http://lapd.com/blog/los_angeles_times_story_threatens_safety_of_key_witness/#comment_form_anchor

Following is the response of a WeAreChangeLA member (Tim) to a blog (see link above) on the LAPD website by the Los Angeles Police Protection League - the union for police officers in LA. Tim is in constant contact with LAPD officers and the police union, and he uses every opportunity he can to talk about 9-11 Truth.

Free vs self-censored speech

What makes this country great is the fact that we have the right to a free press. Where no government official can infringe on the rights of the media.

But being that this is my opinion, the editorial staff should have [a] look at the above-mentioned story and determine what should have gone to press. It seems that The Los Angeles Times lack[s] the common sense on what should or should not [be] printed in their newspaper.

An example is the investigation of the World Trade Center Buildings by 1,000 architects and engineers under Richard Gage [AIA] of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. These men and women poured over 1,000s of pages of information with all of them coming to their expert conclusion that thermite and nanothermite were used inside building 1,2 and 7 on 9/11/2001. What does it mean? Gage believes that this is how the buildings came down killing 3,000 people but also, to this day, killing the police, fire and EMTs who went in to the rubble to find survivors.

Question to The Times: Why no mention of the investigation and its finding nor the end-results of New York's finest dying, but mention the name of a 15-year-old witness? Self-censorship is the only form of censorship I support, but to print or censor the wrong story only leads to more grief and the opportunity for the wrong people to win. If The Times read[s] my opinion? I have three words for you: Use Your Head!
— WeAreChangeLATim

http://lapd.com/blog/los_angeles_times_story_threatens_safety_of_key_witness/#comment_form_anchor