He's President of all. We should work with him - Right?

Sure thing. Link me up.

Viewers be warned. It's highly technical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IegkDCBJxjY&feature=youtu.be&list=PLUshF3H0xxH0-LxNZYGPIJqIp8-roEJY4

Oh, I didn't need convincing.

I am a builder, and I have demolition experience of low-rise structures.

I know how those buildings were set up to resist even several high-impacts from aeroplanes, and building 7, in particular, didn't get impacted at all.

It was the content of that building that raised my curiosity initially, and more so when the NIST report avoided any mention of that structure's collapse.

He was inaugurated the same day as Trump. Right up until then though it would have been an apt choice. The country has a lot to sort out, no judiciary since the judges were all sacked and empty coffers.

When Trump was asked about the people who were protesting the repeal of Obamacare, he said:



source

So I suppose he doesn't care about the people who feel strongly enough to protest repeal of the ACA because they are not republicans and so don't have a voice. Gives you an idea he only feels those who voted for him or other republicans are the only ones in the US who matter.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Very much an us and them mentality, he makes Bush look like an elder statesman.

And as these supporters rush away from a "president" that does not want to hear what is so obviously such a fundamental right, the right to petition, all they hear ringing in their ears, is "You're fired".

The simple fact that Americans voted him into office is already irreparable....the sooner you get him out the least damage to your nation aspiritions as a leading power. Atm America isn't an example for anything.

...problem being with its dowfall it will drag down the entire western countries...

Rotten is the word here...a monumental fail of Democracy, Law State, and the educational system at large...

Here's a video that is much less technical. It is of a former NIST employee who speaks to the fact that so many do not know the ins and outs of the investigation. Even him, a NIST employee, not on the NIST 911 study team, but still a scientist.

When he actually did a little research into the NIST report, after he heard the "lucid arguments for controlled demolition" [his words] he was furious with NIST and himself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb2NOBbD88c&index=5&list=PLUshF3H0xxH0-LxNZYGPIJqIp8-roEJY4

Because the alleged hijackers cannot possibly be held responsible for the molten metals at the WTC site, to repeat, the only fuel they could have brought was jet fuel, the large presence of these molten metals says that someone[s] else is responsible for the molten metals.

Can you understand, can you see any reason whatsoever why NIST didn't deal with the molten metals, why the NIST second in command categorically denied molten metals, even though there are many pictures of him pointing to/touching the end of a previously molten beam/column?

Here is that same NIST "scientist" denying the molten steel found at WTC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZbUe_tQ0to

The video has numerous examples of people describing the molten metals.

What is especially interesting is his squirming and body language. His inner self is not at all comfortable with gross lies.

Im always amazed at how model results mostly seem to coincide with the position that the sponsors want to hear.
============

Are you equally amazed at how NIST's results were done exactly how their sponsors wanted, how they were fraudulent beyond belief?

Denying molten metals when at least one lead NIST scientist posed for pictures touching a beam/column that had been in a molten state!

Who cares?

I care.

Rabel showed good common sense. As did Baldimo. They are now working on screwing up the courage to face up to the truth that the collapse of the three towers on Sept 11, 2001, was not the work of 19 Arab hijackers.

I did as you suggested, CI, typed in your phrase, and immediately wondered, actually I knew this would be the case, wondered which google hit you wanted me to attend to.

I scrolled thru the list, for old times sake, and came across a very telling example, one that I had long been familiar with.

==========

http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asce.pdf

Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE, in press 9/13/01, Expanded 9/22/01, Appendices 9/28/01
Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis
By Zdenek P. Bazant1
, Fellow ASCE, and Yong Zhou2
================

That's the same report; the heat weakened the columns, and collapsed.
Google, define, structural engineer

That is going to take 4 years. The only way to mitigate some of the damage is to elect liberal senators in 2018. Until then we are fuked.

Me stupid.

I have no personal opinion about structural matters. My field is Accounting, Management, Consulting and Money.

Intelligent people can understand most anything when events are explained adequately.

9/11 Truth: Steel Buildings Don't Collapse From Fire

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

Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE, in press 9/13/01, Expanded 9/22/01, Appendices 9/28/01
Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis
By Zdenek P. Bazant1
, Fellow ASCE, and Yong Zhou2
-------------

Take a close look at the above, CI. See anything wrong?