blackascoal

Nobody has total or near total control...that is the point...neither do defaulted Democrats. Who "protected America" in 1993 (WTC) or 1995 (OKC) or 1998 (overseas)? It's a dead-end tit for tat argument. The American political system is more sophisticated than that. The history of American "influence" is not a zero sum gain, with plenty of self serving wreckage long before Dubya came along. America is the same as it ever was. A superpower's work is never done. You can call it whatever you want, but control of the White House, Senate, Congress, and the Supreme Court sounds like near-total control to most humans. .. and the American political system wasn't sophisticated enough to prevent this mindless blunder. Comparing the OKC Bombing, which was done by a right-wing American to Iraq is a stretch at best .. although I do understand your need to do so .. AND .. even after the attack on the WTC under Clinton's watch, America still maintained its leadership positiion in the world, which is far different than under Bush. Superpower? Oh .. you mean because we have a lot of nukes .. which is about all that makes us a "superpower" China and Japan own the US .. superpower? In spite of our nukes, shiny new jets and tanks, we've gotten our asses handed to us by small nations the size of Ohio (Iraq, Vietnam) and got our asses kicked by a stone age nation using slingshots (Afghanistan). Iraq was depleted under sanctions for 12 years and their citizens fought back with rifles and made-up bombs and we still lost .. superpower? North Korea has no more than 1 or 2 nukes but we still treaded lightly and had to rely on the rest of the world to save us from our bluster. Can't deal with Iran without help from China and Russia and we're still unable to isolate them because the rest of the world wants no part of so-called American "leadership" .. superpower? We are a debtor nation that cannot pay its bills .. superpower? The euro is about to replace the dollar as the international monetary standard as the dollar goes the way of the british pound .. superpower? No longer wage an effective military action .. superpower? Can't protect our own citizens in a disaster .. superpower? I coild go on .. and on .. but we've been stripped of our "superpowers" by the Bush/Cheney Administration which has ensured the fall of the American Century. All the good will America built during WWII has been squandered by an inept and ignorant administration. But feel free to call it whatever you want.

Then she will surely fail....most of America wants more of a choice than defaulted Democrats. That's how the system works. Just ask John Kerry. How about I ask the parade of republicans walking out the door? After 6 years of near total control of government, how about you educating me on the love and appreciation of the American people for the right-wing and republicans? Perhaps you can educate me on the shrinking ranks of republicans and how that's the democrats fault? Somehow, I missed "America wanting more choice than democrats" in the 2006 elections. Perhaps you can educate me on how you arrived at this unsupported opinion. After 6 years of near total control, perhaps you can educate me on all the wonderful achievements by the Bush Administration .. other than .. failure to protect America on 9/11, failure to capture the oerson said to be responsible for it, failure to destroy the Taliban, the monumentally miserable failure of the war on Iraq/"terror", the loss of American influence, power, stature, and respect all over the world, failure to maintain American support for this mindless attack, failure to keep even republicans on board with the sinking ship, and the failure to keep the "coalition" together. for starters ...

If it comes to it, and although I hope for a better choice, I will hold my nose and vote for Hillary in a heartbeat over ANY republican candidate .. and I'm sure that most of America shares that sentiment. Her campaign is based on the knowledge that republicans are so corrupt and dysfunctional that none of them deserve to be president.

Nope, I will not make an attempt to triangulate, we get enough lies, cover ups, bias and pap promoting the Iarq war and too little opposing information and truth as it is. Why don't you ask others putting up war propaganda to triangulate what they are saying? And are you really trying to say veterans groups are wrong that are reporting to this site about what is going on are lying? And I sure DO see where you are coming from! Well said.

In keeping with the rules .. an excerpt ... Blood and oil: How the West will profit from Iraq's most precious commodity http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle...icle2132574.ece The 'IoS' today reveals a draft for a new law that would give Western oil companies a massive share in the third largest reserves in the world. To the victors, the oil? That is how some experts view this unprecedented arrangement with a major Middle East oil producer that guarantees investors huge profits for the next 30 years And Iraq's oil reserves, the third largest in the world, with an estimated 115 billion barrels waiting to be extracted, are a prize worth having. As Vice-President Dick Cheney noted in 1999, when he was still running Halliburton, an oil services company, the Middle East is the key to preventing the world running out of oil. Now, unnoticed by most amid the furore over civil war in Iraq and the hanging of Saddam Hussein, the new oil law has quietly been going through several drafts, and is now on the point of being presented to the cabinet and then the parliament in Baghdad. Its provisions are a radical departure from the norm for developing countries: under a system known as "production-sharing agreements", or PSAs, oil majors such as BP and Shell in Britain, and Exxon and Chevron in the US, would be able to sign deals of up to 30 years to extract Iraq's oil. "Three outside groups have had far more opportunity to scrutinise this legislation than most Iraqis," said Mr Muttitt. "The draft went to the US government and major oil companies in July, and to the International Monetary Fund in September. Last month I met a group of 20 Iraqi MPs in Jordan, and I asked them how many had seen the legislation. Only one had." WHAT THEY SAID "Oil revenues, which people falsely claim that we want to seize, should be put in a trust fund for the Iraqi people" Tony Blair; Moving motion for war with Iraq, 18 March 2003 "Oil belongs to the Iraqi people; the government has... to be good stewards of that valuable asset " George Bush; Press conference, 14 June 2006 "The oil of the Iraqi people... is their wealth. We did not [invade Iraq] for oil " Colin Powell; Press briefing, 10 July 2003 "Oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50bn and $100bn in two or three years... [iraq] can finance its reconstruction" Paul Wolfowitz; Deputy Defense Secretary, March 2003 "By 2010 we will need [a further] 50 million barrels a day. The Middle East, with two-thirds of the oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize lies" Dick Cheney; US Vice-President, 1999 ------------------------------------------------------ The war on Iraq has proven to be nothing more than murder for profit.

It seems you need the context of my little campaign to chastise the author of 4 threads all simply bashing bush(Figleaf). I posted comments in all four giving said author the hint he was making multiple threads on the same type topic, which btw got almost no posts. The main point of my above comment was to inform a newbie his post was too long. I will call out any poster who has Bush derangement when they go over the top. If you don't like such posts, ignore them. A point from the "newbie" .. You can point out what you consider "Bush derangement" all you want and I respect your right to do so .. but it won't make a damn bit of difference to me and will be a complete waste of your time. I have a daughter in the military dude, who has already served two tours of Iraq and I will talk about the miserable failure of this war and Bush where I see fit, irrespective of the ignorance of those who supported the worst blunder in American history .. and irrespective of right-wing desire to avoid the mirror.

I think you need children or a dog. Someone you can tell what to do. Bush deserves no defense. You might want to learn the netiquette of posting here before you shown the hard way. If that means I have to kiss your ass, then I can post somewhere else. "I need to get a grip on Bush"? .. I'm supposed to take that crap seriously? If there is a limit on the length of posts here, there is a better, more "netiquette", way of telling me. I suspect that you simply don't care for what I have to say, not the "un-netiquette"way I'm saying it

I think you need children or a dog. Someone you can tell what to do. Bush deserves no defense.

I think that something that happens about 2% of the time can be considered an anomoly can it not? Are you suggesting that homosexuals make up 2% of the population. What country do you live in?

All that's telling about that is that the Democratic Party is made-up of cowards .. as if we didn't already know.

You're correct. No steel-frame or concrete building, or, indeed, any bulding in history, has ever melted, weakened, or totally collapsed from a theory. The Twin Towers, on the other hand, collapsed because they were hit by two 400,000lb jet aircraft travelling at about 900 km/h. Then I'm sure you can explain, in detail, how they did it. I asked PN for his version about 20 pages ago, but maybe you can offer up a scenario where he could not. Oh: don't forget to show your work. "Don't forget to show your work" .. I'll assume that's humor. So are you now suggesting that the weight and speed of the planes brought the towers down? I agree that the fire/heat theory is lame as hell, but I'd rather deal with one ridiculous theory at a time. Was Operation Northwoods a real plan to assassinate and kill innocent people as a pretext for war? Or did we lefties just make that up? I'll give you an two examples of "how they did it". First, if you're planning an Operation Northwoods style attack on your own country, you'd have to make sure that NORAD did not get in the way as they have successfully done for 40 years. You would need a stand-down order and a smokescreen to confuse the military. Was there a stand-down order? .. Surely you know. Were there 5 wargames going on the very same day? How did 19 cavemen know that? Was it coincidence, happenstance, or just plain luck that "Bin Laden" chose that day to attack? Additionally, if you're going to implode the buildings and blame it on magic (fire/heat), you'd better make damn sure that no one inspects the crime scene and physical evidence. After the attack, the US scooped up all the concrete/debris/EVIDENCE and shipped it to China and India with the quickness without a thorough examination of the evidence. In fact, by the same demolition company that scooped up the Oklahoma City Bombing debris. How many people would know of the fraud at this point outside of the people who planned it.

Post remove due to copyright infringment

So, are you just Polynewbie? Are you a Lyndon Larouche neo-fascist? Most rational people can see through the BS often spewed by the conspiracy theory crowd, who think their living in the Matrix for some reason. Nope .. I'm a citizen. Most rational people? Do you mean as in most rational people saw through the fraud of Iraq? I bet you were spewing that "most rational people" bullshit then .. weren't you?

Hardly, if it really was a botched hoax then we would have a long line of up colaboraters ready to explain their part in the scheme whether it was planting bombs or faking evidence at the crash sites. A few photos from a cell phone and there would be no debate today - Bush would be already impeached and life moves on. However, no collaborators have come forward for their 15 minutes of fame. Rational people conclude that must be because there was no hoax. Nearly half of Americans question the events of 9/11 and they come from both sides of the political spectrum. Just a thought.

If no one know's how hot the fires were, then how do you know they couldn't have weakened the structure? Somebody who says that it's easy to prove 9/11 was the product of a CD by filling a barrel full of kerosene and a tin cup probably don't know what their talking about. PteB, and I hear that those aircraft fires can burn extremey hot. I'm not right wing, I'm more of a Liberal-Libertarian. As well the American people don't think too highly of the right wing given the last mid-term election results. As well left wingers on here think your theories are completely bogus. I make my own opinion's based on what I've read. So far the mainstream science community supports the official event's of 9/11, and base that on science, not from making a few observation's while watching a video. Either way I can only hope a round house kick is coming your way. Wasn't talking to you dude or does this board work differently than replying to the name on the quote? It doesn't matter what "wing" the fairy-talers belong to. The person I was talking to is right-wing. As far as that round house kick .. not a good idea.

So please explain how an adminstration capable of screwing up the invasion of Iraq so badly could have possibly orchastrated a hoax like 9/11? Your partner in crime, PolyNewbie, believes the war in Iraq has gone exactly the way Bush and the evil overlords want. I think I'm beginning to like my "partner in crime" even more. The fraud of 9/11 wasn't that difficult to orchestrate and even then they did a lousy job of it which is why planet earth questions it. You can begin with "how did you know that Al Queda was involved?" The official White House response "When one of the planes hit the towers, the passport of one of the hijackers fell out of his pocket, landed on the ground, we found it, then related that hijacker to Al Queda". People with brains would ask .. wait a minute .. are you suggesting that a paper passport fell out of the pocket of a hijacker, fell through heat and fire so intense that it melted a building, landed on the ground amongst tens of thousands of tons of concrete, debris, glass, and steel, then shortly after the attack, someone walked over and found this passport laying openly on the ground through dust and smoke so thick one could hardly see the nose on their face, you got the passport not knowing where it came from and immediately connected it to Al Queda. How brilliant is that? Sounds like a joke, doesn't it .. but it's their official story. The fraud wasn't premised on brilliance, it was premised on anyone hearing the official story would be too dumb to figure out that it's stupid. By the way, I'm going to create a thread about "Victory in Iraq" which supports my partners claim.

Since you love facts try to absorb these ones:1) Steel does not need to melt to weaken - it just needs to be heated. Normal fires burning carpet, furniture, etc can easily reach 800C. That is why steel frame buildings require fire proofing on all steel supports. 2) No one knows how hot the fires were when the buildings collapsed so your statement "relatively small fires" is simply something you made up. Gawd, I feel like I am standing in front of a whack a mole machine. One of the facts that I love to asborb is the fact that no steel-frame or concrete building has ever melted, weakened, or totally collapse from such a ridiculous theory. Can you dispute that? Didn't think so. "No one knows how hot the fires were????? What grade are you in? I'm sure I have better things to do than argue science with someone who doesn't know that fires can only reach a certain temperature. Feel free to ignore me if you choose 'cause I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Especially given the long and distinguished track record of the right-wing in getting things right during the past 6 years. I mean the American people just think the world of the right-wing and are so appreciative of your stellar achievements .. and the rest of the world is so enamoured by the leadership of right-wing ideology. Who would ever question if you actually knew what the hell you're talking about? Such accomplishments.

The Civil war? Where did that come from and what does that have to do with phazers bring down the WTC? Didn't mention the civil war .. the worst blunder in American history, not just military, is the mindless attack on Iraq .. and I was just musing about the intellectual prowess of another poster is how it came into this conversation .. ALTHOUGH .. it must be said that most of those who believed in the mind-fuck of the "war on terror" are usually the same ones who got everything else wrong as well .. which I'll be glad to debate if you choose to go there.

Within 15 minutes you made a post saying that a large jet crashing into the WTC would only create a "small" fire. Thus I made the conclusion that you are an idiot. Originally I thought Saddam had WMD's based on what the intelligence community had brought forward. However I'm against the occupation of Iraq. How does "Road House" sound? I have a request .. how about we debate like adults and challenge what is actually said. I said that there were relatively small fires in the buildings when they "collapsed" and that small kerosene fires cannot melt buildings. In fact, LARGE kerosene fires cannot melt buildings. How did I know that you thought Saddam had WMD? Man you sure look like you knew what you were talking about on that one. And, I already knew that you support the worst military blunder in American history. You're batting a thousand.

You're not very good at this are you? Pardon my presumption but I'm new here and sizing up the posters. Normally, those who are good at this don't deny shit that can be clearly backed up by looking at the thousands of available videos. Show me one with raging fires after the initial impact and I'll show you one thousand with relatively small fires in the buildings and WTC7 with very small fires. By the way, I read that nonsense about WTC7 "getting it's face ripped off" .. but it was so ridiculous that I thought why bother to pop that ugly balloon. Wanna' see videos of WTC7 as it collapes .. with its face intact? Do you guys get the internet? Here's a clue .. jet fuel is essentially kerosene .. what are the characteristics of kerosene in a fire? Here's another clue .. kerosene reaches what temperature? Here's another more exciting sort of hands on clue .. take a wheelbarrel, fill it with kerosene, toss in a regular flimsy soda can .. see if that weakens the structure of the can .. then once you find out that it didn't, go back to the previous clue and you'll have your answer as to why it didn't. Science can be fun.

ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING I believe the only one on here who is a fascist is yourself, since alot of your claim's sound like the same ones the NAZI's made against the Jew's. Unfortunately, our forum now has two village idiot's. "Idiots"? Let me guess .. you thought Saddam had WMD .. am I right? I'm new here and I haven't read any of your posts on the subject, but I'm guessing that I'm right .. simply based on the intellectual prowess you just displayed. Am I right?

That was wrt to a pancake collapse and is true. One mass hitting another on the way down would slow things down. Glad you could help me out here blackascoal. There are too many of these neoliberal sychophant fascists out there. Blackascoal: do you need any help with physics on this thread or are you OK on your own ? I have a degree in engineering and can see Riverwind just has no idea what he is talking about in physics and writes down what he imagines as fact. I'm wondering if its that obvious to you as well. I appreciate the offer my brother and feel free to jump in and correct me when you think necessary .. but this is Science 101. The Law of Falling Objects is real easy to understand if anyone is really seeking truth .. but as you know, this is not about truth or science. I find this issue a fascinating study of the human psyche as it demonstrates how easily humans are controlled. There absolutely couldn't be more conclusive evidence of the Fraud of the Fairy-Tale than what is already available, yet even in the face of the mountain of documented and proven lies and deceptions of the war on Iraq, many are still trapped by the limits of how much reality they can take. What we're doing in this thread is arguing science against ideology and the limits of the human mind to concieve what is clearly before it. We exist in the Matrix where illusion is more desired than reality.

Parts were blown upward & downward. These downward moving parts moved down faster than freefall. Too easy.

No. Progressive failure has only occured when there is a fault in the building causing a shearing force that causes all the supports to fail at once. This only has occured a few times in reality during a building construction when the absence of planned supports (to be added later) was not considered and it has happened once in Seoul when a 3 storey shopping mall had its plans changed at the last moment. Progressive failure is always associated with a certain type of fault in design or construction. Its easy to see from video that it wasn't a progressive failure. Its plain to see the building being blown apart from the top down (wtc1 & wtc2) because there are huge chunks that are being blown upward. This propoganda about 911 is only meant to fool the lower 30 % low grade morons that can be made to believe anything and the upper 5% who figure they will benefit from it in the end from the investments in war and the (supposedly) needed worldwide depopulation. "Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. "Fire Engineering 1/4/2002 And completely ignores the fact that there has never been a total "progressive failure" of a building EVER .. but magic caused it to happen 3 times on the same day .. And completely ignores the fact that even in a "progressive failure" .. mass would be met by mass and the rate of fall would be dramatically different.

I grabbed one at random. Though it intends to show the resemblance between the tower’s collapse and a controlled demolition, it succeeds in doing the opposite.Most CDs start with the base of the building. The WTC towers fall starts at the top. In most CDs, the explosives' detonation precedes the collapse. In the WTC, the towers are falling before the "squibs" appear (which is inconsistent with CD, but consistent with the pancake theory). I can see how to the uninitated or the willfully ignorant, the WTC towers' fall would look like CD. But no one who stops for five seconds to think about it would believe that to be the case. Great video, and one that makes your point superbly. I think, however, that amongst the "truthies", the notion that a natural collapse would look like a tree that's been chainsawed on one side tipping over is hopelessly ingrained. -k I guess you missed the word "controlled" meaning that buildings can be brought down however chosen. And I guess you missed that in order to bring the building down into it's own footprints, the center is controlled to cave in first, thus the outer walls end up on top of the roof, exactly in the manner that can be clearly seen in the collapse of WTC7. .. and you missed that NO total progressive collapse of a building has never before happened. Got any science to back up your theory? I do.