Thinkinoutsidethebox

I don't know, to me it feels off that there seems to be a certain group of individuals running this world. Always you see the likes of major oil interests, big pharma, big banks, defence contractors, factory farming etc. with politicians. There are people from these entities that get appointed high government positions, what else is going on behind the scenes. In a way Trump is the odd man out but he still put several of his cronies in powerful positions in his government (although with mixed results ) Although you may think this has nothing to do with what we are discussing they are still taking risks to make gains from their positions.

I joined this discussion because I find the subject matter interesting, as far as 911 is concerned I think it happened, I've seen a few videos and documentaries on the subject. It never affected my life in the least, I didn't know anyone involved or lost in the incident, the loss of equipment and infrastructure was a shame, the loss of life a tragedy. But we all are born, we live and we die, there are about 7.5 billion people on the planet, about 6,316 people die every hour. Why did you join this discussion Rue?

Actually Rue, tests performed during the designing of these buildings proved they could not be brought down by the aircraft that actually stuck them. This is not OBJECTIVE evidence? Maybe for those who believe the official storyline it brings closure?

Well Rue, what you have stated may have some basis in reality, however, what's to say the conspiracists theory is correct and the official explanation isn't false? Where are you getting your OBJECTIVE evidence? Because you buy the official storyline of what happened on 911 and others see things that just don't make sense doesn't automatically make you right and them wrong. There are thousands of examples of this. How many people have been wrongly convicted of crimes they didn't commit? How many times have we been told living downstream of industry our water was perfectly safe? Smoking was not harmful to your health? Remember this was all based on OBJECTIVE evidence... AND remember the destruction done on 911 was never officially investigated, we bought the aircraft brought down these three buildings, end of story... As far as working inside government is concerned I have no idea, but I do know dealing with government that I seem to always bring scenarios they have never dealt with before Would I be safe to assume you have no idea what happens at the top end of government and their interactions with other governments and the elite as well?

There is an interesting discussion about the towers and planes here http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/655-faq-9-were-the-twin-towers-designed-to-survive-the-impact-of-the-airplanes.html . One guy was so confident they would remain standing he died rescuing people when it did collapse. There's some interesting reading on the towers design here http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/wtc4.htm , they also have a good article on building demolition by implosion. In there they state that they install explosives on higher floors but only to aid in crushing the materials to make cleanup easier, they use explosives on the main floor to actually bring the structure down.

Yes I know, I work with metals every day. I also know steel weakens and yields slowly as it's heated, it's not an instant phenomenon. In addition these buildings should have had a considerable safety factor built into them, they were designed to withstand the impact of fully laden 707s at cruise speed which according to aircraft specs, speed and load the 767s that were used were well under. It should also be noted these buildings were designed for substantial wind loads (and some earthquake shock loading as well?) It's hard to believe they could just fall like a house of cards like they did. Another option is these buildings were actually rigged to collapse the way they did to minimize potential collateral damage then if they toppled but advertizing that feature they may have figured the towers would have been hard to fill. Those three buildings collapsing the way they did is just so full of holes in my opinion. I could see the top portion toppling off or possibly the towers falling over but falling straight down onto undamaged structure is simply the path of most resistance. If this is the case demolition crews are going to way too much trouble to implode buildings. .

Even during a demolition the building doesn't actually freefall, there is resistance as the structure above overcomes the integraty of structure below. WTC 7 was a half block from WCT 1 and debree destroyed it? There were other buildings across the street from both towers and they weren't catastrophically destroyed, this speaks volumes of the quality of construction for the WTC buildings...

A couple things about that. 1. The towers fell amazingly fast with seemingly very little resistance. I argue that the floors below should have offered far more resistance then they did. 2. The towers fell straight down into their own footprints. I argue that A. The steel was heated slowly so anyone with any metalworking experience will know that the steel columns would begin to yield slowly resulting in the top section actually settling onto the section below, not free falling onto it. B. The fire should have been concentrated on one side so the top of the building should have toppled off instead of just listing 10 degrees and falling straight down. The floors below were also not heated so they should have offered considerable resistance. This is all assuming the fire even got hot enough heat the columns in the first place. Also, what caused building seven to collapse?

Nope, the most difficult thing I'd think is actually going through with it but I guess people run right into enemy fire during battle as well. People don't realize 90% of the switches and buttons in those cockpits are for isolating systems and subsystems for troubleshooting and in flight mechanical or electrical issues, most will never be touched for the life of the aircraft other then for testing and fault finding.

Actually, reading this and thinking about it this whole post is utter nonsense. I'm a pilot of both fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft and although I'm no high houred expert of every aircraft to ever take to the air I do know that Bernoulli's principle applies the same regardless of if the aircraft is a rubber band airplane or the great Antonov AN 250. These aircraft were well within their flight envelopes when they were taken over by the hijackers, in other words they were at cruise speed loaded to around 50% capacity, there was a lot of leeway for them to make amateurish mistakes and still be able to keep these aircraft aloft. As far as controlling them the 767 has one control that probably 99% of all fixed wing aircraft have (including the Cessna 172) and that is the aircraft control yoke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoke_(aeronautics) . With this one simple control device one could take control of these aircraft and basically do exactly as what the hijackers did without touching one other single control in the cockpit. I bet the aircraft autopilot even disengages when human input is detected at the yoke. I would bet any novice pilot could taxi, take off, fly and land a 767 with very little instruction, it's not rocket science. Also the cockpit is not anymore stressful environment while in flight then traffic on a highway especially as most basic tasks are automated these days. As far as navigation is concerned all they needed was a Garmin or TomTom and they would have been guided right to the towers, they just needed to guided to the area, the towers would have been easy to see within thirty miles especially for the second aircraft. Also seat of the pants navigation has been going on since the beginning of flight, it's not that complicated...

Is there a gene that affects how submissive a human will be? If there is would the powers that be tell us? Who knows? As you spec out your new designer baby this may be a characteristic you don't have a right (or the knowledge) to choose, besides who wants a toddler that freaks out once in awhile?

Is this the same "science" used in Star Wars etc. ? Remember, just like the "official" story, counter arguments can be as real or fictional as the resources we have at our fingertips, today the limit is our imagination. It's possible for anybody to even make smurfs the cause of 911 look real on YouTube. Quoting experts that no one has heard of or behind their backs is not outside the realm of possibilities either. Stating aircraft didn't strike the twin towers is a bit out there, the pentagon and Pennsylvania I don't know. Were these the aircraft they say they were I don't know, the families of the people aboard those aircraft might argue they were. I'm pretty sure aircraft struck the towers, I don't believe they caused the towers to collapse into their own footprints as well as cause so much damage to only the other buildings of the world trade center and no irreparable damage to others right next to them.

Not sure if you understand the purpose of gathering components and reassembling the aircraft in a warehouse. They do this exercise to establish the cause of the incident. I'd think even you can see the causes of these wrecks is no real mystery. Just incase you missed it these aircraft were driven into their demise, mechanical failure had nothing to do with it... Are the people that were aboard these aircraft missing? If so, where are they?

This is another step on our way to become clones and to serve AI. It seems to be human nature to be a slave to something whether it be money, power, super stars, possessions, technology etc. The theory is if we all exactly the same there will be no more abuse of each other, personally I don't think this can be farther from the truth as humans will still pick on each other from the cubicle they sit in to their place in line to where they live, it's human nature. Of course it may be possible to edit that gene from us also... Then the population can truly become a tradable commodity for the elite at least for awhile.

No, people are more than willing to take these risks. Look around you, everything you see that was touched by humans someone took a risk and many that make these decisions are well off enough they don't have to work another day in their lives yet they keep on taking risks to advance their wealth. Without the willingness to take risks we would still be Africa living in caves and grass huts. Examples would be the likes of Hitler, he had it all but decided it wasn't enough, The Arab spring is another, the 2008 crash was another that several billionaires took huge risks and none of them went to prison in that case. Look at the mess in Asia with manufacturing, many billionaires are more than happy to take huge risks to make money and they know they can with a few cronies in the right places and the consuming public on their side they will be free and clear. You don't have to pay off anybody, all you need is to make sure you have a few people at the top working with you to produce an official story that doesn't incriminate you. All you need is the majority of the population to believe you and call those that question the actual series of events crazy. People like HE further advance the "conspiracy nuts" attitude, it's also human nature as observers to go to extremes (left and right in politics is a perfect example...). The people that witnessed the actual event can say what they want, unless they can sway public opinion and someone at the top sees their future on the line nothing is going to change the official story.

Ah so 911 didn't actually happen, it was everybody's collective imagination Are we in the Matrix here?

Personally I think there were plenty of IDable parts lying around but I don't know I wasn't there (I don't think you were either), obviously something hit the twin towers, the pentagon and created a crater in Pennsylvania. Are the people that were aboard these flights missing? I don't find it too big of stretch for some to believe some human sacrifice is acceptable for the "cause", whether it be war, travel, space flight, whatever, it's human nature. It's no different then sacrificing wilderness and wildlife for suburban development, energy exploration, travel, tourism and so on. How many of us would be willing to sacrifice a few thousand lives for a few billion dollars? It's been said everyone has a price...

Fun fact... These were not "jumbo jets" they are about half the size. Just throwing that out there

Actually seven buildings in New York city alone. And only the world trade center buildings http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapse.html wierd...

It is a sad state of events... Government wants everybody to work yet they are financing and encouraging technology, robots, automation, globalization, exporting jobs etc. to replace people in the workforce. Maybe it's time to step back and look at the big picture. What exactly is their ultimate goal? Besides buying votes?

We don't purchase healthcare... I've probably financed more health care through taxes than I've required over my lifetime so far but I'm fine with that, I'm blessed with being reasonably healthy to this point and I don't mind subsidizing those that have been less fortunate health wise. That's not our experience, we've sat in waiting rooms up to four hours at times but anything approaching life threatening has always been taken care of immediately. I have never had issues waiting for specialists, yes waiting 6-8 months to get a concern addressed is an issue but on the other hand do we want to finance specialists waiting on the sidelines to immediately address every little irritant we get? It's all checks and balances people and industries get busy, we all go through times we can't keep up and I bet European healthcare systems have their issues too.

Here in Southern Alberta health care has been virtually perfect for myself, family and others we know. We have no complaints whatsoever. It's not perfect but far better then alternatives I've seen so far. I believe health care should be a right, not a privilege and everybody should have equal access regardless of financial ability.

I believe to some children are required accessories so they can fit in... I think we need to start realizing we just can't have it all, in my opinion raising our own children should considered a career choice and should be supported as such. I can't understand how someone can bring a child into the world, stick with it a few months then hand it over to others to raise. I realize there are circumstances that may make it necessary but as a society we should have more and better ways to keep children and parents together. I have four siblings, we were raised on the farm by our parents, we all grew up and entered different career and life paths. Of the five of us one chose career over children, there are eleven children among the rest of us and not one of our children had a nanny or entered a daycare. So far between us, our spouses and our children there are no drinkers, smokers, no drugs, no criminals no random offspring, divorces etc.. I realize this is just a very small sample and maybe we are just lucky but there are other families like ours that seem to be doing as well and there are other that had children raised by others that don't seem to be doing nearly as well. By the way, all day kindergarten gets my vote, saves having to drive into town to either pickup or drop off the kid. Better for the environment too

I didn't say he wasn't a crook or a bully, he also isn't running his empire or the US from a prison cell... He will use as many of the tactics you've listed above he can get away with to achieve his new NAFTA agreement and we are going to pay for it, I think Canada is going to get hit harder than Mexico because we have have a woman in charge of our portion (we all know Trump's dealings with women) and Trudeau is a pushover. Trump couldn't care less about the majority of demands Canada has on our side of the negotiations (pay equity, native rights, dispute resolution, the environment etc), he will be there to benefit the US and all he sees are dollars and cents and what it's going to take to put Americans to work. The ironic thing about this he will probably do more for some of what Canada wants if he gets his way then if he signs the agreement as it sits now.

People like yourself and the vast majority of the press refuse to see his successes through your pure hatred of him. I'm not saying his presidential run so far has been an overwhelming success. The man is the biggest joke in US history but he's making MSM and his neysayers look like a bunch of middle school kids. There is simply no unbiased reporting or opinions on this guy or what he achieves (although the press is starting to back down a bit). PS, I'm not a fan of him either but I am mature enough to see he's achieved many of the goals he's set for himself.