What would it take for Trump to win?

[BernardLanguillier]

Bernard, I agree that there are always unanswered questions about events like these, and the attacks on the US on this occasion are no different, especially the involvement of Saudi Arabia. All I am saying is that contrary the conspiracy buffs, the Pentagon was certainly not hit by a missile, and the Twin Towers were certainly not brought down by demolition charges.

Hi David,

Ideally, this would have to be analyzed in details by experts belong to an independent committee sponsored by the UN for instance. The problem is that most people who don't want to be seen as "conspiracy theorists" look at the problem with a pre-defined interpretation of what happened shaped by the official story instead of looking at available facts. Science doesn't start with a model to which you try to match facts, it builds the most likely model from the facts at hand.

As far as the pentagon goes I don't know if a missile did it, but there is ample evidence that not a single experience pilot would have been able to fly a plane according to the flight path that is proposed by the official conspiracy theory. Let alone a beginner. Not to mention the fact that, at the speed at which it is reported to have hit (800+ kph which is way beyond the possible speed of this plane at low altitude), ground effect would make it simply impossible to fly that low. Not the mention the lack of debris,...

Let me look briefly at the latter.
There is no such thing as a silent explosive that gives off no light. When the 11 story Radio House building was brought down in Christchurch after it had been damaged in the earthquake, the entire building lit up and you could hear the bang from the other side of the city. See my photos below.
The world's press had their cameras and microphones running on that day and none recorded a flash and a bang. Remember an analysis of a news recording from on the ground had enough detail in the soundtrack to calculate the rate of fall of the core of the building.
The only person I have been able to find who claimed to have heard a bang was a police officer, who also claims that hundreds of people in the US are kidnapped each year by witch's covens. I'll go with the sound analysis I think.

I am not an expert in demolition, but I understand that there are several techniques that could be used to bring down buildings. At least in the case of the 3rd tower, there are many documented reports of explosions.

There guys seem to have serious doubts also: http://www.ae911truth.org/

There are more pressing issues to put our energy into.

Really? When you consider that the whole world in the following years was defined by the aftermath of 9/11, I am not sure to consider this as non pressing issue. The 80 people who died tonight in Nice would not have died if the Islamic State hadn't grown in influence, which would not have happened if the war in Irak hadn't taken place, which wouldn't have happened if the 9/11 hadn't happened.

So for the families of these 80 tragic casualities, 9/11 did indirectly, but beyond any possible doubt, impact their lives for ever... today.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Colorado David]

The worst thing that can happen to a web forum and informational site that shares professional information in a collegial manner is to have a sub forum that allows the discussion of politics.

[BernardLanguillier]

The worst thing that can happen to a web forum and informational site that shares professional information in a collegial manner is to have a sub forum that allows the discussion of politics.

I think I understand why you would say that, but I happen to disagree.

To me there is value in conversing with people you "virtually" know already and that you know are creative people you can respect.

Our views are part of who we are and as long as they are honnest what's wrong with discussing them?

Cheers,
Bernard

[David Sutton]

As far as the pentagon goes I don't know if a missile did it, but there is ample evidence that not a single experience pilot would have been able to fly a plane according to the flight path that is proposed by the official conspiracy theory. Let alone a beginner. Not to mention the fact that, at the speed at which it is reported to have hit (800+ kph which is way beyond the possible speed of this plane at low altitude), ground effect would make it simply impossible to fly that low.

Hi Bernard.
Yes, I've seen that argument.
Here's my take on it FWIW:
I think it's style was made famous by the Inquisition in 1615 when it said that Galileo's observed facts were subordinate to biblical theory.
Right from the beginning there were credible witnesses who stood up to say they saw the plane. I'll go with that. Therefore there are errors in the theory.

Not the mention the lack of debris, lack of video footage,...

A massive amount of debris was found. I did a quick search and the first two entries were:
http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5659/debunking-911-myths-pentagon/

I am not an expert in demolition, but I understand that there are several techniques that could be used to bring down buildings.

There are several reliable methods to bring down buildings. All produce sound and light. For example, I've seen a container of thermite ignited. It doesn't go bang but produces an almighty "woomph" burning through the container walls and producing an amazing amount of light. You can't disguise that.

I agree the aftermath has been nasty for most of us, and I don't know what can be done about that. One issue I was thinking of when I said there are more important things, is the seeming determination of the current US administration to start a nuclear war with Russia. There is nowhere to hide from that one. I'm old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis, and I think we are approaching that level of risk. At that time the USSR blinked, but the missiles were not on their own border. Hope I'm wrong about this.
Cheers,
David

[Justinr]

Hi Bernard.
Yes, I've seen that argument.
Here's my take on it FWIW:
I think it's style was made famous by the Inquisition in 1615 when it said that Galileo's observed facts were subordinate to biblical theory.
Right from the beginning there were credible witnesses who stood up to say they saw the plane. I'll go with that. Therefore there are errors in the theory.

A massive amount of debris was found. I did a quick search and the first two entries were:
http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5659/debunking-911-myths-pentagon/
There are several reliable methods to bring down buildings. All produce sound and light. For example, I've seen a container of thermite ignited. It doesn't go bang but produces an almighty "woomph" burning through the container walls and producing an amazing amount of light. You can't disguise that.

I agree the aftermath has been nasty for most of us, and I don't know what can be done about that. One issue I was thinking of when I said there are more important things, is the seeming determination of the current US administration to start a nuclear war with Russia. There is nowhere to hide from that one. I'm old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis, and I think we are approaching that level of risk. At that time the USSR blinked, but the missiles were not on their own border. Hope I'm wrong about this.
Cheers,
David

Billions upon billions of people have seen the sun rise in the east and set in the west, it therefore follows that the sun revolves around the earth. Are you going with that as well?

As for the wreckage then there are just as many sites pointing out that there was none and that the fire chief changed his story about it being inside the building and so on. We are also expected to believe that the wings folded up and followed the soft nose fuselage through an 18 foot wide hole despite the fact that two great spinning lumps of hardened metal, the engines, would have needed to overcome huge gyroscopic forces for that to happen.

We could argue all day about this and the only thing that will be proven is who believes in reality and who still thinks Santa brings the pressies.

[David Sutton]

Billions upon billions of people have seen the sun rise in the east and set in the west, it therefore follows that the sun revolves around the earth. Are you going with that as well?

That's a weird argument, no?

As for the wreckage then there are just as many sites pointing out that there was none and that the fire chief changed his story about it being inside the building and so on.

Never read about the fire chief. Just looked all the the photos.

We are also expected to believe that the wings folded up and followed the soft nose fuselage through an 18 foot wide hole

I think this may be fantasy. From memory, the front of the building collapsed after 20 minutes, and so we are relying on simulations to work out the size of the hole. The estimate is 75ft. Do you have a link to a photo taken before the collapse?

Edit: It must be getting late if I'm discussing minutiae. Hundreds of people saw the plane. No-one saw a missile. QED

[stamper]

A few years ago Donald Trump - referred to as trumpet gub in Scotland - invested in real estate and golf courses in Scotland. At first he was welcomed especially by Alec Salmond of the SNP. However he quickly became known as a bully. In Aberdeenshire, where he has a golf course, he tried to bully residents off their land in order he could expand his golf course and mostly failed. He told the SNP government to demolish wind farms at sea on the horizon because they spoiled the view from his golf course. His recent tax returns highlights that all of his enterprises are heavily in debt. Most Scots find him contemptible and he is a figure of ridicule.

[stamper]

How many of the members on the site who are US republicans are willing to reveal that they will vote for him? It would be interesting.

[Otto Phocus]

Also, I must admit that I'm really disappointed in the LR audience because with 56 replies at this point, only Alan Weiss and Dave Sutton have challenged you on your 9/11 nonsense. 
Brad Smith     

Perhaps many people just chose not to respond to that person's opinion.  Not everything has to be discussed and non-discussion does not mean acceptance, agreement, or even acknowledgement.

[Justinr]

That's a weird argument, no?
Never read about the fire chief. Just looked all the the photos.
I think this may be fantasy. From memory, the front of the building collapsed after 20 minutes, and so we are relying on simulations to work out the size of the hole. The estimate is 75ft. Do you have a link to a photo taken before the collapse?

Edit: It must be getting late if I'm discussing minutiae. Hundreds of people saw the plane. No-one saw a missile. QED

Here we go, something else to believe in because thousands of people claim to have seen it -

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/crowds-still-flock-to-moving-statue-site-at-ballinspittle-three-decades-on-343777.html

[Jim Pascoe]

Here we go, something else to believe in because thousands of people claim to have seen it -

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/crowds-still-flock-to-moving-statue-site-at-ballinspittle-three-decades-on-343777.html

Well it is only by the word of a few dozen astronauts that we know for sure the Earth is round and that there is indeed a vacuum outside the atmosphere.  Is there really doubt that people 'imagined' a plane flying into the Pentagon?  I certainly suspect the motives behind the US and UK governments use of the events of 9/11 to justify going to war, but cannot believe they orchestrated the attacks......

Or am i just gullible?

Jim

[Justinr]

Well it is only by the word of a few dozen astronauts that we know for sure the Earth is round and that there is indeed a vacuum outside the atmosphere.  Is there really doubt that people 'imagined' a plane flying into the Pentagon?  I certainly suspect the motives behind the US and UK governments use of the events of 9/11 to justify going to war, but cannot believe they orchestrated the attacks......

Or am i just gullible?

Jim

I really have no idea what the truth is and to try and guess at it just brings misguided ridicule from the ultra conformists. However, the psychology behind witness accounts is not as straightforward as we would be led to believe, it's been shown that should there be a shock happening and you then quickly tell people what they saw they will come to believe that is indeed what happened. A quick google brought this up -

Several studies have been conducted on human memory and on subjects’ propensity to remember erroneously events and details that did not occur. Elizabeth Loftus performed experiments in the mid-seventies demonstrating the effect of a third party’s introducing false facts into memory.4  Subjects were shown a slide of a car at an intersection with either a yield sign or a stop sign. Experimenters asked participants questions, falsely introducing the term "stop sign" into the question instead of referring to the yield sign participants had actually seen. Similarly, experimenters falsely substituted the term "yield sign" in questions directed to participants who had actually seen the stop sign slide. The results indicated that subjects remembered seeing the false image. In the initial part of the experiment, subjects also viewed a slide showing a car accident. Some subjects were later asked how fast the cars were traveling when they "hit" each other, others were asked how fast the cars were traveling when they "smashed" into each other. Those subjects questioned using the word "smashed" were more likely to report having seen broken glass in the original slide. The introduction of false cues altered participants’ memories.

https://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Correct, Justin. Your quoted example is also known as "anchoring," i.e., using a specific word or number in a question to "anchor" the answer around it.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

How many of the members on the site who are US republicans are willing to reveal that they will vote for him? It would be interesting.

Why would that be interesting?

[MattBurt]

Why would that be interesting?

Because he is divisive and some prominent republicans have even said they would rather vote for Hillary. Although I suspect it's like when Bill O'reilly says he would move to Canada if Obama got reelected. He didn't and Canada doesn't want him anyway.

[donbga]

Because he is divisive and some prominent republicans have even said they would rather vote for Hillary. Although I suspect it's like when Bill O'reilly says he would move to Canada if Obama got reelected. He didn't and Canada doesn't want him anyway.

l think you are confused, O'Rielly satyrically commented he would move to Ireland if Bernie Sanders was ellected president.

And anyone thinking that the Twin Towers were brought down by demolition rather than the impact of airplanes is a FOOL!

[MattBurt]

l think you are confused, O'Rielly satyrically commented he would move to Ireland if Bernie Sanders was ellected president.

And anyone thinking that the Twin Towers were brought down by demolition rather than the impact of airplanes is a FOOL!

Right, I forget who said Canada but it was one of those loudmouth pundits. I try not to pay too much attention to them.

But I do think it's funny when something looks like too much Socialism to someone and they declare they will leave the USA for some country with a lot more Socialistic tendencies.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Because he is divisive...

I think you missed the point of my question, Matt, which was: "Why would it be interesting who on this board will vote for him?"

[MattBurt]

I think you missed the point of my question, Matt, which was: "Why would it be interesting who on this board will vote for him?"

Oops, I did. I went broader with Republican party members. This board surely contains a subset of that but you are right, it's not really that interesting.

[BernardLanguillier]

Hi Bernard.
Yes, I've seen that argument.
Here's my take on it FWIW:
I think it's style was made famous by the Inquisition in 1615 when it said that Galileo's observed facts were subordinate to biblical theory.
Right from the beginning there were credible witnesses who stood up to say they saw the plane. I'll go with that. Therefore there are errors in the theory.

Absolutely, credible witnesses should definitely be given credit.

I agree the aftermath has been nasty for most of us, and I don't know what can be done about that. One issue I was thinking of when I said there are more important things, is the seeming determination of the current US administration to start a nuclear war with Russia. There is nowhere to hide from that one. I'm old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis, and I think we are approaching that level of risk. At that time the USSR blinked, but the missiles were not on their own border. Hope I'm wrong about this.

I hope you are wrong as well.

Cheers,
Bernard