Question Music
Another fact for 911? Or can anyone debunk this?
Patti June 04, 2009 17:38:16
- 21 answers
- Read all 139 comments
- +7 raves
“Chief Engineer” Hyman Brown
by Patrick Marks
5/26/09
Colorado 9-11 Visibility
While introducing an interview that appeared on NBC-TV on September 11, 2001, Tom Brokaw referred to Hyman Brown as the “architect” of the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers.[i]
Hyman Brown was not the architect of the Twin Towers.
In an article that appeared on September 10, 2007, The Jerusalem Post referred to Hyman Brown as the “Twin Towers chief engineer.”[ii]
Hyman Brown was not the Twin Towers chief engineer.
Hyman Brown, in various books, articles, lectures, and television interviews has been referred to as the “architect . . . chief engineer . . . project engineer [iii]. . . construction manager[iv] . . . fifth in command ”[v] of the Twin Towers.
None of it is true. What’s more, Hyman Brown admits that none of it is true, although he has made no effort to set the record straight.
The Twin Towers were designed by architect Minoru Yamasaki in the early 1960s . . . when Hyman Brown was an undergraduate at City College of New York.[vi] Construction on the Twin Towers took place in the late 1960’s . . . when Hyman Brown was attending California State University at Los Angeles. The Twin Towers were completed in 1971 . . . when Hyman Brown was employed at Tishman Realty and Construction in Los Angeles. According to his own resume,[vii] Hyman Brown began working at the World Trade Center in 1972, a full year after the Twin Towers were dedicated.[viii] Did he hold a position of authority after 1972? Maybe. But he held no important position before then, although everywhere he goes, from Boulder to Jerusalem, he strives to leave the impression that he did.
In a history of the World Trade Center entitled City in the Sky, architect Minoru Yamasaki is referred to six times, chief engineer John Skilling thirteen times, structural engineer Leslie Robertson eight times, and construction manager Ray Monti six times, but Hyman Brown is not mentioned.[ix] In a personal email to me, Leslie Roberston said that he never heard of Hyman Brown.[x] How could that be? How could the structural engineer not know the identity of the “architect”, the “chief engineer”, the “production manager”? Is that credible?
In an interview with me, conducted in June of 2008, Hyman Brown admitted that he held none of the titles attributed to him. “It was my first job out of college, I was 25 years old, and I was the guy who sharpened the pencils. . . . It was my job to open the trailer and make coffee in the morning.”
But even those modest claims are probably not true.
When I asked him how he could simultaneously be in graduate school in Los Angeles and an engineer in New York, Brown told me that he “commuted” between New York and Los Angeles from 1967 through 1970, but is that credible? The typical salary for a novice engineer in 1966 was approximately $9,000, or $173 a week. The cost of a one-way ticket from Los Angeles to New York during that period was $217.65,[xi] which means that a round trip ticket was probably around $400. To believe that Hyman Brown commuted between New York and Los Angeles on the company’s dime, you have to believe that Tishman Realty, which had a fixed contract of $3.5 million, paid weekly travel fees in excess of salary for a novice engineer, who, by his own admission, did little more than make coffee. Is that credible? It is even less credible that Brown footed the bill himself, since the 1967 cost of a round trip flight was more than double his salary. And even if he did commute, how could he possibly work full time in New York and attend school full time in Los Angeles? No matter how you slice it, the story doesn’t add up.
Why is this information important?
1. Hyman Brown is often cited as an “expert” on the construction of the World Trade Center. In the Tom Brokaw piece, for example, “architect” Hyman Brown “explained” why the Twin Towers collapsed. In a public talk in Boulder, Colorado, “5th in command” Hyman Brown “explained” how the steel beams melted.[xii] Hyman Brown is cited as an authority in documentaries made by the History Channel and the BBC, and even 9-11 Truth champion David Ray Griffin has quoted “construction manager” Hyman Brown.[xiii] Brown’s remarks are considered valuable because he was there. Problem is, he wasn’t there, in all probability, and even if he was, all he did was make coffee.
2. Brown’s “expert analysis” always supports the official Bush administration myth. Always. Brown “explains” why the steel melted and the buildings collapsed, even though his “explanation” has no basis in engineering, architecture, the forensic evidence, the temperature of jet fuel, the melting point of steel, or the laws of physics, and he uses his “authority” as “architect”, “chief engineer”, “production manager”, and “5th in command” to gain instant credibility. And when people believe him, they believe the Official Myth. I know people with PhD’s in the sciences who parrot Bush Administration propaganda because they heard Hyman Brown “explain” it to them. But if Hyman Brown was not “architect”, “chief engineer”, or “production manager”, if Hyman Brown was an undergraduate when the Twin Towers were planned, if Hyman Brown was in California when the Twin Towers were built, if Hyman Brown is a complete stranger to the men who actually built the Twin Towers, what does that say about his credibility?
3. The Myth of 9-11, for which “chief engineer” Hyman Brown is one of the most vocal spokesmen, has been used to justify unprovoked attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan, the murder of between 100,000 and 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens, the building of concentration camps, domestic spying, suspension of habeas corpus, torture, the payment of billions of dollars to shady defense contractors, a national debt that is counted in the trillions, and hundreds of other domestic and foreign policy disasters. Indeed, The Myth of 9-11 is so entrenched that Barack Obama himself pledged to go after the terrorists in Afghanistan. It might seem like an innocent prank to fake your credentials and get on TV, but Hyman Brown’s testimony is far from innocent. He did not create the 9-11 Myth, of course, but he lied in order to perpetuate it, and he lied early, when the myth was still being formed. It would have developed without him, I’m sure, but in his small way, he has been a cog in the Death Machine.xi
The question is, why was NBC News interviewing Hyman Brown in the first place, on the very day of the 9-11 disaster, when he
. . . wasn’t the architect (although Tom Brokaw claimed he was)?
. . . wasn’t the project engineer (although NBC correspondent Roger O’Neal claimed he was)?
. . . wasn’t even living in New York when the Twin Towers were built?
Why did NBC call him? Or did he call them? But if they called him, why? Where did they get his name? He isn’t mentioned in any book I have read about the construction of the Twin Towers. His own resume places him in California during the years when the Twin Towers were built. Why call him when people who played key roles in the project were available? Was his name on a list? And if so, where did that list come from? Who compiled it? Was the Bush administration involved? Why call him when five minutes of fact-checking would have revealed that he was neither “architect” nor “construction manager”? Why did NBC fail to do that fact-checking? And if he called them, why? Was it ego? Was it delusions of grandeur? Was he seeking his 15 minutes of fame? Or was he on the payroll of the Bush administration? Was it Hyman Brown’s job to spread disinformation? And why did NBC bite? Were they merely incompetent or were they actively seeking an “expert” to lend credence to the Official Myth?
I don’t know the answers to those questions. All I know is, something fishy is going on.
by Patrick Marks
5/26/09
Colorado 9-11 Visibility
While introducing an interview that appeared on NBC-TV on September 11, 2001, Tom Brokaw referred to Hyman Brown as the “architect” of the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers.[i]
Hyman Brown was not the architect of the Twin Towers.
In an article that appeared on September 10, 2007, The Jerusalem Post referred to Hyman Brown as the “Twin Towers chief engineer.”[ii]
Hyman Brown was not the Twin Towers chief engineer.
Hyman Brown, in various books, articles, lectures, and television interviews has been referred to as the “architect . . . chief engineer . . . project engineer [iii]. . . construction manager[iv] . . . fifth in command ”[v] of the Twin Towers.
None of it is true. What’s more, Hyman Brown admits that none of it is true, although he has made no effort to set the record straight.
The Twin Towers were designed by architect Minoru Yamasaki in the early 1960s . . . when Hyman Brown was an undergraduate at City College of New York.[vi] Construction on the Twin Towers took place in the late 1960’s . . . when Hyman Brown was attending California State University at Los Angeles. The Twin Towers were completed in 1971 . . . when Hyman Brown was employed at Tishman Realty and Construction in Los Angeles. According to his own resume,[vii] Hyman Brown began working at the World Trade Center in 1972, a full year after the Twin Towers were dedicated.[viii] Did he hold a position of authority after 1972? Maybe. But he held no important position before then, although everywhere he goes, from Boulder to Jerusalem, he strives to leave the impression that he did.
In a history of the World Trade Center entitled City in the Sky, architect Minoru Yamasaki is referred to six times, chief engineer John Skilling thirteen times, structural engineer Leslie Robertson eight times, and construction manager Ray Monti six times, but Hyman Brown is not mentioned.[ix] In a personal email to me, Leslie Roberston said that he never heard of Hyman Brown.[x] How could that be? How could the structural engineer not know the identity of the “architect”, the “chief engineer”, the “production manager”? Is that credible?
In an interview with me, conducted in June of 2008, Hyman Brown admitted that he held none of the titles attributed to him. “It was my first job out of college, I was 25 years old, and I was the guy who sharpened the pencils. . . . It was my job to open the trailer and make coffee in the morning.”
But even those modest claims are probably not true.
When I asked him how he could simultaneously be in graduate school in Los Angeles and an engineer in New York, Brown told me that he “commuted” between New York and Los Angeles from 1967 through 1970, but is that credible? The typical salary for a novice engineer in 1966 was approximately $9,000, or $173 a week. The cost of a one-way ticket from Los Angeles to New York during that period was $217.65,[xi] which means that a round trip ticket was probably around $400. To believe that Hyman Brown commuted between New York and Los Angeles on the company’s dime, you have to believe that Tishman Realty, which had a fixed contract of $3.5 million, paid weekly travel fees in excess of salary for a novice engineer, who, by his own admission, did little more than make coffee. Is that credible? It is even less credible that Brown footed the bill himself, since the 1967 cost of a round trip flight was more than double his salary. And even if he did commute, how could he possibly work full time in New York and attend school full time in Los Angeles? No matter how you slice it, the story doesn’t add up.
Why is this information important?
1. Hyman Brown is often cited as an “expert” on the construction of the World Trade Center. In the Tom Brokaw piece, for example, “architect” Hyman Brown “explained” why the Twin Towers collapsed. In a public talk in Boulder, Colorado, “5th in command” Hyman Brown “explained” how the steel beams melted.[xii] Hyman Brown is cited as an authority in documentaries made by the History Channel and the BBC, and even 9-11 Truth champion David Ray Griffin has quoted “construction manager” Hyman Brown.[xiii] Brown’s remarks are considered valuable because he was there. Problem is, he wasn’t there, in all probability, and even if he was, all he did was make coffee.
2. Brown’s “expert analysis” always supports the official Bush administration myth. Always. Brown “explains” why the steel melted and the buildings collapsed, even though his “explanation” has no basis in engineering, architecture, the forensic evidence, the temperature of jet fuel, the melting point of steel, or the laws of physics, and he uses his “authority” as “architect”, “chief engineer”, “production manager”, and “5th in command” to gain instant credibility. And when people believe him, they believe the Official Myth. I know people with PhD’s in the sciences who parrot Bush Administration propaganda because they heard Hyman Brown “explain” it to them. But if Hyman Brown was not “architect”, “chief engineer”, or “production manager”, if Hyman Brown was an undergraduate when the Twin Towers were planned, if Hyman Brown was in California when the Twin Towers were built, if Hyman Brown is a complete stranger to the men who actually built the Twin Towers, what does that say about his credibility?
3. The Myth of 9-11, for which “chief engineer” Hyman Brown is one of the most vocal spokesmen, has been used to justify unprovoked attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan, the murder of between 100,000 and 1,000,000 Iraqi citizens, the building of concentration camps, domestic spying, suspension of habeas corpus, torture, the payment of billions of dollars to shady defense contractors, a national debt that is counted in the trillions, and hundreds of other domestic and foreign policy disasters. Indeed, The Myth of 9-11 is so entrenched that Barack Obama himself pledged to go after the terrorists in Afghanistan. It might seem like an innocent prank to fake your credentials and get on TV, but Hyman Brown’s testimony is far from innocent. He did not create the 9-11 Myth, of course, but he lied in order to perpetuate it, and he lied early, when the myth was still being formed. It would have developed without him, I’m sure, but in his small way, he has been a cog in the Death Machine.xi
The question is, why was NBC News interviewing Hyman Brown in the first place, on the very day of the 9-11 disaster, when he
. . . wasn’t the architect (although Tom Brokaw claimed he was)?
. . . wasn’t the project engineer (although NBC correspondent Roger O’Neal claimed he was)?
. . . wasn’t even living in New York when the Twin Towers were built?
Why did NBC call him? Or did he call them? But if they called him, why? Where did they get his name? He isn’t mentioned in any book I have read about the construction of the Twin Towers. His own resume places him in California during the years when the Twin Towers were built. Why call him when people who played key roles in the project were available? Was his name on a list? And if so, where did that list come from? Who compiled it? Was the Bush administration involved? Why call him when five minutes of fact-checking would have revealed that he was neither “architect” nor “construction manager”? Why did NBC fail to do that fact-checking? And if he called them, why? Was it ego? Was it delusions of grandeur? Was he seeking his 15 minutes of fame? Or was he on the payroll of the Bush administration? Was it Hyman Brown’s job to spread disinformation? And why did NBC bite? Were they merely incompetent or were they actively seeking an “expert” to lend credence to the Official Myth?
I don’t know the answers to those questions. All I know is, something fishy is going on.
Loading... 
Top Comment
-
All of the above
When something smells fishy, my first impulse is to always follow the money.View thread
SodaHead Hot Trends
It is the truth. There is something wrong with 911 explanations.
Answer that question kids.
The pancaking of the floors would leave those monstrous columns standing.
All you have to know is the tinyest bit about dealing with steel and blast furnaces to know that sombody is lying.
It is the truth. There is something wrong with 911 explanations.
It is the truth. There is something wrong with 911 explanations.
It is the truth. There is something wrong with 911 explanations.
All of the above
http://911-engineers.blogspot...
I dare anyone to have an open mind and realize government is far from a friend
In fact,you only need to understand some high school physics to know that Newton's Laws of Motion are universal. On 9/11, the buildings "collapsed" at free-fall speed, but at the same time all of their component parts were pulverised and jettisoned outward and upward - just study the videos!
Free-fall means NO resistence, with all the potential energy of the standing building converted to kinetic. Progressive pulverisation of steel and concrete means enormous extra energy required. You quite simply cannot have your energy cake and eat it too.
A simple gravitational collapse, (which is what we have been told happened), CANNOT proceed at free-fall speed and at the same time pulverise all the components and throw them outwards and upwards, it is just not scientifically possible.....no matter what a group of animators might tell you.
Unless of course you think t...
In fact,you only need to understand some high school physics to know that Newton's Laws of Motion are universal. On 9/11, the buildings "collapsed" at free-fall speed, but at the same time all of their component parts were pulverised and jettisoned outward and upward - just study the videos!
Free-fall means NO resistence, with all the potential energy of the standing building converted to kinetic. Progressive pulverisation of steel and concrete means enormous extra energy required. You quite simply cannot have your energy cake and eat it too.
A simple gravitational collapse, (which is what we have been told happened), CANNOT proceed at free-fall speed and at the same time pulverise all the components and throw them outwards and upwards, it is just not scientifically possible.....no matter what a group of animators might tell you.
Unless of course you think that Newton's Laws, that are the basis of almost all engineering and even "rocket science", did not apply on 9/11.
OK, I know it is scary thought, but you cannot argue against such basic science. I just want to know what REALLY happened; and surely every open-minded person does. Give us a new inquiry now!
http://www.ae911truth.org/
Undecided
All of the above
None of the above
The scientific community has not brought into any of this, with good reason. There is no proof of anything that is asserted in the video. Saying the government murdered it's own citizens because of financial loyality to the jews is preposterous, and requires extraordinary proof, and there is not even any regular proof, nor supporting facts- only innuendo and suspicion.
Personally, I don't believe that there is a case for a government conspriacy. I believe that all the evidence points to Osama bin Laden and Al Queda.
This is the same question I asked Patt
I can also tell you that "the ties to Mohammad Atta and Osama Bin Laden" are extremely thin. In fact the only "evidence" is what we have been told (over & over) by Bush, Cheney and their cohorts and there are no compelling reasons to believe that that should be true!
Remember the infamous quote from Joseph Goebbels (Reich Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany): "If you want to tell a lie, make it a bit one and tell it often" - and then remember how many times you have heard 9/11, Al Qaeda & terrorism mentioned together in the media over the past 7 years! Just because it is said frequently, it doesn't make it true!
Quite frankly, if you want to believe the big lie that is the official explanation of 9/11 then that is your prerogative! But I encourage everyone to do their own research, outside the big media, before they come to their own considered conclusions!
All truth and justice is based on proof and there is quite simply no proof that "Osama bin Laden and Al Queda perpetrated 911", but there is literally heaps of proof that goverment and their military were implicated.
Why would arab terrorists go on a suicide mission to help the US government attack Arab countries? Why would they die for the supposed Jewish conspiracy?
That doesn't make sense.
Like I said somewhere else, one of the "key" pieces of evidence is a passport that is supposed to have fallen out of the "terrorist's" pocket as the plane exploded into the Tower. It then floated to the ground undamage and was able to be easily found the same day to immediately identify the perpetrator. Mate, this only happens in Bruce Willis' movies!
http://www.welfarestate.com/b...