Obama is in deep trouble with the US electorate. I think this piece in today's Guardian summarises his situation nicely:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/18/barack-obama-david-cameron

BARACK OBAMA IN CRISIS AS DAVID CAMERON ARRIVES FOR FIRST STATE VISIT

Quotes:

"In the face of withering Republican attacks – which has seen them promising to repeal almost everything Obama has done – the Democrats are facing sinking polls and staring disaster in the face in mid-term congressional elections in November There is little talk of celebrating Obama's achievements and cementing his authority. Instead, it has become a grim battle for survival, with experts predicting a swath of Republican gains that will give them control of the House of Representatives and could even see them win back the Senate.

"Poll after poll has contained unwanted news for Obama and the Democrats. A Fox poll showed that 41% of voters intended to use their vote to express opposition to Obama, compared to 33% who wanted to express support. A recent CBS poll had Obama's approval rating at an all-time low of 44%. A Rasmussen poll showed Republicans enjoying a six-point lead over the Democrats."

End quotes

So could Hilary Clinton take a leaf from Julia Gillard's book and challenge Obama for the Democratic nomination in 2012?

Will Obama even bother to stand again?

Or will it be President Palin?

For what it's worth my prediction is the election of President (Hilary) Clinton in 2012.

But I don't think the Julia & Hilary show will be a long running one. While I think Gillard will probably win in 2010 I am not so sure about 2013.

Steven, the tragedy of US politics is that the only alternatives are Republicans and Democrats.

At least the Tea Party movement seems a trend away from the 2 party scumbags.

Naturally the Dems and minorities will seek to destroy them and the Republicans will try to hijack them.

OBAMA'S LAST CHANCE will be.... make illegals legal and hunt down their vote. If not this next election, the next one when they can vote as citizens.

Politics and minorities/illegal immigrants is very long term stuff.

Obama does the bidding of Wall St and the US Federal Reserve.They want more wars to steal resources/ from Muslim countries.The USA has only its weapons left.The Oligarchs have looted their country and now are using austerity measures to make the people pay for their greed.

Hillary Clinton will be no different.She may in fact be far more aggressive.The USA will conduct military exercises in the South China sea within striking distance of major Chinese cities.The is a reflection of the Cuban missile crisis only this time the USA are the aggressors.

This time facism is enveloping our countries.History is repeating itself.

Arjay wrote:

"Obama does the bidding of Wall St and the US Federal Reserve"

Really?

I thought he did the bidding of the "Zionists".

LOL

stevenlmeyer, some of the zionists like the Rothchilds own the US Federal Reserve.Would you like to debate this reality?

It was corruption not only by the zionists but congress,and many global corporates who came along for the ride of facism.

Let's debate the reality of Afghanistan steven.

Oh dear, Arjay.

>>Obama does the bidding of Wall St and the US Federal Reserve.They want more wars to steal resources/ from Muslim countries.The USA has only its weapons left.The Oligarchs have looted their country and now are using austerity measures to make the people pay for their greed... zionists like the Rothchilds own the US Federal Reserve.Would you like to debate this reality? It was corruption not only by the zionists but congress,and many global corporates who came along for the ride of facism.<<

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même rubbish, eh?

I'm only surprised that you didn't manage to include 9/11 conspiracy theory in this load of unimaginative twaddle.

Back in the real world, I'd like to think that Americans are wise enough to work out that the Republicans do not represent a positive move, insofar as combatting the problems Obama is handling is concerned.

Sadly, they are currently being fed endless appeals to their "patriotism" by various far-right noise-boxes, and will probably knee-jerk their vote to make an unholy mess of their administration for the next two years.

If they do, it is more likely than not that Hilary will sink along with Obama.

Fortunately though, they aren't quite dumb enough to elect Palin, who has all the credibility of Bananas in Pajamas. Nor the Tea Party, whose idea of getting the country out of trouble is to reduce taxation first, then find ways to gut expenditure later. Nor the father and son comedy team, Ron and Rand Paul, whose economic policies would dissolve like rice paper the moment they are articulated.

The US will eventually work out that they have, as a population, gorged themselves on borrowed money to buy plasma TVs to install in their double-wides, as well as houses they couldn't afford in a lifetime of sweeping floors in tacky diners, and need - at some time fairly soon - to tighten their collective belt.

But not, I suspect, while they have someone that they feel entitled to blame for their stupidity, who just happens to be a) black and b) a Democrat.

Pericles,

By and large I would tend to agree with your analysis.
However, I am not so sanguine about the influence of the 'teabaggers' (as they are called) on the Republican rump. As individuals,they are as innocuous enough but as a collective they are simply mob inanity.

I think you are correct that the Tea party only hangs together because its aims/policies are viscerally mob rule.
To me what is missing is the other side of the right to have one's say... the responsibility to activate the primary (the brain) before the drive (emotions).

To me there in lies the philosophic difference between moderate, and the far larger great unwashed, either side.

Bill Maher comedian/talk show host makes some telling points on the smarts of America
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fys3MsKMpms&feature=related

Humour aside the previously mentioned inconsistency in Conservative thinking reigns true here in good ole Aus. i.e. With every right comes a logical responsibility, regardless of which side of the political fence you inhabit.

Steven,
Three things come to mind about your topic.
- why, the bias is palpable
- If you lay down with dogs...you get fleas. translation you read and believe(cite) self-interested sensationalized (i.e.media sources and believe them) then don't be surprised if you are merely one of the manipulated.
- the final point is more difficult to express in 350 words.
It seems that your interest in discussion is more subliminal that surface interest in the topic per se. Or perhaps I over rate your capacity for rationality.

*Back in the real world, I'd like to think that Americans are wise enough to work out that the Republicans do not represent a positive move, insofar as combatting the problems Obama is handling is concerned.*

I hope you'd be right Pericles, but IMHO alot of Americans are
still in denial, lashing out to blame someone, anyone but themselves
for their problems.

Few seem to admit that it was their vote for George and Dick twice,
that got the US into this mess in the first place. Expecting
Obama to wave some magic wand to fix it all in a year, is quite
unrealistic. It took years to drag the US down, it will take
years to drag it back out. IMHO Obama is doing as good a job
as can be expected, given the shocking deal that he interited.

Palin as prez would indeed be a disaster, not only for America,
but for world peace of any kind.

Are American voters smart enough to not just lash out emotionally
in the November elections? I somehow doubt it.

Examinator

I haven't the faintest idea what point you are trying to make. You are over-estimating my capacity to decipher riddles.

Yabby

It's not that I disagree with the steps Obama has taken; but I think he has displayed a lamentable lack of something called "leadership".

The essence of good leadership in a democracy is to be able to tell the electorate unpleasant truths and carry them along with you. Obama doesn't seem to have it. He is an administrator rather than a leader.

I had hoped he would seize the moment in his inaugural address. Less "yes we can" and more "we're in a mess and here are the hard things I'm going to have to do to get us out of it." Back then I think the American people were ready to hear some harsh truths.

But Obama let the moment pass and never regained the initiative.

Pericles

There is certainly a danger that Hilary could be tarred with Obama's perceived failures. But not if she separates herself from the administration after the mid-terms. That puts two years of daylight between her and the administration

*The essence of good leadership in a democracy is to be able to tell the electorate unpleasant truths and carry them along with you. Obama doesn't seem to have it. He is an administrator rather than a leader.*

I will have to disagree with you there, Steven. Let me explain.

The danger with any leader is that he is driven by ideology and
thinks that he knows everything, then pushes ahead regardless,
as Bush used to. (after he had talked to God)

There is huge wisdom in knowing that we don't know everything and
that many of the best brains around can make a contribution too.
Its what Kevin Rudd got so wrong, as Hawke has pointed out.

I watch a fair bit of Bloomberg and I know of no president or
leader anywhere, who has gone to more trouble to assemble
the best brains around and try to examine issues from all perspectives.

So Obama limits the fixed ideology and claim to know everything,
with a very open and consultative process, of being open to reason,
of being open to ideas, of being open to change.

I think that is hugely positive, but I am aware that many seek
a saviour in their politicians, rather then an open minded leader.

I have yet to see a saviour get it right, so I much prefer the
openmindedness and flexibility of Obama.

But he really has had bad luck. Take the BP saga. Half of
Louisianna condems him for stopping deep sea drilling until
the reasons are sorted out, the other half reckon he's not been
tough enough on the drillers. Yet the real mess was created
when the Bush regime virtually forgot any kind of enforcement
of the Govt office which overseas deep sea drilling.

So anyone who expects him to play Jesus, is likely to be
dissapointed.

Ah,the usual suspects arise in unison.See Who Owns the US Fed http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10489

Also http://www.apfn.org/apfn/fed_reserve.htm or http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/whofed.html 1976 but look at the names.Rothchilds,Henry Schroder,Morgan,Grenfel,Lazard Bros,Lehman Bros,Solomon Loeb,Abraham Kuhn,Lehman Stern.While Lehman Brs US went under they did not do so in Europe.The Bank of England (previously owned by Rothschilds) was nationalised after it had been stripped of its assets.The tax payer left with the debt.

Pericles ,it is no longer theory about 911.I met Prof Niels Harrit from the University of Cophenhagen last weekend.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o This was shown on national Danish TV,yet our ABC will dare not air it,let alone disect the science. His peer reviewed paper on nano-thermite ( ie explosives used at 911) after 15 mths has not been disputed,let alone disproven.Conspiracy fact has been proven.

Unless you Pericles and others of your ilk,face the reality of this totalitariarn facism,our humanity will enter a new dark age.

So we have 1218 Architects and Engineers,400 scientists,hundreds of academic and thousands of ordinary folk asking for a new and unbiased enquiry into 911.So let's do it and put the lies to rest.

One day, Arjay, when you have grown a little older and a little wiser, you will look back on all this tripe, and blush at your naïveté.

>>The Bank of England (previously owned by Rothschilds) was nationalised after it had been stripped of its assets.The tax payer left with the debt.<<

This is a statement entirely without foundation in fact of any kind, and makes me wonder why on earth you could possibly write it, while keeping a straight face.

The Bank of England has never, at any stage, been owned by any Rothschild, or combination of Rothschilds. Where on earth do you find this garbage?

There were no "assets" to strip, either, since the stockholders were only entitled to a dividend, not the underlying capital. Take a look at the 1946 Act, if you doubt this.

As for this 9/11 stuff, it is becoming increasingly threadbare.

>>Conspiracy fact has been proven<<

Only if your standard of proof is so low that you believe that pigs, given favourable wind conditions and a long enough runway, can fly.

>>...thousands of ordinary folk asking for a new and unbiased enquiry into 911.So let's do it and put the lies to rest.<<

Sadly, there is no verdict, from any enquiry, however it might be constituted, anywhere in the world, at any time between now and Armageddon, that would prevent a new conspiracy from being invented and promulgated by an over-stimulated anorak, a nanosecond after it had been delivered.

Time to move on with your life, Arjay. Start enjoying it for a change.

America and democracy as practiced is smart enough.
who is trying to kid who ?
Read this snippet
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10681861
Contrary to Ajay's assertion of conspiracies per se it is clearly a problem with the visceral reasoning of the people that facilitates level of paranoiac, self interest and self denial.

Sadly I would contend that this is a side affect of our Western Feral Capitalism...focusing as it does on Black Letter Law.
Bill Maher commentator/commedian makes the point That greed is natural but feral Capitalism through characters like Gordon Gecko 'greed is good'.
It is arguable that Reagan instilled the notion that they should feel good about it....entrepreneurship on steroids.

Steven,
I simply wonder at the mental process that linked Julia Gillard's ascendancy to Prime Minister in a Westminster System to Hilary's chances under a TOTALLY different college with a President.
Then going that step further to equate the monumentally incompetent Ms Palin to JG.

I think you are too smart for this to be an idle thought, it was then either a choice between a stalking horse or subliminal suggestion seeding. There is the outside chance that this is all subliminal bias on your part.

I further suggest you reasoning is coloured by your understanding that support for Israel is ostensibly from the political right rather than the left

LOL examinator

Ever determined to see a nefarious Zionist plot.

For the record:

--I do NOT "equate" Gillard & Palin. Nor have I ever done so. Any "equation" you attribute to me exists solely in your mind.

--I wanted Obama to win in 2008 - ESPECIALLY after McCain chose Palin as his running mate.

--As I think my post made clear, I do understand the differences between the US system and the Westminster system. I simply speculated on whether Hilary Clinton would challenge Obama for the Democrat nomination in 2012. Presidents have faced challenges from within their own party before. (I don't know whether any have been successful.)

Lot's of generalisations from the likes of examinator but he will not confront the science.None of you here have the guts or the knowledege to debate it.

Moving on. Prof Niels Harrit has this advice for you all.Ths Reserve banks will crash the Euro first and hyper-inflation due to inflationary bailouts will kick in,sending interest rates through the roof.The real economy will collapse,with loss of production and resultant high unemployment.Prof Harrit agreed with me ,we have no choice but to fight this facism,since none of us will have a future if we do not act now.

So Pericles,you advise me to get a life.None of will have a life worth living if these facists win.Both of the major parties have sold us out.Keating should never have sold the Commonwealth Bank.

Ron Paul may well run for president and I hope he wins.End the US Federal Reserve and their European parasites,then we all can be free.

Prof Harrit has good contacts in the Swiss Banking industry.They know what is about to happen.Prof Harrit's advice is to pay off your debts and if your have some cash left,buy real gold,not shares.

The reality is this.The con men of the derivatives market are trying to make us,whom they have stolen from,pay for their greed.They will trash the western world economies and take us to war to hide their treachery.The neo-cons are already desperately seeking excuses to invade Iran or attack North Korea.They are conducting military exercises in the South China Sea hoping to antagonise China into conflict.

The banksters brought on WW1 and backed both sides for profit,which led to the rise of Hitler and WW2 in which the banksters again created counterfeit money to finance both sides.

Sarah Palin and Hilary Clinton are part of the problem.They are both deceptive and treacherous with only their own power and wealth bing paramount.Their real fear is the growing awareness of ordinary folk,not the communists or the terrorism.This is why there are such repressive presidential orders such as the Pariot Act,Preventative detention,and Obama's legalisation of assassination.Pure facism.

We have tried, Arjay.

>>Lot's of generalisations from the likes of examinator but he will not confront the science.None of you here have the guts or the knowledege to debate it.<<

But talking to the proverbial brick wall is exhausting.

The evidence has never been presented in a manner that allows for serious debate. Not once. So many assumptions are made, at every stage

For a start: where was the good professor's "nano-thermite" found? By whom, when? Where had it been kept in the meantime, who had kept it, and why?

You see, the discussion fails at the very first fence.

If you can't see the pointlessness of a theory that relies on flecks of unknown material purportedly "found" in six-year-old dust, that someone had just happened to have kept all that time, until a fruit-loop scientist can develop a wild-assed theory from it, then there is absolutely no point in discussing anything with you.

And there is certainly no point in listening to that same fruit-loop scientist pontificating on the global economy.

>>Prof Niels Harrit has this advice for you all.Ths Reserve banks will crash the Euro first and hyper-inflation due to inflationary bailouts will kick in,sending interest rates through the roof.The real economy will collapse,with loss of production and resultant high unemployment.<<

Too much gazing at sheep's entrails will do that for you, you know.

Incidentally...

>>Prof Harrit's advice is to pay off your debts and if your have some cash left,buy real gold,not shares. <<

Surely, if interest rates are going to go though the roof, what is the point of having your spare cash invested in an inert lump of yellow metal?

With hyper-inflation Pericles,the last place you would have your money would be in the bank.Your money is losing value daily and the is also the prospect of the retail and commercial banks collapsing because the real economy is faltering.The World Reserve banks just keep makinig cyber money.The price of gold could go to $3000 oz.

6 yr old dust not a reliabale source Pericles? Prof Harrit got four samples from verifiable sources who were willing to go before a court and testify to their authenticity.Nano thermite is a highly sophistocated explosive which at that time only top military facilities had the capacity to make it.So how did ordinary cizizens come across it? There were many other sources but they were too scared to testify befrore a court.see http://www.journalof911studies.com/ There were 10 scistists who produced this paper and Dr Frank Legge is the Aust rep.It has not been challanged.

See this from Rob Shapiro;chief advisor to Bill Clinton and also advisor to Obama. "Obama needs another terrorist attack to survive." Straight from the neo-cons mouths. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuL9SNdaSqc&feature=related They hint that another attack will come in October.

Oh Dear,

Arjay, I used to think you were an open minded and innovative person

but to be honest, your conspiracy theories do you no credit at all

Although they are so funny... I am torn between reading them and waiting for them to come out as a musical.

anyway - Obama Owamba - he is a one term president, like Jimmy Carter was... he does not have the strength to last two terms...

Regarding Presidency and Leadership

It was Harry S Truman (Dem) who said

“When a leader is in the Democratic party he's a boss; when he's in the Republican party he's a leader”

It is up to the American People

whether they wish to

rally behind a leaded or

just be bossed around....

but whatever you say, Obama never has been and never will be a leader, in the presidential or any other sense.

View the evidence stern.It is irrefutable. 1218 Architects and enginers,400 scientists + hundreds of academics.You should all have no objection to a new open scientific investigation.Agreed?

More voodoo economics Arjay.

>>With hyper-inflation Pericles,the last place you would have your money would be in the bank.<<

I absolutely agree with you. I was actually referring to his interest rate nonsense, not hyperinflation.

But never mind, let's examine your theory a little more closely.

>>Your money is losing value daily... The price of gold could go to $3000 oz.<<

If we are talking hyperinflation, Arjay, what price do you think a loaf of bread would reach? And would you prefer to eat bread, or gaze fondly at a piece of yellow metal? Also (still in hyperinflation mode) if you were at some point to try to trade in your lump of yellow metal for some bread, who would be able to buy it from you?

Your grasp of the realities of finance remains at the level of mindless slogans, I'm afraid.

>>6 yr old dust not a reliabale source Pericles?<<

Exactly. Harrit's 2009 paper takes each of the collection/retention stories without the simplest, most basic enquiry.

Sample 1: "He then went to visit his friend, Mr. Tom Breidenbach, carrying the dust in his hand, and the two of them discussed the dust and decided to save it in a plastic bag... "

Sample 2: "Evidently [sic] the open window had allowed a significant amount of dust from the WTC destruction the day before to enter the room and cover the laundry"

Sample 3: "This dust, which came from the ‘collapsed’ World Trade Center Towers, was collected from my loft at the corner of Reade Street and Hudson Street on September 12, 2001."

Sample 4: "There was a thick layer of dust on the floor. She collected some of it into a large sealable plastic bag for possible later use in an art piece."

How on earth could you believe that such evidence would be given even the most cursory consideration at the "new and unbiased enquiry" that you propose?

Does the phrase "chain of evidence" mean anything to you?

Sorry, but it's all just conspiratorial moonshine, Arjay. Give it up before it rots your brain.

Ajay,

One can assume you are signing up for the bunker bunker as shown on TV recently.

The example I posted about the US's out of control national security industry (which is based on maybe's, what if's [faux conspiracies]) should tell you that uber conspiracies can't work because to work they need organization single authority, that clearly doesn't exist.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10681861
What we have in the USA is a country that depends on paranoia to supply the jobs etc both in the govt sector and private enterprise.

In effect we have a true definition of chaos . Not conspiracy.

Steven,
Nefarious conspiracy? Come on, what a tawdry technique.
To accuse me of that is a deliberate(?) gross misinterpretation of the point.
I leave uber conspiracy theories to Ajay.
I lump them in with belief in Religion and the like.....a man made (needed by some)(emotional) explanation for either the non-comprehended or a tool for power.This is usually driven by fear.

Pericles you miss the point.How did this this rare and sophistocated substance get into the WTC dust? Ordinary folk do not not have access to military facilities.Who then gave it to these 4 people if you are saying it was a set up.Prof Harrit said that did not have the facilities in Cophenhagen do do it.There was very little known about it when Prof Harrit began his study 3 yrs ago.

There are hundreds of serious anomolies,eye witness accounts,photographic evidence,physics,maths,chemistry etc that prove the official theory a lie. http://ae91truth.org/
The truth is coming out.You are wasting my time.

Obama is gone.Palin and Clinton will follow.There is a big grass roots movement in the USA and parasites like Palin who are in the bankster's pockets, are trying to ride their wave of popularity.People like Ron Paul Denis Kucinich,Judge Napolitano,Alan Grayson,Peter Schiff etc, now have the publics ear.

This is exactly what I meant, Arjay, when I pointed out that "so many assumptions are made, at every stage"

>>Pericles you miss the point.How did this this rare and sophistocated substance get into the WTC dust?<<

First of all, you have assumed that it is, in fact, "WTC dust". This has not been proven, just surmised.

Then you proceed to assume that it contains a "rare and sophistocated [sic] substance". This has not been proven, merely postulated.

So all you have is an unknown substance that appears in dust that may or may not have come from the WTC rubble. What kind of evidence is that?

>>The truth is coming out.You are wasting my time.<<

I should remind you that it is you, Arjay, who keeps repeating the same old tosh, at every opportunity. Who is wasting whose time?

By the way, where did you get the idea that the Bank of England belonged to the Rothschilds? Was that from your loopy professor too? What about the assets that were stripped when the Bank was nationalized? Another of his fantasies?

You really should find less, ...errm... excitable company, Arjay.

It will be better for your nerves. And people might not avoid you quite so much at parties.

Golly Pericles.Do I have to give you a lesson in chemistry as well?Ordinary thermite a combination of Al and Fe O2 can be made at home.It burns rapidly at very high temps.

Nano technology is highly sophistocated since the molecules are mixed almost perfectly to the react explosively and with more heat since there is a quicker exchange of oxygen.It explodes as well as cutting through steel.Prof Harritt said he did not have the facilities to manufacture it in Copenhagen.

This is why they fires raged underground for weeks even though they poured thousands of gallons of water on the rubble.Nano thermite has its own oxygen supply and burns to 2500 dg C. almost twice the melting point of steel(1370 deg C).There are photographic records of molten steel huge gurders cut like some huge oxy torch has parted them.Ordinary fires reach only 700 dg C so how was it possible to have molten steel,and the burning of Al Fe O2 and temps of 2500 C ?

You have not done your homework Pericles.

How can something burn rapidly (i.e. explosively) and slowly (fires underground for several weeks) at the same time?

Explosives do not burn for several weeks Arjay.

There are photos I have seen of girders that looked like they were cut by an oxy torch, but that's actually because they were.

There's absolutely no point, Arjay, in giving me a half-baked lecture on chemical compounds, flammable or otherwise.

As I have already pointed out, there is no sufficiently recognizable chain of evidence that connects the "dust" in question, with the WTC.

Nor is there evidence that the dust contained nano-thermite material. It was inferred, from extremely flimsy premises.

So you can witter on about molten steel as much as you like, but you - along with everyone else - are totally unable to connect the dots.

This is why it is unlikely that there will be yet another enquiry.

In fact, I can think of two very good reasons, straight off the top of my head.

1. There are no grounds, apart from the existence some loony-tunes conspiracy theorists, to ask the taxpayer to incur such an expense. Especially given that every one of those loony-tuners would demand their own airtime, and would scream "conspiracy" if their pathetic little voices were not heard.

2. Whatever the verdict, there would be a bunch of conspiracy-nuts claiming "cover-up" if their own pet theory (CIA/Mossad/Bush/Donald Duck/whatever) were discarded.

By the way, still no response on the Bank? or the Rothschilds? nationalization? What about interest rates and hyperinflation?

You really should think before you write, Arjay.

You are simply building a picture of yourself as someone who knows absolutely nothing about the subject at hand, but simply retweets stuff that is fed to them by some nutter or other, or that has been unquestioningly hoovered up from a web site with its trademark multicoloured typeface.

Bugsey,if you studied Prof Harrits work he says that it was not only thermite that was used.Nano thermite can act in two ways ie as an explosive or as a means of cutting steel.Harrit found other chemical residues such as magnesium and sulphur which is used to lower the melting point of steel.He says there is evidence of other explosives being used.We see evidence of cutter charges in the twin towers that slice the major corner structures.So depending on the intensity of the mixture,nano-themite can explode or cut through metal

This is why we need a true and open investigation.The whole puzzle has not been solved.They are not sure how much explosives were used,or in many instances how they were applied.Harrit rules out painting it on,although that could have been done to pulverise the concrete.Harrit said that every second floor wired, would have been sufficient to bring it down in such a fashion.

Just see Danny Jowenko http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I the Dutch explosives expert and his opinion of WTC 7 who at this time did not know about this building.He was shown the video of WTC 7 and not told of it's name or origin when he viewed it.He was in no doubt,it was controlled demolition.

It's quite sad that you don't get it, Arjay. Because your stubborn adherence to the mythology can only serve to stunt your intellectual growth. For which, it is clear, there is abundant room.

>>This is why we need a true and open investigation.<<

Let me spell it out for you.

Because the "dust" cannot reliably be offered in evidence, the presence of explosive materials cannot be offered as part of any alternative theory. In the absence of explosive materials, the placing of such by undercover operatives, of any kind, cannot be offered as an alternative theory. If there is therefore no evidence of undercover operatives, the allocation of blame on (insert your choice here) cannot possibly stand scrutiny.

Do you see now why it would be an utter and complete waste of time and money?

No?

There's your problem, right there.

Since you have gone very silent on some of the other extraordinary claims you have made on this thread - the Bank of England and the Rothschild connection, the theft from the BoE when it was nationalized, the value of gold during a period of hyperinflation etc. etc. - might it not be time you ceased flogging this particular dead horse?

Only asking.

Pericles we've been there before.The evidence to most logical intelligent people is over whelming.Your aim is to waste my time.Good bye.

Grow up, Arjay. It's not all about you.

>>The evidence to most logical intelligent people is over whelming.Your aim is to waste my time.Good bye.<<

If the evidence were indeed, as it were, evident, than we would not need to have these discussions, would we?

It's sad you are going, though.

I was keen to find out where you dug up those ludicrous stories about the Rothschilds, the Bank of England, and the pre-nationalization pillaging thereof.

>>The Bank of England (previously owned by Rothschilds) was nationalised after it had been stripped of its assets.The tax payer left with the debt.<<

So far, my searches have yielded nothing factual on the topics at all.

Was it perhaps just another example of the wit and wisdom of "Prof Niels Harrit from the University of Cophenhagen [sic]"?

Wouldn't surprise me.

But if you've gotta go, you've gotta go.

Goodbye.

Or, as you would say,

Good bye.

Examinator wrote:

"To accuse me of that (spruiking a nefarious Zionist conspiracy) is a deliberate(?) gross misinterpretation of the point."

OK, then please explain what is the point you are trying to make. You've lost me.