“Chief Engineer” Hyman Brown
by Patrick Marks
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?