The media have been proved wrong in their prediction that Donald Trump will never become more popular than Hilary Clinton.
The anti Trump CNN has Trump two points ahead in their latest American Poll.
Recently, Obama has been shun by more world leaders than any American President in history.
Putin respects Trump .This is the best news for the world since before Lenin and the Communists seized power in Russia in 1916.
Hillary Clinton has a view of the world set firmly in 1955.She sees China and Russia as the big enemy and the lovely Saudi Sheiks with all their money are on our side.
Usama Bin Laden and President Obama Hussein both have the view that
America is full of infidels.
The Clinton Foundation,The Clinton Saudi joint money laundering venture is the Clintons and Obama pension plan.
Americans are often considered dumb.Even the dumbest can see through the lying of Clinton.
When asked if she had cleaned her computer in front of a Committee she insulted the nation by saying "with a duster"?
The biggest threat to world peace is a Clinton win.

It would be nice to think the yanks would see through Clinton, & elect Trump. However I don't hold a lot of hope for it.

Any people who could be stupid enough to re-elect Obama, after seeing his first stint, are a long way from bright enough to see, or concerned enough to care.

So Putin respects Trump. Really?

From https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/18/vladimir-putin-donald-trump-striking-america-superpower.

"Asked about the presumptive Republican nominee for president, Putin again described Trump as a 'flamboyant' or 'colorful man, using a Russian word – [Russian script won't copy] – that can be translated with ambiguous connotations, from gaudy to striking to dazzling.

'You see, it’s like I said,' Putin told his questioner. 'Trump’s a colorful person. And well, isn’t he colorful? Colorful. I didn’t make any other kind of characterization about him.

Trump has for months misinterpreted Putin’s comments as 'a great honor' and clear praise, rather than consider the various meanings of the word."

Sounds like Putin was calling Trump a show-off. That's not respect.

Brock
So you think the US and the rest off the world will be better of if Trump gets elected.

I am not saying I think Clinton is a better choice, I believe that the US is in serious trouble having to choose between the two. Trump talks a lot about what he will do, but never gets around to explaining how, or with money from where. His lack of understanding about the world, and how it functions is really a scary, as I fear he will just hand over to others when he is overwhelmed by a crisis, and cant decide what to do.

His latest issue of what to do with the military, shows his complete lack of understanding of why the military is not in the minds of many keeping America safe. The US military budget is bigger than almost the rest of the world’s budget put together, and yet he wants to make it bigger and more expensive. He says he will not put the military in harm’s way, so what does he need more for.

Why are all military contracts for less than US$ 10,000 no bid, and why can’t the latest F35 fly in the rain. There are many examples of collusion between the industrial complex that profits from the rubbish they supply the military at ridicules prices, and the people that place the orders.

America is a dying empire. That is plain to see for any one that cares to look. The health of their people, the ineptitude of its leaders, the bankruptcies of its economy, and the disintegration of its infrastructure, to name a few of their problems.

Electing a stand up comedian to the leadership will help speed up its demise, not help it to face its significant fundamental flaws.
Chris

Lefty One, the world is in turmoil and the only way out will be for real firm leadership. Trump will be the only option for that in the US.

Commentators are now reaffirming my statement that Trump Brexit and Hanson are not accidents. We want change and the present governments can not deliver because they pander to minority groups and focus too heavily on the likes of same sex marriage when more than half the people don't give a toss.

Luckily the poll results boasting of a boost for Trump have turned out to be misleading:

http://www.afr.com/opinion/columnists/donald-trump-winning-polls-mislead-on-us-presidential-election-20160907-grbah8

It looks like Hillary will still romp it in. Don’t get me wrong, she’s far from perfect. Very far. But Trump would be an unmitigated disaster. A man-boy like him doesn’t have the temperament, intelligence, or the political experience to be POTUS. I mean, this is a guy who had to ask three times, during a one-hour briefing, why they couldn’t use nukes.

When it comes to the intellectual and political calibre of Trump and his supporters, I think Jim Jefferies says it best (Language warning):
http://youtu.be/CceQISThDYQ?t=68

AJ
Well we meet again and we find our selves in complete agreement on this one. I have been watching the poles, however as we have seen in the past in the UK recently they are not infallible.

Chris

Rehctub
So they need firm leadership? Do you mean like, many of the worlds dictators around today, that Trump seems to see as his hero’s
.
I assume you agree with my post as you have not seen fit to challenge my assertions.

Can I ask how long you have been following US political history? I am guessing not very long as you would realize that people have been asking for change for the last fifty years, if not longer. How do you think Trump will deal with a situation that needs some serious thinking before he decides what to do?.

I wonder what knowledge you have of the devastation impact that just one nuclear bomb will cause if detonated. It is clear Trump does not, as he would not talk about them as if they were fire crackers if he did.

I am old enough to have hidden under a desk at my school, as we were told, that that was the best place to be, in the event they started chucking them around during the Cuban missile crises. I also got to visit Hiroshima in the early seventies, and visited the museum there. In case you are not aware a very small bomb (by today’s standards) was detonated over that city. One hundred thousand people died in an instant and tens of thousands more in a slow painful death over the following weeks, months. and years.

So if you are older enough to vote, and Trump is elected president, you will have a lot of change. However as I doubt you are in the one percent, it will not be change that you or your family will be happy with.

Chris

There is a lot of Joh for PM in Trump's run for president and it has about the same amount of substance. But while Australia was smart enough to see Joh for what he was I'm not as confident about the Yanks.

My mother forwarded this email from one on our American friends with the rider;

"This may be the best and most honest political promotion statement you will ever read. It decidedly does not brush objections aside.
You hate Hillary? READ it. You hate Trump? READ it. You think there's no choice? READ it.
And, read it with your grown-up hat on. We've all been dealt huge responsibility with this election. The first step toward accepting responsibility is accepting it, and the first step toward accepting it is recognizing it.
READ THIS. Read every single word. It'll take you about three minutes.
Be sure to read to the end (take a few minutes and read all of it!)


http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneallynroot/2016/06/24/a-message-for-christians-about-donald-trump-n2182796

Scary stuff.

As for Putin what a gift Trump would be for him. an isolationist President basically saying let the world fix up its own problems cause we are out of here. Not so good for Australia.

Trump is anti-science:

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trumps-anti-science-campaign

Trump has picked as his vice-president a man who doubts evolution

Trump has talked of making Saudi Arabia and Japan nuclear powers.

Trump has promoted prejudice, and that has brought him the endorsement of David Duke, a prominent Ku Klux Klan leader. Trump did not distance himself from Duke.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/donald-trump-david-duke_us_56d31097e4b0871f60ebbd35

Trump’s anti-intellectualism and authoritarianism has brought him the support of Christian fundamentalists.

https://newrepublic.com/article/133488/evangelicals-like-trump

Trump has said that he would order the military to act in a way that would violate US law.

http://time.com/4244608/donald-trump-military-orders-illegal/

Clinton is a very flawed individual, but she is not anti-science and has not appealed to prejudice. She is unlikely to appoint judges who will eliminate legal abortion, civil rights and lessen the separation of religion and state. As a dual citizen of the US and Australia the prospect of Trump becoming president is very frightening to me.

SteeleRedux
Ok I read it and a lot of the comments that followed. There is an element in the US that actually believes that rant about how Trump is going to save America from whichever bogy man they believe is about to destroy their world. What is more to the point is who is going to save America from tearing itself apart.

I am sure that if you read mien kampf, you would see many similarities about who the good guys are and who are the ones its going to be ok to rounded up and put in a camp.
I believe that the world is in the mess it is now, because America is a nation that is perpetually charging around the planet changing any regime that will not pay for protection. Ask yourself why the US still has basis in England, and Germany when the war finished 70 years ago.

Everywhere they go they create a base until they are told to leave like the Philippians, and Iraq. Other countries were not so polite and slung them out of places such as Laos, and Vietnam.

You also seem to be worried about China and Russia, when was the last time they did anything more than adjust their land border. Only Europeans and America, have invaded other nations on different continents. So I think Pax Europe has had its day and the inmates are turning on themselves.
Chris

That's a great news for me! I voted for him everytime. He can change the US!

Lefty One....So they need firm leadership?

Pretty much the entire English speaking world has adopted the feather duster approach towards its own country and it has clearly failed. I mean, we don't even have the balls to stop the likes of full Muslim dress being worn in our own country, yet our own citizens are not allowed to wear their motorcycle helmet indoors.

As for US political history, it is just that, history and my thoughts are that Joe average, the ones who usually don't give a toss, have had a complete gut full of this whole 'let ourselves be dictated to by foreigners crap' allowing them to come here not only with their own set of laws, but also allow them to change our laws to suit their beliefs. Put simply, people, even those who have been rather inactive in the past want this to stop, and as for the US, it would appear Trump is their only option to get the job done.

The Brits have shown they have had enough, similarly here in Oz as well and I would go so far as to suggest that had berxit been held ten years earlier, a different result would have occurred. I also predict the royal families ruling days are numbered, but that's just my view.

You see people work and pay their taxes, then elect governments to look after their affairs, and when they see their taxes going to the likes of what's been going on, on a global scale, the point arrives when they have had enough. I think we have arrived at that point now.

I think Trump will win and he will change the world. Whether its for the better, only time will tell. But one certainty is, people are not happy the way it is.

It’s not just Kim Jong Un, the Ku Klux Klan, and Christian fundamentalists anymore. Trump has now won himself the support of ISIS:

http://time.com/4480945/isis-donald-trump

TRUMP 2016: There Will Be Hell Toupée.

As President, Drumpf will call in his generals and demand a Plan for the Middle East within his first month. Easy-peasy. We're all sick of hearing about the Middle East.

Then he'll demand the presence of the President of Africa and tell him to fix poverty in his country within a month. He's sick of seeing pictures of starving Indian babies.

Then he'll call in a team of doctors and demand that they fix cancer within a month. Then heart disease.

Then he'll demand that Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Iran drop the price of oil further; that schools in the US make sure everybody can read and write, within a month; that China shed jobs back to the US, and pay a trillion dollars' compensation to US workers for loss of pay; he'll tell Turkey to get rid of that Islam sh!t, and mandate that English be taught in French schools, and they'll pay for it; he'll build a wall between Florida and Cuba; and demand that Canada moves ten miles north, within a month, either that or a wall, which they will pay for.

None of all that is rocket science. But then he can get down to business.

Will Moscow be his first overseas state visit ?

Joe

loudmouth
Well we meet again. Your post was most incisive and just what the Joe six packs of this world are looking for, someone who knows how to get things done as opposed how to do them.

The saying that sticks in my mind is he/she who forgets history is doomed to repeat it.I seem to recall the were a whole lot of Joe six packs in continental Europe in the 1930's, who thought that voting for someone who was going to do something about those other people we dont like because they are not like us, was a good idea.

May be it is time to start talking to people who may look and sound different, but in reality are just the same. They want their kids to be safe and do better the than they have. The people who are really not like us are the class that thinks it is perfectly ok to accumulate way more stuff they they need, while the rest of us struggle to make ends meet.
Chris

Anyone supporting Hillary Clinton should seriously consider seeing a psychiatrist; and/or voluntary euthanasia.
Do you support wars of bankers, mass immigration, and globalism, George Soros and what he pushes creating chaos in countries and profiting from trading in currencies or do you support nationalism and the right of the people?

I don't even know where to start or how to get through to you.
Bill and Hillary Clinton's empire goes back to drug-running in Arkansas, mixed up with the Bush's and Iran-Contra.
The US government is based on people who came to power through drugs.
Look up the Clinton Body Count list, 4 people have died in suspicious circumstances just since she Hillary won the nomination.
She's not for women; helped destroy Bill's rape victims when she was an attorney.
The Clinton Foundation is a slush fund 'pay for play'.
Look up the previous scandals.

They're not royalty where the right to govern is inherited within their families.

Polls supporting Hillary are fixed, because the election will be rigged, fools.
The corporate media openly supports her, they brag about it.
The amount of voter-fraud issues are almost endless.

The only way she will win is if she steals the election, (which she might) just like she stole the nomination from Sanders.
No democracy in the Democratic Party and a spit in the face of every American, and a danger to the rest of the world.
If she goes to these extremes to become the President, what will she do when she becomes President?

Trumps picking up the Black and Latino vote, the Hillary 'women' camp has badly miscalculated things.
Blacks might traditionally support democrats 'I want my Obamaphone', but they know Hillary wont keep her word.
Only about 20% of Americans thinks she can be trusted, Blacks are starting to realise this.
And the Latino's who came to America legally don't want illegal Latinos coming as it's giving them a bad name.

Then add in the 7 minute coughing fits; uncontrollable 'epileptic fit-like' shaking, needing help to not fall down stairs and the many doctors who've questioned her health....

Rehctub
Laws are passed by parliament and I am not sure which statue you are referring to, that has been changed by foreigners. If you look at the dress second generation Muslims wear, you will notice they are hanging out with their schoolmates and wearing the same clothes as them, not their parents. You think history is irrelevant, and it is ok to experiment with electing an ignorant tyrant. Well that was done in Europe in the nineteen thirties, which I am sure you are aware did not turn out to well for anyone of that generation.

I understand that average Joe is hacked off with life going backwards, and I am glad they are starting to think it is time to use the ballot box to make a difference. Houses unaffordable, student debt out of control, and jobs shifted overseas, or automated out of existence. It‘s not just those who speak English, it’s all those Europeans’ as well.

Question is who is to blame and what can be done about it.
It is time to educate yourselves with why the middle class (that has only been in existence since the end of ww2) are being squeezed on all sides. Do you really think that Donald Trump and his kind, care about you or your problems? The day he starts telling the world how he is going to do all that stuff he waffles on endlessly about is the day I will take him seriously. In the mean time I suggest you start thinking for yourself, or he will do your thing for you.

Chris

It's terrible, isn't it Armchair Critic? And to think she's the only one who stands in the way of America being run by someone as dangerous as Trump.

armchaircritick

So here we all are then, basicly all pointing out why two individuals are unfit and unwanted for the most powerful job on earth. I cant argue with anything you have said because it is probably true. Equally for those of us who have a similar litany of issues with Trump. I like most on this site dont have a vote, and if we did it would not make the slightest difference to the result.

So what can we, the great unwashed do about the reality that all the effort of our forbears to get a vote for us, seems to have been in vain

However there is something we can all do if we can be bothered to get out of our over stuffed chairs, switch off the main stream media and get involved in local issues. Also above all talk to people who hold a different point of view. Especially use the time they are speaking,to listen to what their are saying, instead of thinking what you are going to say next.

Bottom line is we can make a difference if we can be bothered , if not I suggest you start looking for somewhere to hide form the authorities as police states have a habit of eventually rounding up any one who has an opinion that is not in line with their thinking.
Chris.

Hey LEFTY ONE,
I'm pretty sure Hillary would give the green light for a drone strike on my house if she could get away with it.
She loves talking about the 'vast right wing conspiracy' against her and 'the alternate right' (they make up terms that they can use to denigrate) plus they don't have a problem killing innocents or those they don't like.

But free speech is like a muscle, if you don't use it you lose it.
And those who give up liberty for a small amount of security deserve neither.
If I worry about what others think and self-censor then the globalists would win anyway.
They want us just to sit here and say nothing while they force immigration upon us and destroy our sovereignty, and if we complain they attack us and call us 'racist'.

Globalists v's Nationalists that's what the game is, while Gorge Soros laughs all the way to the bank with currency trading and promoting open borders and moving towards global government while normal citizens are being played off with all the leftist agendas.
Nationalist fighting with immigrants... or/ A nation of citizens and immigrants fighting amongst ourselves.
That's how they like it, people are a whole lot easier to manipulate when they aren't united.
Not really such thing as a nation anymore, merely countries to be ruled over by corporations (who don't pay tax - only small businesses and employees) and sovereignty given up by weak traitorous politicians who care more about making money and being part of a globalist club none of us are invited into after they've finished national politics.

Only small businesses and workers pay tax.

Hi Lefty One and Armchair Critic,

I agree with both of you, that the people united are a bit harder to defeat. Movements should be aiming at that sort of solidarity, unity on the basis of common basic principles such as freedom of expression AND the equal quality of every life.

If course, there are issues that divide us, but there are usually issues which fundamentally unite us, all of us, regardless of ethnicity, gender, and even, maybe, religion/ideology.

The common enemy is the crippling and denigration of democracy, totalitarianism of both Left and Right. If there are to any better future united societies, they have to be built - probably painfully - on democracy, equality, freedom of expression and other Enlightenment values. i.e. better democracy - and as you both hint, that means that people must be more active in defending and fighting for that future, step by step.

Cheers,

Joe

Not just America, but the rest of the world would be better off with Trump or someone like him. People who think this is not so are blind to what is happening all around the world: people are sick of lazy, self-serving elites who have made a career of politics. Trump is not a politician; he is not tainted like the Clintons, the Bushes or others tied to political parties and the system - even the Republicans hate him (he could put an end to all that cheap labour from Mexico, and give the working and middle classes a say in what happens in their country, and how white Americans feel regarding rapidily becoming minorities in areas all over their own country). Trump, Brexit and the rising discontent of the young in Hong Kong (not pleased about losing the democracy they enjoyed before they were hand back to Communist China), as well as the results of our own election, are signs of the disgust felt for elites and do-nothing windbags. Get used to it, folks.

armchaircritick
I assume you live in Aus, so not much chance that the US will be sending drones to silence you.

I sent you and your like minded posties a challenge. Stop sitting around and doing your "plane load of poms" impression about how bad things have become.It is time that all those who are sick of the corporate elite making all the decisions for their benefit, to do something or stop complaining about it.

It is time for farmers to talk directly to consumers, small business employees to talk to the owner, they are the backbone of the nation as you stated. Divide and conquer is the oldest trick in the book, and we are letting them get away with it. Immigrants are not your enemy, Australia is a nation of immigrants.

Ok time to stand up for a future you can be proud of, at least you dont have to carry a gun to make a difference, unlike the last generation.


Chris

Ttbn
If you think Trump is not part of the lazy self serving elite that you refer too, then you are not paying attention. The cheap Mexican labor you refer, do all the jobs most Americans won’t do such pick fruits and vegetables, clean house, and look after the sick and elderly.

Your obsession with you own skin color shows that you have not read much history regarding the white mans invasion of the rest of the world over the last 500 years. The non whites of this world used to own most of it, so it was never yours in the first place.

Hong Kong was not handed over to the Chinese, as you said. The British left because their lease run out. I grant you some of the locals were not happy about the new political reality, but if you ask most of the shop owners they were more concerned with the disruption caused by the protest.

Get used to what, do nothing wind bags complaining about having to share with others, who have the audacity to think they are equal, despite having the wrong skin tone. That has been going on for a very long time already, so I think the rest of us will just learnt to tune it out.

Loudmouth
Agreed, so what are you going to do about it. Or are you going to be just another windbag, who only knows how to identify the problem as opposed to some ideas of how to fix them.

Chris

'It is time that all those who are sick of the corporate elite making all the decisions for their benefit, to do something or stop complaining about it.'
Well that's very non-leftist of you LEFTY ONE, maybe there's hope for you yet.

Firstly, I identify as Armchair Critic, and that's because I am NOT a Street-Level Activist or Purveyor of Civil Disturbances, as opinionated as I am.

Fighting globalism and overreach by elites is like being trapped in quicksand, the more you struggle the worse it is;
or like being in the jaws of some creature where the more you struggle the more you get eaten.

What are we supposed to do?
People who you're actually trying to stand up for have become so dumbed down and brainwashed they will fight you on the leftist agendas, like they crave the globalist tyranny that's soon coming to them, too stupid to see the bigger picture.

It's one thing to pose a challenge like your smarter than others but just calm down and tell us what is your plan?

I live on a farm, and understand what its like for small business btw.
Small businesses get fined if they don't report on time, while corporations pay no tax at all.

And don't even get me started with the bleeding heart immigrant stuff.

Armchair Critic
You see what happens when people from different political points of view actually take the time to listen to what the other is saying. I deliberately identify as a leftist to draw out people like yourself who identify as the right. I assure you that a lot of the bad stuff that is labeled as being the opinion of the left is not, but labeled as such to divide us.

I take your point regarding resistance. My philosophy is to fly under the radar. If they don’t see you as threat chances are you will not be unduly hassled.

I too am a farmer, but not in Australia. We have a few blocks that total about 22 acres in Laos. What we are in the processes of creating is an integrated system that works with nature as opposed to trying to control it. We have a small herd of cows (15) for beef, a small breeding herd of pigs (10 sows} a fish pond next to the pig sheds so the pig by product gets feed to the fish (catfish), also ducks, and chickens. Our crops are mostly feed crops, such as corn, elephant grass, sugar cane, cassava, rice, and banana. We don’t use pesticides or herbicides which destroys the general health of the soil.

Now I know what you are thinking, Australia has too many rules and the wrong weather to do what I am doing. I was simply telling you what I am doing.

I believe we need to start talking to our neighbors, and retail customers, so that our collective understanding is not filtered through the main stream media , who are not there to inform, but rather indoctrinate.

I will leave immigration for another day. However one point you may not be aware of, is what started the “troubles” in Syria. The 4 years preceding the original riots was I time of drought. The farmers left their fields and went to the city for relief. All they got was billy clubs and tear gas. As a farmer, you would understand their plight.
Chris

With a nom de plume like 'Lefty One' you would, of course, spout such Marxist nonsense. When you say "you" did not own it to me, it seems that you are not a white person, either. I am not "obsessed" with my skin colour, but I certainly am not ashamed of it, as so many pathetically inadequate and self-hating Westerners are. And, I prefer my own kind to others; only fools, losers and halfwits do not - black or white.

PS I said HK was handed back, not over. Despite what you think you know, I read history a lot, whereas you don't even read plain English. By the way, I can get along with people with opposing views: I have two brothers of similar pursuasion to you, and I often agree with non-conservative posters here. But, when a twit calling himself Lefty One comes along, I don't expect to have anything in common with such a person.

Hey LEFTY ONE,
I don't technically identify myself as being 'right' as opposed to 'left', because I don't like the gang mentality and being stereotyped.
But that said I do lean towards right conservative ideals, but this doesn't mean I'm a religious extremist or anti-abortionist or racist.
Sure I oppose immigration and multiculturalism because its being used as a tool to divide us against each other but that doesn't necessarily mean I hate foreigners.
And I'm not too fond of Islam either because its a belief system that includes religious, political and military doctrine, it's not compatible with our nation and combined with the idea that we have freedom of religion I see Islam as a threat and an issue that democracy cannot easily deal with.

Regards to Trump,
A lot of people are angered by his hard-line stance about immigration, Muslims and Mexicans etc but I'd likely be doing exactly the same thing.
Say you go to buy a $5,000 car.
Do you offer that person $4800 cash and hope to walk away with a $200 saving? which you wont because once negotiation begins the seller will counter with an offer of $4900, then maybe you settle on a deal at $4850. No.
You give that person a hard-line and semi-insulting offer first - say $2000 or $3000 (depending on how far you think insulting the person will get you) and then you negotiate, ending up settling at say $3500.

You see what I'm getting at?
You don't negotiate before the negotiation phase.

In regards to Islam especially, you want those people stressed enough to be arguing over the dinner table, because its only then that the good amongst them will stand up against the bad in their own community.

I don't support everything Trump does, but I'm not convinced he has this issue wrong even if some consider his methods controversial.
I have no problem with him returning illegal immigrants or securing his border.
You can't be a nation without these things.
They're non-negotiable.

Hey Armchair Critic
I use the label to get into conversation with people like your good self, as I feel the real enemy (the extreme wealthy) use main stream media(which they own ) to make us think our ideas are incompatible.

You are not a racist, using the dictionary definition. However many like me use a slightly different definition, and that is someone who dislikes/hates someone simply because they are of a different faith. I am guessing if we were talking about Buddhists, you may well say, I don’t mind them.

And now to your,”I don’t want Muslims in my country because they are the enemy”. The reason for this you have stated is, their belief system includes religion, politics and the military. I think that is a label that could sit well with some Christians, and even some who claim to be Buddhists.
I think you have avoided any Muslims and their temples, so your understanding of the religion is given to you by our friends in the MSM.

I got a bit confused with your car deal analogy, but I get it now. So I guess that means that when Coles negotiates with dairy farmers the price of milk, that is economically unsustainable for the farmers, then it is ok to be hard line?

You think the good Muslims should rise up and destroy the bad ones. Seems reasonable, until you throw into the mix the fact that the Middle East has been invaded many times by the Christian west, and today their skies are full of drones looking for someone to kill. I put it to you that if Australian sky’s were full of American drones, you would support anyone who fought back, and however they did it.

Chris

AC,

I agree with you on labelling. I am a conservative by any measure, but that does not stop me from being horrified and angry that Australians who have worked into their middle years, but are suddenly made redundant, have to survive on $263 per week New Start allowance, particularly now that there is little chance that they will ever get a new start. Or, workers being asked to take a pay cut in hard times, but never the managers, who are likely to part of the problem in the first place. Rot starts at the top, and the buck should stop where the big bucks are. Then there are people who are homeless, not because they always have been, but because they are forced to work a few hours a week, and are then considered to be "employed". Kids neglected or killed because of drug addled parents and incompetent government protection. The list goes on, and it's that list that is more important than people whining about refugees, multiculturalism, and foreign bludgers sapping a welfare system they have not contributed to.

I don't think that my white race and culture is better than anyone elses, but it is mine and it is different. All people are worth something, but that doesn't mean that they should live in Australia and eventuall undermine us, which looks like happening if the elites and Marxists continue to get their way, with the help of the media.

Back to the labelling. If people like Lefy One self-label and present themselves as all idealogue and no heart, the deserve what they get.

Cont’
So return the illegal immigrants, and secure the border.

How many of the unemployed have the skill or stamina to fill all the empty fields and hospitals jobs they would leave behind.

Many have been in the US for decades, so their children are just like any other American kids. Would you tear the family apart, or simple throw them all out, and where would you send them if they have no documents, and would not tell you where they are from. And then there is the wall. As you can’t just run it along the banks of the Rio Grande, as there are laws that prohibit that. Let’s say you are a land owner and they decide to build the wall through the middle of it, which a situation that exists now with the wall that is already there. And that is without even thinking about who is going to pay for it.

Unfortunately when you get a leader you get the whole package. His tax policy would hand out tax breaks, to everyone, but especially to people like him. He would increase spending on the military, despite the fact they already spend more than the next seven countries combined. As we have already found out, a conventional military is no match for a soldier on a suicide mission.

The reason I don’t think like you, despite being surrounded by a similar belief system whilst growing up, is that I went on an old bus from London to New Delhi in the early seventies. It took 5 weeks and there were 9 different nationalities out of 27 passengers.

I understand that you like being around your own kind, but history tells us the more we isolate from others, the more likelihood of war. Few in Australia alive today have experienced war; I suggest you talk to some old soldiers, if you don’t think war will be a problem for you or your family.

Chris

Lefty One,

No, you are quite wrong: religions are not races. Ideologies are not races. Surely, as someone on the Left, you have no hesitation about criticising someone with an objectionable ideology or who tries to shove religion down your neck ?

So it is with some of the ideologies which Islam has thrown up, perhaps countless times since 612 AD. After all, if one's religion dictates that every word of the 'sacred book' is directly from one's god, never to be added to or taken away, then one is stuck with a book which gets more and more out of date, almost from the outset. So reality, real living, the real world, is bound to clash with one's precepts.

And as societies develop, as scientific knowledge develops, as the notion of human rights becomes more sophisticated (especially for women), then the strains between reality and a backward-looking religion grow - and fester. So reactionaries are bound to try to resolve this contradiction by retreating to unreality, to their book. But modern life moves forward, inexorably. So a return to a mythical origin becomes more impossible in contrast to the dynamics of the outside world.

As an inevitable consequence, the ideologies based on reactionary interpretations of the book have to become more extreme, more violent, more paranoid, and the outside world has to be more and more demonised. Ergo, anti-Western propaganda.

So why shouldn't those reactionary ideologies be criticised, and condemned ? I agree that the vast majority of Muslims may not really give much thought to what is in their book, and are probably horrified at what is being done in its name - in THEIR name.

If I am vaguely correct, the defeat of ISIS will not bring an end to the conflicts between Islam and the modern world. Such fascist ideologies will keep bubbling up, in worse forms, and I think, throughout this century, until Islam is somehow 'reformed'.

[TBC]

[continued]

Lefty One,

As for the many invasions of the Middle East by the West, pot-kettle.

Apart from the Crusades to regain Christian cities and nations a thousand years ago, and the few short decades after WW I, when and where has the West done that ?

Islam launched itself at the west for more than a thousand years, threatening France barely a hundred miles from Paris in 732 AD, and besieging Vienna in 1699. Islam invaded and occupied Spain for eight hundred years: can the West match that ? Islam invaded and occupied much of the Balkans for nearly as long, and left it the poorest part of Europe.

Cheers,

Joe

Ttbn
So you are happy with your label but, you agree more with Bernie Sanders than Donald Trump. It would appear that my label gets up your nose and you think I believe all the things the bosses tell you about my type in Their media.

If you want to know who the real bludgers are, read about people who work in the financial industry. Many make millions of dollars a year for watching a screen all day, and contributing nothing. Or those that sell payday loans to those, who are struggling the most, for hundreds of percent per year.

By the definition that you don’t like others and don’t want to be near them, you are a racist. I know you hate being called that because you accept other as equals, but they should live over there were ever that is. If the people you identify with would stop invading where they are from, then I think they would probably prefer to stay where their ancestors are buried. Unfortunately their home lands are now just piles of rubble thanks’ to the coalition of the willing, that your government supports.

What would you do if there was a chance of death every day? No food, work, and your house had just been demolished by a drone. I am guessing you would sell what every you had left, borrow what you could and pay whatever the price to get to somewhere safe and start again.

There is a saying, there but for the grace of god go I. If you want the refuges to stop, then convince your government to stop destroying their neighborhood

I am not sure what you mean “get what I deserve” I can assure you that people having a go at me, is what gets me up in the morning, as I love to have a verbal joust with people who think differently. I am not looking to convert anyone to my way of thinking, just to give I point of view you will not find in the elite owned MSM.
Chris

Hi Lefty,

"By the definition that you don’t like others and don’t want to be near them, you are a racist. By the definition that you don’t like others and don’t want to be near them, you are a racist."

I wouldn't want to live in a street full of Nazis. Or ISIS. Or Boko Haram ('Education is Filth').

Islam is not a 'race'. There is no specific Muslim 'race'. People who are Muslim share their ethnicity or 'race' with people from other religions.

Not all Muslims support fascist ideologies such as that of ISIS. Supporters of ISIS seem to come from pretty much every ethnic group, or 'race'.

To the extent that an ideology is evil, that it seeks to harm innocent people, don't you think it should be criticised ?

If a religion, or a set of religious books, gives rise to such an ideology, don't you think it should be criticised ?

As for killings in the Middle East, My understanding is that most of the dead in Syria have been killed by the bombers of Russia and Assad. If drones can target ISIS fighters, I have not the slightest qualm about their use.

Cheers,

Joe

Hay Loudmouth
You are correct that Muslims marched west as far Spain in the same way the Romans marched over their border hundreds of years before. However if you read about the conditions in the west at the time, it could be argued that they were simply trying to civilize a part of the world, that needed help The same justification used by Rome in the past and Washington, London, and Paris et al in the present.

The east was after all the birth place of civilization, and had been the dominate culture for thousands of years, creating mathematics, astronomic knowledge, and medical advancement to name a few.Also it was the Muslims who’s superior knowledge of the time who established universities in the 6 and 7 centuries, in feudal western part of Europe.

Come on Joe, don’t you follow the news. Since the end of WW2 the west has been sticking its military fingers into the affairs of many nations in the Middle East and beyond, just to control the supply of oil that it has by the bucket load. They created the mujaheddin to drag the Russians into a no win war in Afganistan, then created Al Qaeda to wipe out the Mujaheddin.

The Crusades were an edict from the Pope of the day. They recruited monks, nights, and a rapidly expanding population of mischievous youth. The monks were probably on a mission to regain the old Christian cities, which they disastrously failed to do because of incompetent field officers, and the strength of the Byzantine Empire of the time. They were also given a get out of Jail free card by the pope. What that means is, whatever sins you commit from now till you pop your clogs; your absolved of, thus no hell for eternity if you got into a bit of rape and pillage. The youth were sent for the same reason they were sent to fight each other in WW1, and that is so they are not a threat to the elite of the day.

Chris

LO,

You just had to say 'racist' didn't you? You can call me whatever you like, but I'll give you the a definition of a racist from someone of my ilk: "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal". He is American, but you can translate 'liberal' to Marxist, Commo, to suit you.

If you are not trying to 'convert' anyone, but merely want to express your opinion, try doing that and not picking fights with me or other posters.

And, my opinions are not compulsory reading; feel free to ignore them. After you arrived, very recently, I decided that I wouldn't be reading yours, responding only to your smart-arsed comments to me. Keeping raving on, by all means, but don't expect me to get involved.

You lot can crap on as much as you like, the reality is the world need changing and it needs the likes of the Trumps to make such changes.

As for here in Oz, we too need to change our ways and this dud we have must also be replaced.

We need leaders with balls who will make the tough choices.

As for living on $263 per week, there are plenty of fruit picking jobs out there, they pay on performance not by the hour, which is as it should be.

The other thing to remember is that that $263 is for doing NOTHING!

LEFTY ONE,
Regards Islam, you should firstly watch this video on it, then we'll talk again.
http://youtu.be/-YpJjRzQDIM

I have also watched videos from the other point of view where Muslims talk about Israel wanting to become the next ruling state in the world (Pax Judaica), of starting a big war, but not wanting to do so seen as the aggressor.
http://youtu.be/DeQ_wfUBjws

This is a bigger subject and there's a lot to it I'm not going into right now.

And THIS is the only reasonable response I can find (being half awake on a Sunday morning) for ANY GROUP with a global conquest mindset who wishes to subvert Australia.
http://youtu.be/YRKhTvUUYMI

Rehctub,
'...there are plenty of fruit picking jobs out there, they pay on performance not by the hour, which is as it should be.'
It sounds like an awesome idea but we can't do that because of political correctness.
Don't you understand women might complain that they're getting paid less than men?

I have however come up with a solution.
What we need to do is make 2 different prices...
1 price for fruit picked BY women FOR women and another price for fruit picked BY men FOR men.
There just isn't any other way in this PC world of 'equality'.
Of course the fruit for women will be more expensive as they can't pick as much but expect the same wage...

It's like the whinging about wanting paid maternity leave...
Don't they know it will make them less likely to be employed in the first place.
Maybe that's their angle.

- Sorry - I got carried away - You know I love pointing out the flaws contained in dumb ideas -

Yes I understand arm chair.

The fact is people don't have to work here and if they are cunning enough, and have the smarts, often something that is passed down from generations, they actually earn (pardon the pun) more than the workers once you remove the costs associated with holding a job.

Just having stayed in Bali, Club Med, I noticed the gardens and lawn ns are perfect, not even a leaf out of place. I was amazed to see up to 5 guys pushing push mowers whereas the same scenario here would be one guy on a zero turn mower and there in lies the difference. If you don't work there you either rely on your own family, not the tax payer, or you stave.

Perhaps life here is going to turn a complete circle out of necessity as we continue to strive towards zero jobs as we are seeing many jobs either being made obsolete, or major employers seeking a solution towards this.

When you think about it, we all want better paying jobs, automated equipment, more flexible hours, more reasons for leave (maternity, bereavement, stress, even domestic violence leave) while taking a slash and burn approach to cutting emissions. In reality, ten bucks an hour may be closer than we think because there will be so many competing for so few jobs, jobs that cant be automated.

What? People suddenly made redundant through no fault of their own are doing "nothing" because they want to do nothing? People in their 50's and 60's, who you wonderful employers don't want; those people who are too young for a pension - they should go fruit picking when they already have the start of old age physical problems? At $6.93 an hour? People of their ages still have mortgages these days. Many are still stuck with kids who can't get a job either, thanks to most industries being allowed to go overseas by useless politicians.

BTW. if you are the businessman that you claim to be, where do you get the time to think up and post such crap?

What? People suddenly made redundant through no fault of their own are doing "nothing" because they want to do nothing? People in their 50's and 60's, who you wonderful employers don't want; those people who are too young for a pension - they should go fruit picking when they already have the start of old age physical problems? At $6.93 an hour? People of their ages still have mortgages these days. Many are still stuck with kids who can't get a job either, thanks to most industries being allowed to go overseas buy useless politicians.

BTW. if you are the businessman that you claim to be, where do you get the time to think up and post crap?

Armchair Critic
That is more home work than I used to get at school.

I watched some bites of the videos, which would be very convincing for the audience. I could fill pages arguing some points, but will stick to just a few.

The bit about, make a deal/contract when you are weak, then ignore it when you are strong. That sounds just like how Trump runs his empire.

I think the truth of this day 15 years ago will never be told, as the general public could not handle it. Sufficient to say I believe the “false flag” control option is played by most leadership around the world.

It is clear both of them tend to embellish the story to fit their particular view point.

There have been a number of times in history when this or that religion dominated the world. Most people will tell whoever the dominant ruler is; they are devout followers whilst just getting on with their lives as best they can.

Christian armies have marched around the world many times and slaughtered millions, a fact Mr Federer seemed to forget. The problem with any religion is not the religion, or most of the followers, but the fundamentalists. Jews have been picked on by everyone throughout history, so I do understand some of their behavior. My first wife is Jewish, and she had no idea why they were picked, but never thought it important enough to find out.

I think the majority need to be mindful that our enemy is greed, and intolerance, preached from whichever pulpit.

As for your response, It is important to remember what the English did to him. However I have a similar point of view.

Chris

Rehctub
I have lived in Se Asia for the last nine years, in the real world. Club Med is a western invention like Disney world., and so have little connection to how Asia really is. You are correct that if you don’t work here it is the family that carries you or you starve. However life is a lot different from the west so it doesn't cost anywhere near as much to live reasonably well.

Housing. Instead of loading yourself up with a debt, you simply make a drawing that a ten year old could do, find a builder and build as you have the cash. So you have a basic house as you can afford to build, doing some of the work yourself. . No council plans, inspections, or rules regarding design, or materials.

Food, fruit and vegetables are fresh and mostly a dollar or two per kilo. Meat is on display without packaging, so not full of preservatives. The family takes care of its own, that means no nursing homes. I suspect if you read some history of Australia, not to different from a hundred years ago.

Your sweeping statement about, “what we all want. Is partly true. More flexible hours enough money for the bills and time to be with those you care about, I would agree with. However the new toys and money for the sake of it you can keep.

You also seem to think maternity leave is an unnecessary luxury and not essential for mothers. I am guessing you are a man and have never had to deal with all the issues around pregnancy and birth. So I have a suggestion. Take a 4 kilo watermelon, swallow it whole and squeeze it out through your arshole. Then get up the next morning and trot of to work like nothing happened.

I am also guessing you are an employer who cant wait for the rest of us to come begging for ten bucks an hour with no benefits so that you can swan of to fantasy land whenever you feel like it.
Chris

Ttbn
I know you think my opinion is a complete waste of space.
However for what is worth I completely agree with your last post.
Chris

Hi Lefty,

So we have to go back to the Romans ? Perhaps you're right - on behalf of the People's Marxist-Leninist Patriotic Revolutionary National Front (PMLPRNF), (not to be confused with those bastards in the National Patriotic Revolutionary People's M-L Front), apart from a few bull-rings, what did the Romans ever do for us ? Okay, they introduced olives, but - okay, flush toilets, but what else ?

Slight correction: the Middle East, pre-Arab, was Christian, highly civilized, and Kurdish/{Persian/Syriac. The tribal Arabs burst out of the desert and destroyed most of that. The 'civilization' in Spain was mostly carried on by Christians and Jews, under the thumb of Berber and Arab rulers, who transcribed crucial books from the Greeks etc. Gibr al-Tariq, after all, was Berber, as were most of the Emirs of the various feuding Caliphates in al-Andalus.

The maths that you talk about had been developed mostly by Indian priests and Central Asians, e.g. al-Khorazm, from Khorazm. The Arabs and their Berber converts invented nothing, developed nothing and extended nothing. If you have alternative evidence, let us know.

Islamism - ISIS, al-Shabab, Abu Sayyaf, Boko Haram etc. - is the major threat to the Left today. Surely, it stands for everything the Left is opposed to ? It also stands for everything the West in general is opposed to, and yes, I would say that the Western Enlightenment and any genuine Left have far more in common than either has with the fascists in ISIS etc. End of.

Joe

Hi loudmouth
Yes Monty Python did a brilliant parody of religion, with all its absurdities laid bare; they don’t make comedy like that anymore.

As this period in history is not one I am familiar with, I looked on the internet for a bit of clarification. What I soon learned is the truth of history depends on whose version of it you are reading. Even the scholars of the time, who say they were there, have had their works “interpreted” by one point of view or another.

So have a look at these two and make comment if you wish, but to be honest the only time that interests me is since WW2.

http://www.soundvision.com/article/muslim-christian-relations-the-good-the-bad

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade

The west’s meddling in the affairs of the middle east starting with the over throw of Musadek in Iran in the early 50, to the random drone programs, which Obama has intensified since being started in the Bush 2 era, have created a hot bed of insurgency against the west. Add to that the unquestioning support of Israel’s slow strangulation of Gaze and annexation of the West Bank, you have all the ingredients you need for a world of turmoil.

The Saudi’s are the ones funding the Wahhabi's who make up a significantly large percentage of the caliphate population, that Isis has proclaimed amid the ruble of western created nations.

They idea that you can wipe out militarily a political/religious belief that Isis promotes, as many on the political right believe, is myopic at the very least.

Neither I nor anyone else I know in the left see these organizations as sane, stable, or compatible with the world as we would have it. Isolation, denigration, and the death of many of their “martyrs” simply strengthens their resolve. There has to be a dialogue between the moderates of all religions, to find what we have in common as opposed to demonizing the moderates for not doing enough.

TBC

LEFTY ONE,

In regards to immigrants and farming. My theory is this:
If Australians need to rely on immigrants in order to farm, then we shouldn't farm in the first place.
If we can't figure out how to grow it ourselves we don't deserve to eat it.
But it does get complicated given that what we can grow under Australian wages we can buy twice as much from a foreign country.

Immigrants need to embrace our country first before we should reasonably be expected to embrace any of them.
We're often told that its commonly known Australians are racist.
Well if it is commonly known then why did they come here?
What did they expect?
That they fight for years over lands and it's the reason they end up fleeing wherever they come from, and that we're evil because we won't just hand our nation over to them?

Multiculturalism?
I get so peed off by foreigners who try to justify pushing their own cultures upon us by saying -
"Well you Australians don't have any culture anyway"
That's bloody well right!
Our culture is to not have a culture; and we sure as hell don't bloody well want yours.

The traditional inhabitants are never the ones pushing immigration anyway.
Its bankers and economists that do it.

"Tracey McNaughton, head of investment strategy at UBS Asset Management, says that the consequences of growing nationalism could force the bond market to finally become more discriminating in the way it prices sovereign risk."

G20 needs to reverse its protectionist ways: UBS
(Or in other words: Bankers and Economists want Elected Leaders to Sell Out Their Own Citizens)

http://www.afr.com/markets/debt-markets/g20-needs-to-reverse-its-protectionist-ways-ubs-20160906-grahlw

You know George Soros (Open Border and Financial backer of Hillary) is a frontman for the Rothschild's (Private Central Bankers) and the whole world is just a battleground for global hegemony.

They push the wars and imperialism, and the citizens of nations who take on immigrants clean up the mess.
You think these people give a crap?
They already live in gated communities.

Hi Lefty,

As you write, "They idea that you can wipe out militarily a political/religious belief that Isis promotes, as many on the political right believe, is myopic at the very least."

Yes, indeed: like any other religion, Islam spawns extreme interpretations of its books, its message, and will keep doing so long after ISIS is defeated, perhaps more so, again and again. After all, defeat will only be another provocation by the West against the most reactionary elements within Islam. Any religion which looks backwards (and don't they all ?) is bound, when pushed by its most extreme zealots, to retreat to an ever more reactionary position. There will be no let-up until Islam is either 'reformed' or cast aside.

Well, there's the twenty-first century taken care of.

Yes, like other powers, the Yanks have meddled incessantly in other countries' affairs: the ousting of Mossadeq (and possibly his murder in Paris in 1966) by the CIA, and of Arbenz in Guatemala at about the same time, were clearly to advance the interests of powerful US companies. No argument there. And do you think that the Saudis (i.e. Wahhabis, i.e. uncles of ISIS) aren't meddling in Islamist affairs everywhere they have set up mosques ? Perhaps not in Laos :)

And as you also write,

"Neither I nor anyone else I know in the left see these organizations as sane, stable, or compatible with the world as we would have it. Isolation, denigration, and the death of many of their “martyrs” simply strengthens their resolve. There has to be a dialogue between the moderates of all religions, to find what we have in common as opposed to demonizing the moderates for not doing enough."

I would add the proviso to beware of quietly-spoken, neatly-dressed, ever-so-dignified imams who gradually, slowly, bit by bit, will ask for the introduction of Shari'a law (perhaps at first just for Muslims) while gently pointing out the spectre of Islamist terrorism as a sort of ever-threatening alternative, to encourage 'dialogue'. In that sense, terrorism will have served its purpose. Bad cop/good cop.

Kob chai der,

Joe

Hi Lefty,

As a do-nothing wind bag, on the issue of furthering democracy (in its best sense), I agree with you (and Marx's Thesis Eleven) that it is easier to describe a situation than to do anything about it.

As an ex-socialist, I would suggest that for any society to be 'better than democracy', it has to build on democracy rather than try to subvert and replace it with something else, which invariably becomes totalitarian. Equality before the law, freedom of expression, freedom for scientific investigation, eternal scepticism and a tolerance for uncertainty and incompleteness seem to be a good place to start. So we do what we can within that framework.

I'm with Karl Popper who, in his last years, tried to synthesise socialism with the best of liberalism, and supported piecemeal improvements rather than 'revolutionary' giant steps. Very insufficient, not flashy enough from a young person's point of view, but dull and sensible from an old fart's point of view :)

Cheers,

Joe

Armchair Critic
Immigrants and farming, I was talking about the US.

Food production around the world is done using a production factory system, which ignores the laws of nature. Why do you think the health industry is so large today, could it be illness created by the consumption of crap, instead of real food?

Embraces the original culture, you mean as the European did as they advanced around the world over the last 500 years?

I had the privilege of travelling through the Middle East over forty years ago; I did not see any violence similar to that which is occurring today, after the west got involved in their civil wars.

Australia does have a culture, as does everywhere else. If you want to know what a nations culture is just look for the biggest building that hold the most people. Clearly in the west it is no longer the Christian church.

Not sure about your next points, although I would agree that the world of finance is the greatest threat of all.
Chris

Hi Lefty,

Biggest building ? Do you mean the MCG ? More than a million people watched the fantastic exhibition women's AFL match on TV a week ago. Did you have that in mind ?

Fascinating: you write, " .... travelling through the Middle East over forty years ago; I did not see any violence similar to that which is occurring today, after the west got involved in their civil wars."

Knocking around Indigenous affairs, I'm used to people externalising all their self-made problems. Has it occurred to you that the growing gap between the West and Muslim society, and people's perception of that gap, and why it has occurred as they see it, may have provoked the backward-looking reactions of some people there ? That ultimately, Islam dictates that progress is evil, and what they see being enjoyed in the west is therefore evil ? Therefore the West is evil ? And that any progress, say in health or women's education, in fact any whiff of better rights for women, is viewed with alarm in such reactionary societies ?

Still, you can't hold back human progress, which is ever-present around the Muslim world. Imams may preach that the world is flat, that the sun goes around the earth, but science and technology progress elsewhere, two steps forward, maybe one step back, but inexorably forward. Backward-looking belief systems fall ever more behind.

Cheers,

Joe

Load mouth
Yes the Saudi’s are meddlers, but they are the good guys, just ask the Bin Laden family, as they were flown out on 9.11 while all other flights were grounded over the US.

As I have not lived in a world being “invaded” by Muslims for the last nine years, I accept I am out of touch with how it feels. There are many laws in the west that have been ignored, or don’t exist to protect the weak in society. The finance industry has literally bought the planet to its knees, but get a slap on the wrist fine of loose change they find in their couch.

How about a couple of lashes with the cane for the mongrels who shove the recently unemployed out of their home that they having been paying for, for years.

I understand that Shari’a law is over the top , but I think many are sick and tired of a certain class of smart arse, who have had the laws written in a way that means they can live high of the hog with little effort.

So, to my final points on this thread.

It started with a comment aboutTrump that seems to have been lost.
I watch the Sunday political shows in the US on the internet. Being as it was the 15th anniversary of the destruction of 3 steel and concrete building in New York, and a tuning of the tide, I thought some of the panelist’s comments were very poignant.

How does America come together whoever wins in November?
Why did no one get punished for incompetence, in 2001?
Why have we got such a ridiculously poor couple of candidates to choose from out of over 300 million people?

And “my” final question that no one wants to ever ask, How do three steel and concrete buildings collapse at free fall speed, when two are hit by aluminum tubes full of aviation fuel, and one is hit by nothing at all.

Chris

Because they were firstly wired for demolition.

The 9/11 conspiracies have long been debunked:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center

Either that or it was the shape-shifting reptilian humanoids from the Alpha Draconis all posing as our politicians.

Armchaair Critic
Thank you , but it was a rhetorical question to flush out the likes of.....

A J Philips
So you have posted one of a number of articles that purport to "debunk" the belief that I and many other have regarding the destruction of those three towers.

I suggest the next time you decide to post a link you actually fact check it first.

The flash point of kerosene is 210 c hardly likely to bother the steel beams that were in those buildings.
And how exactly does an aircraft built of aluminium sheeting cut steel beams or cables.

I could go on but I wont, because there are two schools of thought on this. One is as Armchair Critic says and those like your self who steadfastly refuse to question the ridiculous report presented by the US government as researched scientifically provable fact.

Please feel free to continue this discussion if you wish, but with your own researched words.
Chris

Hi Lefty,

Some people are going to keep asking about the twin towers. I vaguely recall that, when they were built, there was scepticism that they would stay up, since their supporting frameworks (I think they were somehow external to the buildings they were holding up) were thought to be too flimsy, but being of less weight was precisely how they could get so tall).

And presumably those thousands of litres of fuel would have weakened the integrity of the materials in the structure (without necessarily having to melt, by the way), and down she goes, floor by floor, bam, bam, bam. The shock would have destabilised the smaller building next door.

And if three buildings were wired for demolition (without anybody noticing), why wire up that third building ? Nothing was going to hit it ? You're not claiming, by the way, that no planes hit any buildings, are you ? It's all Special Effects ?

Move on. Al Qa'ida planned it, al Qa'ida celebrated it. It was a master-stroke of anti-Western symbolism, the two tallest buildings in the world (at least when they were built) brought down by Islamic ingenuity and cunning. People must have been so proud.

Joe

That’s right, Lefty One. Just one of many.

<<So you have posted one of a number of articles that purport to "debunk" the belief that I and many other have regarding the destruction of those three towers.>>

Here’s another article with references for each rebuttal: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/9-11.

<<The flash point of kerosene is 210 c hardly likely to bother the steel beams that were in those buildings.>>

The article I linked to explained this, but you haven’t provided much of a response beyond mere assertion. The jet fuel would have burned for 10 minutes and at 426-815°C - enough to weaken steel by 50%. From then on, the fire was well on its way and no longer needed the jet fuel for kindling.

There was thousands of litres of jet fuel and nowhere near the oxygen or surface area required for that amount of jet fuel to burn up in a single puff.

<<And how exactly does an aircraft built of aluminium sheeting cut steel beams or cables.>>

With speed. It’s all physics. Here’s a ping pong ball going through a ping pong paddle at 900 mph:

http://www.tested.com/science/physics/453458-ping-pong-ball-launcher-blows-past-sound-barrier-through-paddle

<<I could go on but I wont, because there are two schools of thought on this. One is as Armchair Critic says and those like your self who steadfastly refuse to question the ridiculous report presented by the US government as researched scientifically provable fact.>>

Yes, I see this in anti-vaxxers and the anti-GMO mob too: happy to accept “evidence” that supports the conspiracy, but any evidence goes against it is all part of a big cover up. With that mindset, you’ll ensure that you never accept anything that contradicts a what you already believe.

Hollywood-style plots and secrets are more enticing than the drab mechanics of engineering disasters anyway.

<<Please feel free to continue this discussion if you wish, but with your own researched words.>>

You want me to paraphrase it all?! Why would I do that when it’s already fully accessible from somewhere else that doesn’t have a 350-word-limit? This sounds like the On the Spot fallacy (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/On_the_spot_fallacy).

Hi Loudmouth
I have no wish to spend time trying to convince people that the three tower were deliberately destroyed to create an environment that allowed the implementation of the patriot act, and a war that unlike any other fought before is anywhere near ending.

I will be honest I thought you were one of those who does a wee bit of research before posting an opinion. On this post you have words like vaguely recall and assume, which are not the language of a competent researcher.

You are correct that it was a ground breaking design in its day, and its structural integrity came from the outer walls. The columns were 350 mm wide spaced app 1 meter apart. There were 47 center columns made of 50 mm thick plate with a cross section of 40 cm by 90 cm.

Perhaps you have a think about how an aluminum tube flying at 450 miles an hour could smash its way through the steel outer columns. You might also like to wander how a liquid with a flash point of 210 c in any quantity could effect that thickness of structural grade steel.

My final point is, please don’t tell me I should move on it is insulting. I have no interest in trying to persuade you to believe anything you don’t want, just give me and thousands of architects, pilots and engineers who have studded this at length, some credit for their expertise. We believe the governments account of the events that day are implausible based on years of collective training.
Chris

What about the ping pong ball, Lefty One?

<<Perhaps you have a think about how an aluminum tube flying at 450 miles an hour could smash its way through the steel outer columns.>>

It appears there is only one belief here that is being held "steadfastly", and its not that of Joe or myself.

A plane is made up of more than a tube of aluminium too, by the way.

Hey AJ Philips,
While I disagree with your opinion about 9/11 I'd defend your right to have an opinion and share it.
You can make fun of me and my conspiracy theory opinions if you want, I'm not in the mood for inflaming things or making them worse.
If a persons arguments hold up there's no need for them to get upset or offended anyway and I think LEFTY ONE's going a bit far and moving into heated debate mode rather than calm constructive discussion.
Mind you I'm guilty of it at times...

There's a lot of info to pick apart regarding 9/11 and I'm not sure this is the thread for it.
I can tell you (going through the list on the link you posted) one thing they have wrong is that there most certainly was prior knowledge of the attacks because of the insider trading.
Also regards to yours and LO's discussions of molten steel there was reports of lava coming out of the rubble at least two weeks after the collapse.
But this is just a couple of the many many aspects to this particular subject.

Armchair Critic,

Yes, Lefty One’s quick switch from zero-to-heated-debate in the space of one response did, to me, give the claim of steadfastness an air of irony.

I’d like to see evidence of a lot of insider trading before the attacks, although it still wouldn’t be very good evidence. It would be like a reverse ergo propter hoc fallacy.

As for the molten-steel-in-the-rubble claims, they’re dubious to begin with (http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html). Although a controlled demolition wouldn't explain it any better than weakened structural support.

If such an operation were pulled off, it would require the knowledge of hundreds, if not thousands; and a study at Oxford using mathematics showed just how hard it is for people to keep secrets, and how that difficulty multiplies as more people are let in on the secret:

http://www.rt.com/news/330302-conspiracy-theories-oxford-study

How a big evil government manages to keep everyone silent, and yet can’t even shut down the YouTube channel of some crank, is something that is never explained.

Anyway, it comes as no surprise to me the fact that if one believes in one conspiracy theory, then they are likely to believe in many others, whether they be the moon landing, chemtrails, or lizard men. There is something else at work here and it’s not a keen eye for coverups.

Hi Lefty,

A basic law in physics is that momentum = half (mass of an object, times the square of its velocity). A doona hitting one of those towers at 500 mph would have done a lot of damage too. Velocity squared is not to be sneezed at. And why wire up that third building ?

Following AJ's point: knocking around Indigenous affairs for some time, I've had a theory about secrets and conspiracies for a while, that the chance of a leak is roughly proportional to the square (or perhaps the cube) of the number of people in the know, perhaps times the seriousness and/or consequences of the damage done by the conspiracy. A 'lone wolf' attack ? Still some chance of a leak about what is about to happen. Five people know about it beforehand ? A multitude of chances that it will be discovered. And so on.

Perhaps you're on safer grounds asserting that the CIA flew a missile into the Pentagon. Strange, no obvious antipathy between the heads of the CIA and the Pentagon over that ? Ah, because the Pentagon was in on it beforehand, and was prepared to sacrifice dozens of its staff, is that it ? Nobody IN the Pentagon passed on any leak to any colleagues, to those patsies who were about to be vaporised ?

Lies are very complicated, very difficult to maintain, especially the more people are involved. The truth is far simpler to maintain. An idiot can tell the truth and sleep soundly, but it takes a genius, or many geniuses, to knit together a fabrication. Or have I watched too many detective stories on TV ?

Anyway, BTT: Will Drumpf sink the boot into Hilary and harp on her illness ? You bet. And as if he hasn't castigated whole populations, Blacks, Hispanics, women ? What a slime.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi AJ Philips and Loudmouth,

Despite the fact I have a differing opinion about 9/11 I have to agree with you both about how hard it would be to plan and pull something like this off and keep it a secret.
And as much as I'm on the other side of the fence I do try to keep my feet on the ground as far as crazy conspiracy theories go, though I'm always open minded to consider all possibilities.
Toni Lavis thinks I'm the most guillible man alive, but well I guess we all have our opinions.

Now Loudmouth as I recall is Pro-Israel.
So I just want to make a point that I'm not bringing the following info to your attention for the benefit of denigrating Israel.
I'm simply sharing the information, thats all.

And if LEFTY ONE wants to have any chance of making it out of this mess, he's going to want to know every single fine detail in the following videos, because with 9/11 the devil's in the details.

Also AJ, I thought your ping pong ball demo was pretty good (and your explanation too Loudmouth) and I understand the basic theory behind what you both are trying to explain, however I don't think the plane was going 600kmh, I think it had slowed down to about 250knots or just over 450kmh though I'm not sure how much difference that makes.

9/11 Trillions: Follow The Money (Insider Trading on 9/11)
http://www.youtu.be/n3xgjxJwedA

Rebekah Roth Interviews
http://youtu.be/qdP95oSoOFk
http://youtu.be/xjOqcGSTL5M
http://youtu.be/I3HtKTSnJ48

LEFTY ONE,
I know the videos are time consuming, but if you really want to try to get to the bottom of it and put up a decent argument I've given you the tools to do so with these videos.

Regards Trump,
Not sure its really Presidential to lay the boot in over Hillary's health, except in areas where her ability to lead and make decisions could be impaired by it.
But obviously he's not going to let the opportunity completely go to waste. Hillary wouldn't.
Well see I suppose.

Sorry, I forgot to take the 'www' out of that link I shortened.
Here's the correct link for '9/11 Trillions: Follow The Money'
http://youtu.be/n3xgjxJwedA

Armchair Critic,

The first plane was going 790 km/h, and the second was going 950 km/h. However, even at 463 km/h, I hardly think the plane would crumple up on the side of the building - steel beams or no steel beams. But if one is determined to believe that it’s a government cover up, then one need only convince oneself that the government has lied about that too. It’s a fact-proof mindset.

Anyway, I still don’t understand the point of this part of the conspiracy theories. We saw planes hit the buildings. Are conspiracy theorists suggesting that the beams were weakened at those precise points beforehand? With no-one noticing?

Regarding Hillary Clinton’s health, she could be in a hospital bed and doped-up on morphine for her entire presidency and her ability to lead and make decisions would still be better than Trump’s:

NEW YORK—Saying it was completely exhausted and overwhelmed by its strenuous workload, Donald Trump’s prefrontal cortex admitted Thursday it was simply unable to filter through the torrent of impulsive comments coming from the rest of the presidential candidate’s brain. “I’m just completely inundated with erratic thoughts and knee-jerk reactions from all sides—there’s no way I can possibly screen everything that’s being produced in here,” said the higher-order structure of Trump’s brain responsible for impulse control and long-term planning, adding that the number of hastily formed ideas it was expected to evaluate and cull before they reached the speech motor cortex had been increasing steadily over the past year. “Sometimes, four or five different instinctive urges will try to get through all at once, and it’s just impossible to stop every one of them. I keep thinking they’ll eventually peter out, but there doesn’t seem to be an end in sight. I’ve been doing this for 70 years—I’m just drained.” Trump’s prefrontal cortex admitted that it could use significant help from the neural circuits in the angular gyrus and posterior cingulate that are tasked with moral decision-making, but noted that the ineffectual structures had stopped functioning years ago.

http://www.theonion.com/article/trumps-prefrontal-cortex-admits-it-cant-possibly-f-53502

Armchair Critic, loudmouth, and AJ Philips

First I will try to type calmer words in future, and I have no wish stop the opinions of others. I do get a bit ticked off when some posters tell me to” move on” when I know what I am talking about is true as I have been questioning it for years. It is especially difficult with this subject as has turned so much of the world into a much scarier place to live in.

I have viewed one of the videos, and there is a whole lot on there I was not aware of, so thank you for that.

However I will sit this one out as I don’t think I have anything more that is useful to add to what I have already said, except this.

Yes a plane is more than an aluminum tube as you say. The engines for instance I would have thought, would have sheared off and dropped to the ground.

It is hard to believe, that all those who were involved have kept shtoom all these years. However I find it even harder to believe that someone not in control of the system, could have shut down the entire air defense of the USA for a couple of hours, by sending all the aircraft to other parts of the country at the same time. My guess is they all understand that if any of them put their hand up to speak out, some very nasty things would happen to them and their families. We are, if people like Armchair Critic and I are correct, dealing with some very scary psychopaths, who have shown they have no problem killing to effect the required outcome.
Chris

Lefty One,

At the speed they were doing, the engines would have penetrated the buildings like bullets.

<<The engines for instance I would have thought, would have sheared off and dropped to the ground.>>

For them to suddenly lose, in an instant, the momentum they would have had at that speed and simply drop to the ground (despite being attached to the planes’ wings too, mind you) defies physics.

I still don’t understand what this proves, though. Is the claim that they would have had to have built special building-penetrating planes? There’s more people who’d have to be kept quiet: the builders of such planes. This gets more and more implausible all the time.

<<… I find it even harder to believe that someone not in control of the system, could have shut down the entire air defense of the USA for a couple of hours, by sending all the aircraft to other parts of the country at the same time.>>

What makes you think someone did that? Conspiracy sites? Only fourteen planes were on standby throughout the whole country (because, let’s face it, it’s not every day the US is attacked on its own soil), and none of them were close to the scenes. But I have seen no evidence that the whole country’s air defence was simultaneously re-located.

The idea that those hundreds, if not thousands, have all kept quiet because of threats is utterly implausible. There are many ways to blow the whistle with total anonymity. Yet no deathbed confessions, no leaked documents. Nothing. The penalty for leaking Cabinet documents is imprisonment and yet it happens all the time.

It also seems utterly implausible that the guys who sit in dark, smokey rooms watching re-runs of JFK being shot from the grassy knoll on their 8mm projector - the ones who would benefit from all this - just happened to all be psychopaths. Hundreds of them. All psychopaths.

To think that a Western government could callously murder 3000 of its own people just to start a war, I think, demonstrates a disturbing level of cynicism and paranoia.

AJ Philips

Ok so let’s assume you are right and the engines are behaving like bullets in wtc2, which the plane entered across a corner, why did they not exit the building on the other side?

I don’t think the building was compromised in any way to accommodate the events of 9/11.

However it is amazing how on that very day NORAD were carrying out 5 different exorcises, simulating the very thing that was happening in in NY, thus causing confusion in the US air defense operators. Also up until June 2001,NORAD had the ability to scramble fighter itself, this was changed ,so Chaney was the only one who could authorize it.

You obviously don’t want to believe people can be scared into silence, I and many other disagree based on our research.

Are you saying that America does not have hundreds if not thousands of powerful individuals who will stop at nothing to create, the new American Century. For the required lifting of defense spending to occur, there had to be an enemy to fight. So I believe 9/11 was planned to create an enemy to go to war with.

The problem I see with our back and forth is that you won’t read anything that is on a “conspiracy” site and thus has no merit. So I do understand why you never see any evidence there was a cover-up.

The twin towers are only a part of the issues around 9/11 that have never been explained properly.

You have still not explained why tower 7 came down, or why they never found much of the other two panes, or how an FBI agent found the passport of a highjacker on the ground by the twin towers, or how the passengers made cell phone calls from flight 93, when that was not technically possible at cruising altitude at that time.

I could go on for another couple of pages , but what is the point.

So let’s just agree to differ, as I don't believe you are interested in testing your theory.

There’s probably two reasons for that, Lefty One.

<<Ok so let’s assume you are right and the engines are behaving like bullets in wtc2, which the plane entered across a corner, why did they not exit the building on the other side?>>

Firstly, they were attached to a plane. Secondly, there was building in the way. Bullets don’t always exit what they hit. It was also a figure of speech. I’d doubt the speed, velocity, and mass of the engines was identical to that of a bullet.

<<I don’t think the building was compromised in any way to accommodate the events of 9/11.>>

So what’s the point of the ‘aluminium tube’ argument then?

<<However it is amazing how on that very day NORAD…>>

Yes, all very co-incidental, but is that actually the truth or are these just the claims of some conspiracy theorists on their dodgy websites?

<<You obviously don’t want to believe people can be scared into silence…>>

I do believe people can be scared into silence. I’m just not cynical enough about the courage or goodwill of humankind to think that not one of the hundreds or thousands of people, who would have to have knowledge of the conspiracy, would blow the whistle on it given how easy it would be. Nor am I confident enough in humankind to think that that many people could all go this long without letting anything slip.

It’s not about what I want to believe either. It’s about what’s plausible. And I believe I’ve given sufficient reason to doubt the plausibility of your claim. I even cited a study suggesting a similar level of implausibility.

I “don’t want to believe” that people can be scared into silence as much as you “don’t want to believe” that our politicians are all really shape-shifting reptilians from the planet Alpha Draconis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reptilians

[You don’t believe that, do you?]

<<…I and many other disagree based on our research.>>

Your research seems very selective given that you were not even aware that light/weak objects could pass through some surprisingly strong objects given enough speed.

Continued…

…Continued

Like a climate change denier, you have staked-out your position in advance and are wading through the data employing confirmation bias as you go.

<<Are you saying that America does not have hundreds if not thousands of powerful individuals who will stop at nothing to create, the new American Century.>>

No, but I am saying that it is exceedingly unlikely that enough would be perfectly positioned to pull off a stunt like this without having to advertise and recruit.

<<The problem … is that you won’t read anything that is on a “conspiracy” site and thus has no merit.>>

Yes, because I’ve read it all before and have not yet seen a claim that stands up to even the most cursory scrutiny. They’re also unsurprisingly light on the referencing. The very fact that these sites exist, and that these people who run them are still alive, despite what they claim the government will do to those who blow the whistle on the whole operation, discredits their claim.

The irony here is always lost on conspiracy theorists.

<<The twin towers are only a part of the issues around 9/11...>>

I know. I’m embarrassed to say that I did get into all the 9/11 conspiracy rubbish. Luckily it only lasted a few months, but it felt thrilling for that short period of time to think that I possessed some special knowledge that separated me from all the “sheep” out there. My excuse is that I was still de-converting from Christianity and was no longer sure of who I was because of the void it left.

Thanks, by the way. I was trying to avoid revealing that. I shudder every time I think about it. It’s mortifying.

<<You have still not explained [insert a lot of claims here]…>>

Google them. I did and there was no end of results debunking each one.

<<…I don't believe you are interested in testing your theory.>>

I don’t have a “theory” any more than you have a “theory” regarding your rejection of our reptilian politicians. My position, as always, is one of scientific scepticism.

A J Philips
Same as before you tell me to go looking on the net for the answers to my questions,I want to hear your explanation, because it is you I am debating.You seem to think because I challenge the official findings of the 9/11 commission, I believe every other conspiracy that is out there.

Any other thoughts I have regarding Elvis or lizard men are irrelevant to this post.

I have to say that you are starting to sound like a religious zealot who's job it to convert people like me from my corrupted thinking.

As I doubt any one else is still following this thread it is all rather pointless.

So I will close now by just saying if you are not convinced that 9/11 was an inside job it is OK I don't mind. I am comfortable in my own view.

Chris

LEFTY ONE,
Here's a bit of background on 'Home Run'
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/WTCDEMO/wot/home_run.htm
This page says the 767's that hit the WTC weighed 420,000lbs.

Reptilians now?

It’s like I said before, Lefty One.

<<Same as before you tell me to go looking on the net for the answers to my questions,I want to hear your explanation, because it is you I am debating.>>

“You want me to paraphrase it all?! Why would I do that when it’s already fully accessible from somewhere else that doesn’t have a 350-word-limit?” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7439#229568)

Really, though. What is the point in getting me to paraphrase it all, if not to overwhelm me or to limit what I can argue through the word and posting limits of this forum?

This is like the On the Spot fallacy, or a sort of reverse Gish Gallop.

<<You seem to think because I challenge the official findings of the 9/11 commission, I believe every other conspiracy that is out there.>>

No, on the contrary, I had assumed, for the sake of argument, that you rejected the one about shape-shifting reptilian politicians.

There is, however, the phenomenon known as ‘crank magnetism’, whereby if one buys into one form of quackery, then they are likely buy into other forms of quackery. For example, try finding an anti-GMO campaigner who vaccinates their children. They exist, but they can be hard to come by.

<<Any other thoughts I have regarding Elvis or lizard men are irrelevant to this post.>>

I used the reptilian conspiracy theory to give you a sense of how inaccurate your portrayal of my scepticism was. It was relevant to the extent that it differentiated between scepticism and denial.

<<I have to say that you are starting to sound like a religious zealot…>>

I’m sure it feels that way to you, yes. But no, I just enjoy discussions involving scientific scepticism.

<<As I doubt any one else is still following this thread...>>

Oh, you’d be surprised. I had a discussion go for eight months once, only to find towards the end of it (when they piped up) that a lot of people were still tuning in.

Anyway, aren’t you having enough fun to not worry about whether others are watching? Don’t worry about what others do.

Armchair Critic
Thanks for that, it is yet another piece of back ground info.

I am not sure about this AJ person, I am guessing he/she thinks they can convert me.

Chris

AJ Philips
I have a life outside this forum, so will not be responding to you anymore on this thread. I suggest you take up gardening it will help you get out of the house.

Chris

Lefty One,

Rest assured, I don't think I can convince you of anything. Not on this topic, at least. As I said earlier, conspiracy theorists tend to have a fact-proof mindset with built-in protection mechanisms. But converting others isn't the only reason to pursue a discussion. Just as pursuing a discussion isn't necessarily indicative of a lack of hobbies.

I find that those who jump to the most unflattering conclusions tend to be getting a little on the defensive side. It's a strange belief to be getting defensive about though. Who would want to assume the worst of humanity, after all? I suppose reality isn't always as exciting as a good conspiracy. Perhaps try finding excitment in debunking pseudoscience?

Hey LEFTY ONE,
I'm not sure he's trying to convert you, I think all AJ Philips has done is backed up his original opinion on the subject by refuting your argument - that the planes wouldn't go 'into' the towers as opposed to smashing up in a crumpled heap 'against' the towers.

They've given out some air-speed data, which was faster than I thought; and I gave the weight 420,000lbs, Loudmouth even kindly showed how to formulate the data (if that's the right terminology)
Then take into account there was a lot of fuel, so the wings weren't hollow and then maybe even consider whether cabin pressure worked a little like the golf ball video we saw earlier ?

With that much weight and speed I think its reasonable to think that the planes went through that outer casing unimpeded, especially considering the inertia that sent the flames way out the other side of the building.
I don't specifically know the strength capabilities of the building, but there are honestly a million other aspects / inconsistencies or what-have-you of 9/11 to look at before you get hung up on that tiny aspect of it.

There was a thread for 9/11 a while back, though I'm not sure its still active.
You are free to start a new topic if you want (though the forum administrator might not approve one if there's still an active existing thread on that topic)
And really we shouldn't 'cross-post' different discussions on the original authors forum.
Sorry BROCK.

If 9/11's important to you, do some research, be sure of all your arguments and come back and have another crack another day, it's no big deal.

Sheesh! Now there’s a conspiracy theory about me trying to convert. Perhaps I’m employed by the US government?

It’s alright, I’ve been accused of being a shill for Big Pharma and Big Agra by those who I'm certain must be shills Big Organic.

I was once even accused by someone of being paid by Graham Young to get them off the forum! The lengths some people will go to to avoid facing the possibility that they may simply be wrong.

I still don’t get what building-penetrating planes would prove though. It’s like those who propose this theory get so caught up in looking for inconsistencies that they forget why it is that they’re trying to find them.

If people work for forty years, like I have, yet have nothing to show for it, then cry poor when they loose their jobs, is that societies fault?

The current situation is simply the fallout of bad government decisions in the past and if some didn't stash a bit away when they had the chance, its a shame, but it was their choice.

Hi AJ,

Those planes weighed 200 tonnes (200 tonnes of aluminium is still 200 tonnes, Lefty), and were travelling at, for argument's sake, 600 kph ?

Momentum = half (mass) x velocity squared.

Some bullet.

Those planes are quite beautiful, sleek, slim, elegant. And ten metres 'thick'. So when one slams into a building at 600 kph, I wonder why it doesn't get jammed between floors ? Perhaps because all 200 tonnes of it disintegrates in a split second, surrounded by thousands of litres of high-power fuel. All part of that momentum = 1/2 m x v sq.

And what impact would that alone have on the integrity of the building it hits, i.e. a ten-metre tall plane body fitting into a four-metre space ? Or hitting the floor-level head-on (or a couple of floor-levels) ? Would that perturb the building at all ? Or would the thousands of .litres of high-octane fuel do that ? Or the effects of both together ? All that fuel pouring down stair-wells and lift-shafts.

Hi Lefty,

Just one thing that puzzles me: the second plane hit much lower down than the first one. Guess which building collapsed first. Why would that be ?

Maybe the demolitioners planned it that way ? Devilishly cunning.

Oh, another thing: what would one of those buildings weigh ? Half a million tonnes ? Two of them falling near a smaller third building: could that have a sort of destabilising effect on it ?

Or was a third plane supposed to hit it ? Otherwise, why wire it up for demolition ?

Just wondering.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Armchair Critic
As you say there are a million and one unanswered questions regarding the 9/11 report presented by the government. It could well be that the planes did smash their way in which if true, would mean the people who were told to design a tower that could handle the pact of a fully loaded 707 did not do a very good job.

I am not that bothered to continue talking about 9/11 as I think the world has lot bigger problems that we can possible affect the thinking of some on. I guess people who post come in three basic groups. Those that follow main stream media and believe what It says. Those who think about what is being stated and ask questions, if it does not make sense. And finally those who just enjoy a good blog joust with an opposing point of view.

And as you also said we are way of topic, for me it is time to move to another topic. Or more likely a take break as my wife is telling me I need to focus more on running our farm.The rains are nearly finished, which means this year at least, no flooding.

Chris

Rehctub
I am not sure why you posted this here as it is way of topic. However you may like to look at the tax structure and ask how is it that some are able to accumulate billions and stash them in tax havens.

The issue for me is very simple. All countries tax systems are based on the middle class recycling their income, discretionary, or fixed expenses. If we continue to shift the tax burden from the asset accumulators, and onto consumers, whilst introducing policies that automate or outsource a greater proportion of the economy that employs those very same consumers,then we are headed for something that looks a lot like the nineteenth century.

So the question is why exactly do the asset accumulators think this would be good for them.
Surly a world that has a solid middle class is something that benefits us all.

Chris

And my final word on this thread goes to load mouth

There may have been some earthquake type damage to tower 7 and all the other buildings in the area. However it came down in 7 second, which if you watch how controlled demolition works, that use explosives, it looked exactly the same.

As for why that one, perhaps you might like to ask what those offices were being used for, to figure that one out.

You may also want to wonder why the building that was built to be the HQ of emergency services for the area, so was masivly over enginered fell down, when buildings 3,4,5,6, which were not built to the same standard did not.
Chris

@Armchair Critic: "With that much weight and speed I think its reasonable to think that the planes went through that outer casing unimpeded...."

Well of course AC, I agree. Physics and engineering is, well, Physics and engineering. :-)

There is another possibility people 'could' apply to what happened without recourse to a Uni Degree in Science or Engineering.

They could open their eyes and look at the planes going through that outer casing unimpeded. :-)

Another little historical factoid that may help future discussions. Both Osama Bin Laden and Mohammed Atta studied 'engineering' at University. Atta went further as he had a specific interest in tall buildings. Atta was admitted into the very selective architecture program during his senior year. In 1990, Atta graduated with a degree in architecture.

At this time, and decades before the WTC building designs were in every Architecture Degree Course and often in Engineering courses as well. This was because they were a unique modern design with numerous advantages, as such the topic was academically highly relevant.

When Atta first took his idea to Bin Laden, because Osama was an Engineer himself, and not an uneducated tribal idiot, it was favourably looked upon, and then funded.

The rest as they say is history. It was a Physics and Engineering experiment basically. Theoretically the towers should have been essentially permanently 'destroyed' by a jetliner crashing into them at the top. But the result far outweighed their expectations.

That's why Science does experiments and cranks super-computer models.

At present the world is basically doing a 9/11 style real life experiment - could increasing GHGs and ongoing destruction of forests and production of cement lead to a unlivable climate and potential starvation for human and animal life on the planet.

Time will tell, because some experiments take longer than others. :-)

Latest Poll from America. Trump leading in marginal States and Hillary Clinton collapses in a heap during the 9/11 memorial ceremony.
Around the world the media has been condemning Trump .The people who matter are the people of America and they are gradually coming to realise that life under Clinton would become more and more dangerous with more Muslims being invited in by Clinton and more blacks killed than in the heyday of the KKK.

Looking forward to seeing Trump carve Hillary up today...

Well, I think this about sums up the debate:

http://goo.gl/eQhOj2

Armchair critic
So how do you think your boy did.
Chris

Hey LEFTY ONE,
Not as well as I hoped honestly.
I think Hillary was well prepared and handled the debate better than was expected.
Trump seemed flustered and on the verge of losing his cool at some points.

HI AC,

Yes, given that Drumpf is mainly piss and wind, all Hilary has to do is keep needling him. Maybe plant a couple of his TV-couch bimbos in the first row at the next debate. Ask more about how it felt for a 'man of the ordinary people, the battlers, etc.' to start off with his couple of hundred mill, whether like his father, he was a rack-renter, how his current bankruptcy deals are going, where Aleppo is, how he would blunder into the Middle East and finish off ISIS within a month, and then leave. She should laugh at him a bit more, work the crowd more, give answers as close as possible to what the journos want and be very polite to them. Exploit his every slip. The man's a moron, after all. But of course, he's your moron.

Cheers,

Joe

Hi LM & AC
Now LM is being a bit hard on Mr Trump I think. First that crack about Aleppo was Johnson who was a bit geographically challenged not Trump.Also he was very on message and did not have any oops moments.LM you of all people must be aware that HRH will be(apart from 'W) the most hawkish go get em presidents in recent history.

I mean any nation that has any resources that the dying empire wants had better be prepared for the aircraft carrier off the coast as the multi nationals arrive to dig it up, or cut it down.
So before LM gets to self congratulatory as the world watchs Mr Trump breath even louder thru his nose, LM should be very careful what he wishes for as the times will get a whole lot more interesting as the old chines proverb says.

On the other hand should he be successful you will see the star spangled nightmare reach its Waterloo a whole lot quicker.

So gentleman start preparing for the worst so you will be a few yards ahead of the herd as it heads for the hills.
Chris

Hey Chris,
Honestly I can't really argue with what Joe said. Fair's fair.

I do support Trump, but it's because I'm very much against Hillary.
I'm against the path America has taken in the past and Hillary has been a big part of that.
I disagree with her stances on certain issues, then there's her track record and questions regarding her honestly; and her self serving nature such as in respect of the dealings of the Clinton Foundation.
Also I think she would say and do anything to get elected, and I'm not sure she would keep her word; nor even intend to.

But I think one of Hillary's big strengths is that there can be all sorts of controversy going on around her about things she's done, but she still manages to find a way to play it all down and stand there all 'innocent-like'.

She looked well and did well today.
I'm not sure if she was wearing an earpiece though and was getting help, but she did fairly well nonetheless.
Not that she deserves all the credit for today:
Trump is his own worst enemy, and he keeps blowing it, in my opinion.

They say hes a populist, but he cant get away with it when he doesn't come up with smart, witty and perfectly inciteful answers at every turn; when he fails to do so he ends up looking like an indecisive blustering fool.
And butting in, trying to get the last word in didn't improve things at all.

Hillary looked more Presidential simply by remaining in control of her own behavior unlike Trump today.
He wasn't as well prepared and it showed.

I did acknowledge when Trump first announced he was running that my biggest concern with someone like him is his own ego.

You seem to be cooling mighty fast on Trump there, Armchair Critic. That's encouraging. The intellectual caibre of Trump supporters is pretty damn low:

http://goo.gl/Iqq0YI

At one point there, you believed that America needed Trump, now you just seem to view him as the lesser of the two evils. Not much further to go now. If it helps to dull his appear to you any more, just remember that his family name is actually Drumpf, not Trump.

Hey AJ Philips,
I have had a few reservations about Trump as far back as during the primaries, I just haven't really shared them.
I thought his primary speeches were 'always the same' and it felt like his message was getting stale, I think he should've mixed it up a little more.

I'm not too fond of some of the foreign policy positions he seems to have.
- Maybe a little too friendly with both Saudi Arabia and Israel (and hard on Iran) for my liking, but only because it makes me wonder whether he'll continue with this 'neocon' like foreign policy in M/E wars or whether hopefully he'll do something different;

But the US has a interesting political system in that certain interest groups must be appeased.
Military Industrial Complex, Big Pharma, Israel Lobby... etc

I do think that controlling borders and removing illegal immigrants is the right thing to do,
And I am very much for a nations citizens themselves deciding whats best for them, not anyone else.

Funny link - one thing I think is true is that there's idiots in both camps...
You'd be surprised what some of Hillary's supporters will agree to: http://youtu.be/Gc4Mi4ocyDw

[Cont]
My criticisms for Trump aside, I still cannot support Hillary Clinton.

I could write a huge list of genuine criticisms for her, everything from her REAL treatment of women (Bill's sexual assault victims) to what she did to Ghaddafi in Libya and Benghazi to hide the gun-running to Syrian rebels, her lies about Assad and his gas attacks and support for the Syrian war - and how she actually created the whole European refugee problem, I could mention the Clinton Body Count List, or even the China-Gate scandal years ago and whether the current Email Scandal was a repeat of this earlier scandal and whether she was committing espionage by keeping classified documents on an insecure server and allowing said classified documents to be delivered via hackers in exchange for contributions to the Clinton Foundation.
She should've been prosecuted for espionage for the email scandal because she was guilty of ordering her staff to remove the classified heading of documents so they could be sent to her insecure and unauthorised server, which is a felony violation of Title 18 Section 793 and would've meant she was ineligible to qualify as being able to hold the office of President.
Not to mention she stole the nomination from Sanders and what was going in inside the Un-Democratic Party...
And all the drug running that was going on back in Mena Arkansas, when Bill was Governor.

There's not enough room here to write all the genuine criticisms surrounding Hillary Clinton, and I think I've done my daily quota.

So yes I do have reservations about Trump, but that in no way means I support Hillary.