the government who finds nuts...

https://www.facebook.com/ae911truth/...type=3&theater
From the comments section

Quote:

Johann Wapstra THE TRUTH IS ALREADY EXPOSED BUT THE MEDIA IS OWNED BY THE JEWS BUT THE DAY WILL COME WHEN THEY WILL HANG

Quote:

Toby Tyler I wish TRUMP could get access to the real reports on 911,,,,Flight 93 was fake,,,all the pictures show no plane parts, bodies, luggage,,, just a missle hole in the ground,,,, the farmers said no plane parts way before the athorities ever showed up.

Who is faking an identity to make up silly stuff? Which one of you did this? No one can be this stupid. oops

Quote:

Frankie Panaia Slightly revised: this is how 'they' pulled if off. The so-called 19 Muslim hijackers were in truth, 19 Contractors. The conspirators simply arranged forged / cloned passports for the real non-Muslim culprits, who seized control of the flights, to re-route the same flights to a clandestine airstrip. It was simplicity in itself: the identity of the actual hijackers were hidden under the bogeyman cover of 19 Islamic Middle-Eastern (Arabs). The 19 Muslims got the blame, while the real hijackers went completely unnoticed.

Quote:

Steve Lane Simple fact number 1. Buildings do not just free fall. If they do in your World your either a shill or liar (Coward). Amazing that you have to do this over and over for AIA!!

ae911t, a cult based on lies, and the ignorance of the followers