Rising fascism in the US

Perhaps Trump just automatically assumed the reporter was referring to him? I don't think Trump is very bright, he seems slick like a used car salesman, but not too bright. Or perhaps the pressure of actually being the President has already gotten to him? I mean given his Sweden comment and all something seems off.

That's an interesting discussion. Butting in, an important reason for the rise of fascism in the US and Europe is that the immunity provided by our last (1940's) vaccination against fascism is wearing off. The young don't care anymore, and the old are tired of remembering. We need another injection of the plague to remember how bad it is. Hopefully we'll survive it...

Another reason, me think, is that our democratic temples are increasingly parazited by money lenders. Their influence is growing so large that the whole idea of representative democracy is increasingly seen as a pretense, as sort of fake, and rightly so. Fascism in this light is presented as a return to real, direct democracy. It's "giving back Washington to the people". That's an illusion of course (direct democracy being impossible) but it sells well. It's nothing new. Fascism originally rose out of a lack of faith in the Italian (and later German) democracies.

Rising fascism in the US
-----------

And don't forget the US Reichstag, actually ReichstagS, because there were three of them.

I've not scolded anyone for talking about matters pertaining to Britain or Europe. I have pointed out when they've spoken absolute nonsense of which they know nothing about.

A point in question was when Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour party. Lash spouted a load of old pony about how the people of Britain had spoken. Clearly she was confused about the people eligible to vote in the Labour leadership context and the broader British electorate. She doesn't like being told when she makes pretty basic errors, which is one of the reasons she's on ignore.

Just to clear up Corbyn's support, this is the latest poll taken on 05 February 2017.



http://www.ukpolitical.info/General_election_polls.htm<br />

If the people of Britain are to speak out overwhelmingly in favour of Corbyn, it's a long way off.

And don't forget the US Reichstag, actually ReichstagS, because there were three of them.
================

Here's an very interesting tidbit, the significance of which may well be lost on some, both the truly naive and the willful naive, but it is highly significant and vitally important, the Reichstag dome was demolished, in 1954, using thermite.

Also, highly significant, is the absolute dearth of comments following the video. Why? Because there has been much discussion around the world of the nanothermite/superthermite that was used on the three WTC towers.

Unreacted nanothermite particles were found in many different samples of WTC dust. What was a US developed, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, US patented around 1996-97, not commercially available, high grade military explosive doing in the World Trade Center buildings?

Reichstag Ruins Demolished 1954

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg8xpsrUpPY

I include the comments from that video here as they are very enlightening. Obviously, the words are not mine.

--------------------

ElectricQualia1 year ago (edited)
I think an average retard would understand that the civilian technology of 1954 is qualitatively different than the military technology of 2001.

But even if we assume that it wasn't thermite or super-thermite or nano or whatever, that still doesn't explain how the buildings fell the way they fell, it doesn't explain the melted steel, it doesn't explain how those hijakcers with minimal training flew jumbo jets and executed very difficult maneuvers without missing the towers, or the political actions like the patriot act, or a million other implausibilities.

This is simply the low hanging fruit, and even at that you fail, I mean 1954? seriously?

Reply
Sgt. Rock
Sgt. Rock9 months ago
+ElectricQualia There was no "melted" steel. Steel just has to be hot enough to buckle and bend for the weight above to bring the building down. And 1954 was pretty much the last time anyone has ever tried to demolish a building using thermite because it failed miserably.

Reply ElectricQualia
ElectricQualia9 months ago
+Sgt. Rock There was, but even if there wasn't that still doesn't make your case better. You have to explain a million other things.

Whether there was thermite or not is a red herring, you can demolish in other ways.

Also 2001 military > 1954 civilian. This is obvious, so the point is moot.
Show less

Sgt Rock: There was no "melted" steel.

There was plenty of melted steel. Leslie Robertson, one of the designers of the WTC, described a situation where firefighters or recovery workers said that he would be interested in "this". They lifted something, and 'there was a little river of molten steel running'. ['...' denote a paraphrase]

Sgt. Rock: Steel just has to be hot enough to buckle and bend for the weight above to bring the building down.

Why don't demolition teams use such a cheap, easy to do procedure, Sgt Rock?

What? Termites brought down the Twin Towers?

15 YEARS LATER:
ON THE PHYSICS OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING COLLAPSES

http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2016/04/epn2016474p21.pdf

Thanks for a great pdf. What I still don't get is: did the terrorists know that the twin towers were termites-ladden and thus easier to bring down, OR did the termites learn about AQ's plans in advance and decided to help them by investing/infesting the twin towers?

What possible reason do you have to raise a "joke" about such serious issues that isn't even funny?

Whoa, hold the phone. It was TERMITES?! That does explain a lot. That dust escaping was probably 90% termite eggs. Man, I wish someone would have explained it to me so clearly 15 years ago!

Thank you Olivier5. You have really opened my eyes to the true cause of the Twin Towers collapsing.

Why, you're not making a mockery of reason? You're not insulting history?

If you can do it, I can do it better. Bunch of Islamist termites did it.

Olivier5: Why, you're not making a mockery of reason? You're not insulting history?
===========

Science does not make a mockery of reason.

There is currently a full engineering study taking place at the University of Fairbanks - Alaska on WTC7. The final results are due out in May 2017.

The study is being done by Dr. Leroy Hulsey, a professor at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) and the chair of UAF’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.

Dr Hulsey did computer simulations that went far towards trying to support the ideas of NIST. In other words, he erred repeatedly on the side of NIST.

When asked by the panel of attorneys, “On a scale of 1 to 100, how probable do you think it is that this building [WTC7] could have collapsed simply because of the fire?” Dr. Hulsey stated categorically, “Zero.”

Asked if he would flunk one of his Ph.D. students for turning in the kind of analysis that NIST did, he replied emphatically, “Yes.”

McGentrix: That does explain a lot.
======

Your replies sure do explain a lot. Measure them against what Professor Hulsey says about WTC7.

"The [WTC7] study is being done by Dr. Leroy Hulsey, a professor at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) and the chair of UAF’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering.

Dr Hulsey did computer simulations that went far towards trying to support the ideas of NIST. In other words, he erred repeatedly on the side of NIST.

When asked by the panel of attorneys, “On a scale of 1 to 100, how probable do you think it is that this building [WTC7] could have collapsed simply because of the fire?” Dr. Hulsey stated categorically, “Zero.”

Asked if he would flunk one of his Ph.D. students for turning in the kind of analysis that NIST did, he replied emphatically, “Yes.”"

How the termites got to WTC7

Fact>Lies

Do you agree or disagree with Professor Hulsey?

Olivier5: Why, you're not making a mockery of reason? You're not insulting history?
=========

Isn't it making a mockery of history to deny the existence of the often well described, prevalent molten metals that were found at all WTC sites?

Isn't it making a mockery of reason to know of the existence of these molten metals, all with melting temperatures high above the attainable combustion temperatures of jet fuel and office furnishings and still make silly jokes about what caused the collapse of three towers?

Isn't it making a mockery of reason to know that WTC7 fell at free fall speed for the first 2.25 seconds of its fall, 100 feet, 8 floors, and think that fire could do/could have done that?

Isn't it making a mockery of reason to know that the twin towers accelerated as they fell, with no jolts, no slowing down, in complete contradiction with and defiance of the laws of Newtonian physics?

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

Everything you bring up has been debunked a long time ago. Enjoy the rest of the silence.