?Impact

No, not the other side of the story. The alternative facts, ie. nothing to do with the story but made up fables.

No, they would be sending in robots... ...made in China

Sounds like in the telling, the story has changed significantly. Perhaps you should read the Joe Warmington report that predates by a couple of weeks all the crap I am seeing in the comic book blogs recently. Yes, there is still a lot of intolerance amongst the pious as the Hindu's didn't present Wynne with the robe of honour about a year earlier because she was a lesbian.

or Chinese immigrants they sent into the railroad tunnels to light the fuse

Other than the incident a couple of years ago where Sgt. Dorion was killed, are you aware of any other reports? I know there were questions about the soldiers treated at hospital in recent months, but DND made a clear statement they were not combat related (e.g. gastrointestinal problems, heatstroke, minor accidents like burns, etc.).

What were the Generals doing during the past 6 years where there was absolutely zero progress on the replacement fighter program?

I don't think that is true. Certainly budget is a big concern, but I think most Canadians see our forces as a visible role that reflects on our nation in world affairs. Far more than those with an ambassador title, the Canadian Forces are our real ambassadors in global events. I don't think there is a national consensus on what the role should be, but certainly Canadians are upset when our government lies to us about it. The mission in Iraq will have a very hard time getting support because Canadians do not want to be seen a part of the mess the Americans created there in the past 14 years (has it really been that long, just checked - March 20, 2003), remember we and much of the world was against that to begin with.

Yes, Google translate thought it was Azerbaijan. Are you from eastern Turkey, or have relatives from Azerbaijan?

Certainly the role changed under the Liberals, no more bombing but many more troops on the ground. I don't know if they have specifically stated that ground troops are non-combatant like the previous government did, but they might not have been as clear as they could be. I remember the terminology did go from "training mission" to "train and assist". They are clearly in combatant roles.

Probably because wings and a harp, and walking in the clouds sounds a little gay.

Canoes, sweat lodges, and potlatch

Yes, the intent of starting large fires is fairly obvious. The twin towers made a very high profile target to send a message. They couldn't fly too low because other buildings would be in the way, but the lower on the towers they were the more people who would be trapped above the fires. They may not have been able to predict that the towers would collapse on their own, but the damage they inflicted would certainly have caused them to be demolished afterwards. I'm wondering if it was the University of Manchester, they do talk about the heat curves of fires.

As I understand it, 2002 was one of the highest years on record. Someone should try and track down competitive data going back to then.

The University of Manchester has a descent high level description of the structural differences between the WTC and Windsor Tower fires, as well as the First Interstate Bank in LA fire. Certainly there have been many other high-rise fires, but are these the most extensive?

Since I only have the many pictures and videos of the fire and subsequent collapse to go by, I guess you are suggesting they are all fake and that your first hand account is the only valid one. Unlike you, I have not traveled to Madrid, and was not there in 2005 to witness the event first hand. I did not study the original blueprints for the building, and was not a construction foreman to witness it being built. So yes, you obviously are far more fully qualified than I. Ok, I will agree that as a generalization that is a bit misleading. Yes, steel does offer some fire resistance advantages in a localized fire as it will transfer the heat away from the source fairly quickly and keep from developing hot spots. Concrete will suffer more localized damage in those hot spots. The difference however is in a large fire like happened at the World Trade Center or Windsor Tower; there the fire will overtake the ability of the steel to conduct heat away and the softening of the steel one the higher temperatures are reached will result in catastrophic failure.

That site is now occupied by the Torre Titania which was built after the remains of the Windsor Tower were demolished. If you look at the picture of the collapse of the Windsor Tower, you will note that the central concrete core remained standing, as did the lower floors which were also concrete column construction. The outer steel columns however did collapse. The big lesson learned here is that concrete columns have better fire resistance than steel ones. Note that the Windsor Tower was less than one third the height of the World Trade Center.

Discussion topics = interoffice memos or email Status updates = bulletin board Chat = water cooler

Verbosity, combined with spurious false allegations doesn't constitute debate.

The collapse of the twin towers was not free fall speed, This is very easily verified by looking at photos where the exterior columns broke off of the structure and they are falling faster than the collapse of the main building. You don't even to rely on math to understand that something is slowing down the collapse of the tower. It was basically a [vertical] domino effect, where the weight of the falling building from above would cause something below to stress to the point of breaking and then another floor (or more) would collapse and add to the weight. Yes there was acceleration because as more and more of the structure fell it took less and less time for the next load bearing structure to stress to the point of breaking.

I'm sorry you interpreted my comment as referring to your English, that was not the intent at all. I am referring to the logic that just because the plane hit one of the "upper floors" that there was not sufficient weight above it. Perhaps "relative" would be a better term to use, there is still a substantial part of the building above the where the plane hit; as in my comparison it was about the equivalent of 5 or so 30 story apartment buildings. That is a lot of weight. The experts have estimated it to be around 40,000 tons in one tower and 70,000 tons in the other.

Court do not have oversight authority anywhere. They are called upon by others to interpret laws, they do not initiate anything.

Actually no, the courts do not. It is the laws and regulations that specify the process. Change the laws.

Fraser Institute is an opinion agency, they are not a statistics agency. They use other people's data, and then manipulate it to serve their agenda. What is the real source data, that is what needs to be examined.

Your solution is to rob funding from the system? That is the problem, not the solution.

I wonder how many a deplorable would have?