The is no reason to protect a dictatorship.

It is biased reporting. Our media loves confrontational protest. They never show the results of an unrestrained mob... the damage they do. Can you imagine turning over the government to the mob. I don't know at what point a protest becomes an insurrection, but I do know that the first order of any government is to maintain an orderly society.

I have a feeling no one gives two hoots about democracy, but they care a lot about economic opportunity. You won't find that in our media either. And you wont get that by rioting.

Now you know how we feel when you guys print Al-Jazerra propaganda that makes the US look like turds. Welcome to our world.

Noumaan Siddiq, Have you ever heard of Facebook? Use it. By all means do post pictures of this terrible "destruction" and "looting".

I do not believe that this "protest" has anything to do with "reform". Bahrain shares its wealth generously with its citizens, Sunni and Shiite, to such an extent that they have one of the highest standards of living in the world. Unfortunately, Bahrain allowed a large population of illegal alien Shiites to move in. They are illegal and do not receive a share of the government's wealth as the citizens do. They live in slums. This is where the "protest" comes from. These People don't care a hoot about "reform". They want to receive the government's money as if they were citizens and have refused dialog about governmental reform. That's not what they want. Get this illegal rabble, now in the slums, out of the country and the citizens, Sunni and Shiite, will return to their very comfortable life styles. In the US, we give money to any illegal who crosses our boarder in Bahrain, it is the opposite. In Bahrain, the illegals see the wealth of the citizens and want a piece of the pie. Of course if Bahrain gave them that it would soon be over run by every Arab in the neighborhood. There is a lesson to be learned from this, but I don't what it is except keep illegals out of the country in the first place. US take heed.

Revolutions are messy. Learn some history. The American and French revolutions, among countless others, also produced violence, looting, economic disruption, and chaos.

However, most of us can agree it's worth it to get rid of oppression.

Or would you rather be beaten to death your local police after refusing to pay them a bribe?

Like Libyans and Egyptians, I would choose revolution.

@w2lucky-

Actually Al-Jazeers and RT News news are more accurate then anything you get here in the good ol USA.

If you rely soley on the Amercian Mass Media propaganda engine for your news then you are clueless. Look into international news stations around the world through the internet.

And yes I am a red-blooded American, who learned that what we have been taught through these years is to obey the Military Industrial Complex is wrong. People are so conditioned here in the USA into believing we are righteous power who only does good for all.

Tell that to the 130 countries we occupy with military bases established, more than any previous empire in history. Including the great Roman empire, which fell because of their Military Industrial Complex. We are following suite.

When in Rome....

And your privileged position as one of the plutocratic elite. Same everywhere. And then you complain when the revolution comes.

Noumaan Siddiq,

I know your kind. Sitting on your ass as a part of the dictatorship government who would screw anybody for your own profit. You will not last too long.

Al Jazeera is one of the few remaining sources for actual news. Almost all American media sources are corrupt like the rest of this country. If not for BBC (pretty much runs Al Jazeera with their staff) we would have only corporate propaganda outlets (i.e. Fox and CNN) left. No reason to demonize Al Jazeera, they are not the enemy.

Another war between the Sunni and Shiite. The Sunni are aligned with Saudi Arabia and the US (see part of article that says "home of US 5th Fleet). Shiites are aligned with Iran. Let's see, which side to we support? Gee, that's a tough one!????

the missing side is that u have a predominantly SUNNI country sending troops into a predominatly SHIITE country to keep the SUNNIs in control. bahrain is a lil Iraq.

If bush the moron were still in control he would have invaded Bahrain and declared mission accomplished after getting the Shiites back in control.

Well.... that's certainly better than "the war is lost!" and "our soldiers are rapists!" and "we apologize..." and "we are a superpower, whether we want to be or not!?

As is continuously being shown, the left is rudderless without Bush in office. At least when he was in office they could figure out what to say and think. Now, they are clueless, so they have to steal from the Christians and ask themselves: What would Bush do?

What would Bush do?

You truly are delerious! LOL

Even Republicans know Bush was an utter failure... democrats know he was an idiot. Nobody is wondering what he would do except to do the OPPOSITE!

Precisely! The left doesn't know what they should do, so they have to reference Bush. Yes, they do the exact opposite. It never made any difference whether Bush actually agreed with the left, if it was Bush, they had to do the opposite. Pretty sad, but since Bush keeps popping up from the mouths of the left, it does prove the limited capacity to think of the left. Thanks for your agreement!

And if you switched Bush for Obama your statement would be exactly what the republicans are doing now.

Some people are labeling this civil unrest a revolution. It is not a revolution but civil unrest which may erupt into a civil war as in Lybia.

To you Al-Jazeer fans (Overlord & Commonsense). If you think for one second that that media outlet is not pro-muslim and strongly anti-American in every way, you are as clueless as your post indicated. I have been part of military ops in the Mid-East that were reported by your favorite media source in a completely false way. Twice. Both times making the Muslim look like the poor downtrodden kind people and the US personnel as evil rapists. You guys are clueless and inexperienced in these matters. No media is any more trustworthy than another. Each and every one has an owner that directs and guides their information delivery.

I've actually watched Al Jazeera, unlike you... it is not as pro-muslim as you might think. I'm not a cheerleader or a fan of Al Jazeera, just pointing out that much of the news coverage I've watched over the last year or so is excellent and puts American news outlets to shame. That doesn't mean Al Jazeera hasn't made mistakes - but I would say Al Jazeera is far superior to Fox News in every way.

Perhaps the problem is you thought you were on a righteous Christian crudase while you were there? If so it's not surprising you felt that way... but the truth is America made many mistakes and in fact invaded Iraq with bogus "evidence" to rationalize it and occupies that country still today. We invaded Afghanistan, ignored it for 5 years and then all of a sudden decided it was important again... all the while the people lived in a war zone. You don't think they have a point when they report on and criticize America's imperialism?

It is absurd to wrap oneself in the flag and pretend like America is altruistic and perfect but that sounds like what you are doing.

Noumaan Siddiq: This is what your Sunni militant organizations and their supporters have been doing in many infidel nations. You people have been supporting them.

World in the name of oil has been falling into the traps set by Sunni beastly rulers and their supporters.

What are you people doing in Pakistan? You people have been financing those, who have been blowing up Ahmedia, Sufi and Shia mosques and their gatherings.

In Saudi Arabia itself, a Shia woman was gang raped by a bunch of Sunni rapists and your religious beasts supporting Sharia Laws punish that poor Shia woman.

Why don't you people allow churches in your nations? You people have become so intolerant that you people have stopped having some human qualities. You always believe in one-way streets.

Many of us know that world is blind to the miseries of poor, helpless, children, women and infidels!

Time has come for Iraqi and Irani Shiites to enter Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait and free the nations from the ruling Sunni beasts.

Lastly, we care a @!$%# to what you people think.

Now enjoy what you people have been giving us!

Your days are coming near too. There is limit to religious madness!

@W2lucky-

As Overlord has said, it is not all pro Muslim news. I do not watch Al Jazeer often barely a couple times a week, and get more balanced news then anything from Fox,CNN,NBC,etc...

Check this out, and this did not come from Al Jazeer. When Afghanistan was freed from the Russian war in the 80s their Heroine export went up making Afghanistan the world leader in Heroine export. Coincidently heroine use increases around the world. Taliban enters and reduces Heroine output by 95% within 1 year of their rule. Coincidently heroine use begins to decline around the world.

9/11 happens, US invades Afghanistan. Taliban moved out, US forces occupy. Heroine production in Afghanistan begins at exponential rates. In 2010 Afghanistan returns to number one exporter of heroine, increasing their largest production ever in it's history by nearly 70%.

We are not in these countries to destroy terrorism, we are there for their resources, especially in black markets.

During the 19th century the British empire used a campaign of making the population of China addicts by forcing heroine onto their population. Making them less likely to put up anykind of fight or have any type of cognive response to world issues. this has been happening once again, but here in the USA.

The War on Drugs, is a war against the population of the USA. Most of the cocaine,heroine imported into the USA since the 70s were in some way helped by CIA, and other government agencies/politicians. Most to make money for the corrupt, but in the end the goal of the global elites is realized.

No Child Left Behind - since it's inception the USA went from the top of the world in education to roughly the middle of the pact. Everything our government touches makes us more reliant on them and we become a socialist country.

You are being dumbed down by the people who we believe we voted into the offices they have. Yet when a true American like Ron Paul ever trys to get real airtime on these huge media markets, touching on issues such as these he is ridiculed, and does not get the facetime he deserves.

Open your eyes, and wake up buddy. This is not the good'ol USA of yesterdays.

damntheflys: Actually, that's not the case at all. Conservatives dislike of Obama is all about his policies. Conservatives don't like socialism, they much prefer freedom. The left's hate for Bush was different. It was personal. For some reason they self-proclaimed themselves as intellectual-superiors to that "dufus." And it really frustrated them that Bush beat them twice. Remember their "intellectual" explanations for the defeats? Bush stole the election. Heard that over and over. Yet, recount after recount, Bush still won. Only by imagining that if they could recount enough times, that eventually they "might" win. This constitutes stealing in their minds.

I've often said that Clinton was actually more favorable to the right and Bush was more favorable to the left, when you actually look at the policies enacted. If not for the repubs taking over Congress in 1994, the budget would never have been balanced. Likewise, the economy was actually in pretty good shape for 4 years after 9/11. Considering the potential harm that could have resulted, the repubs in Congress did a good job. But, they started to look too much like dems, and that is why they were voted out. When the dems took over, the economy went sour. Bush signed what the dems gave him. Not much reason to bash Bush, but they can't resist.

heroin

witchrunner, Never did I or anyone of any intelligence think GW and gang were stupid. They knew exactly how to play their conservative followers with all the flag waving and bible thumping rhetoric.

9/11 was the best thing to happen for their administration, It opened the middle east up for them.

They handed out a fortune in government no bid contracts to their buddies, The gave the oil companies the excuse to raise gas prices and rake in the cash by creating a possible shortage environment while giving them major tax breaks. In the process they left the country so broke that any funding for alternate energy research would not be there once every one got tired of them.

No these people where not stupid, underhanded to the point of being evil but far from stupid.

damtheflys: My my, where were you during the Bush years? Of course they called him dumb, liar and everything else under the sun. You seem not to understand the nature of the contracts that were handed out. There are certain kinds of work where bids are required, such as where there aren't other qualified companies to do what needed to be done. You also don't appear to understand the nature of commodities. They are sold in the open market. The price goes up and down based on what people are willing to pay. Only a lib thinks that a company should only charge a certain price regardless of what they have to pay for what they are reselling. But, that's ok, everyone knows that libs have never understood economics. That's why socialist societies have never prospered.

I'm not sure what you mean by "major tax breaks" either. But, it does appear that you agree with the libs, socialists, that all money belongs to the government and the only reason anyone has any is by the grace of government allowing them to keep it.

As to "funding for alternate energy research," there is lots of money being spent on it. In fact, there is tons of money wasted on it. They only money wasted on it is the money coming from the government. When it comes from the government, there is no real incentive for results. As with most lib thought, the intent is enough. Only when spending one's own money, will it be spent wisely. Only libs think that oil companies are only interested in oil. Do you really believe if they can find a way to make more money with an alternative energy source that they wouldn't pursue it? If you do, then you are as naive as the rest of the libs. Likewise, the socialists, like Obama and Gore have realized that the only way to change away from oil and coal is to artificially raise the price of them by restricting production and adding taxes.

Go learn economics and psychology and you will understand that the left are nothing but a bunch of con artists.

Oops! Need to correct that last statement about the left being a bunch of con artists. The leaders of the left are a bunch of con-artists. The followers of the left are merely misinformed, ignorant, or wishful thinkers.

Having spent many years working for the construction branch of Hallibuton (you know the ones who received the no bid contracts) I can tell you they were far from the most qualified to do the job. Actually, they had lost a lot of their private contracts due to incompetence.

If you had been paying attention for oh say the last 50years or so you would have noticed how the fuel prices fluctuate along with the political climate in the middle east. Start a little war and get people afraid of shortages and you can charge what you like. And if you had been paying attention the fuel prices drastically dropped right after the 2008 election and immediately began to rise after the 2010 elections.

Even Fox news pointed out the the substadies for alternate energy was in the hundreds of millions where fossil fuels received billions.

Finally a flat 10% income tax for everyone, get rid of all the loop holes, no tax breaks for anyone.

Interesting. We might actually agree on something. I would agree that a flat tax is a good idea. I think that making a tax increase or decrease applying to everyone makes sense. It avoids class warfare and the idea that people can vote to take money from someone and give it to themselves.

That being said, it's still not easy to just say "no tax breaks for anyone," and assume that everyone knows what you mean. For someone with a W-2, that might be easy, but for a business, that's a different story. Do you really want to tax all businesses 10% of their income, whether they are making money or not? A local business with $300 K in income but $280 K in out of pocket expenses can not afford to pay $30 K in taxes. Which brings us to what expenses are allowed.

As to your argument of "substadies (sp)," I'm not sure what you are talking about. As far as I know, the government doesn't "give" the oil companies any money. Most people refer to "tax breaks" when thinking of subsidies. Of course, using the term tax breaks also implies that the money doesn't belong to the company, but to the government. This is where libs and coservs disagree. Libs look at all money as belonging to the government and it is only by the grace of government that people get to keep any. Conservs look at money as belonging to the people who make it and is taken away by the government.

It's easy to criticize the oil companies. But, you do realize that the government makes more off the oil companies that the oil companies do, don't you? By raising taxes on the oil companies, all that will happen is that the government will make more for doing nothing and the consumers will pay more for the oil. You seem to think that you aren't paying enough already. Personally, I'd like to see the US take constructive role in our economy and lower the taxes, open up the drilling and make it a lot easier to build new refineries. The explanation for not doing so is that politicians are DUMB! Oh, and crooked. People like Al Gore have a vested interest in the so-called alternative energies. He's highly invested in companies that stand to gain if the politicians succeed in pushing these alternatives down our throats. Now, if you just let them compete on a level playing field, then that's fine. But, that isn't the case.

I would prefer a flat tax structured as a National Sales Tax. Tax people when they spend the
money, not when they earn it. Then, you tax ill gotten gains. You also can have tax breaks like for Education, or first mortgages for your primary residence.

The only real problem I see with it is that during the transition period, we run the risk of ending up with both, since politicians always seem to change things mid stream.

Dennis: I would go along with a national sales tax under 2 conditions. The first is a repeal of the 16th Amendment which specifically states that the federal government does not have the power to levy an income tax. Second, an amendment that limits the percentage of the sales tax. A mistake was made when the 16th Amendment was passed that didn't limit the amount of income that could be taxed. As is usual with politicians, even back then, you give them an inch and they'll take a mile. It was first put in place with the idea that only the richest 3-5% would pay an income tax of up to 3% of their income. Well, you know how well that worked out. That's why I'm a very strict constructionist of the Constitution. Once you give the government the authority to do anything, they will turn it around to be a lot more than what was intended. We're seeing that with Obamacare. Those who think that getting free or cheap insurance is a good idea, or providing it to those who can't afford it don't realize the Pandora's Box that is opened up. If the government can force you to do something while sitting in your living room having no contact with the rest of the world, then they can do anything at all. There's already talk of additional premiums for people who do certain activity or eat certain foods, and even denying coverage for such things. Is that what Americans really bargained for?

A local business with $300 K in income but $280 K in out of pocket expenses

Needs to get someone better to run their business. I would accept them being able to subtract labor cost. If you can't make a profit and afford to pay 10% after labor cost then you need to be in a different line of work. Suppliers may have to lower their prices if they want to sell to you at a price that you can turn a profit otherwise the go out of business. You can bet your rear if it was enacted like that smart people would still be making money.

As to your argument of "substadies (sp)," I'm not sure what you are talking about. As far as I know, the government doesn't "give" the oil companies any money.

Actually all your energy industries receive R&D grants. And that was surprising that a Fox reporter was wondering why Fossil Fuels which is already a well developed is still receiving these "substitutes" (their words not mine) . Yes, energy is tied directly to our economy and R&D is necessary But here's the catch if your lobbyist can afford the best politician money can buy you get the lions share of these grants.

This is a link to a paper on why government funding is important in the fossil fuels industry.

http://www.npc.org/Study_Topic_Papers/26-TTG-OGTechDevelopment.pdf

Again a catch, according to Erik Milito of API, the American Petroleum Institute."

"In fact, a lot of recent data shows that when you drill a well, only 20 percent of the time in deep water are you going to find oil. So you have companies out there spending a hundred million dollars to drill dry wells which give them no benefit in the end,"

That's 1billion in tax right offs for every 2 wells they actually hit.

So are we actually getting the best bang for our bucks when we invest in Fossil fuel R&D?

Many other countries who are economically better of than the US are turning more and more towards these "so call " alternate energy sources

As a non union pipefitter ( nothing against the unions, just never need one) I spent many a year working oil refiners both in the south and along the west coast. Being from a small town in the NM desert I was always amazed at how brown and nasty looking and smelling the air in cities like L.A. ,Houston and New Orleans ect... was.

Though I have no invested interest in the health of the people living in cities ( Only stayed till the job was done then back to fresh air) I still have trouble understanding how people can be so stubborn about not doing everything possible to correct these conditions. I do not know about the whole global warming debate (way to much hype on both sides ) but I do have enough common sense to understand that air which is so polluted it leaves a film on your car overnight can't be good to breath. Your here all the time about cities outlawing smoking in public places, I can't even imagine how many cig's a person would have to smoke to equal the pollution created by burning 1 gallon of fuel in a car.

Libs look at all money as belonging to the government and it is only by the grace of government that people get to keep any. Conservs look at money as belonging to the people who make it and is taken away by the government.

From what I've seen the Lib's seem to understand the need for a strong, up to date national infrastructure and an educated work force. The conservatives belief that all this just magically appears . Like Beck say's it's "free"to look this info up at the library.

We should let the Arab's handle this themselves

Agreed.

and we should not tell them how NOT to do it

We should not tell them anything. Free advice is worth every penny.

This is an Arab problem and we are not the worlds police dept.

Completely agree.

Absolutely, we are doing exactly what we should be doing, nothing..

They'll talk nasty about us if we do anything and they will talk nasty about us if we don't do anything,
Not doing anything doesn't cost the lives of any of our kids in the military or any of our money.
Those of you that want to help the protestors out, feel free to donate your time, life and money.
Keep your mitts out of ours.

Watching sports is not news and supporting dictatorship for decades is not considered nothing.

Iran should intervene with revolutionary guard.

Funny that conservatives now come down in support of a brutal oil regime over protesters trying to put an end to their own oppressive regime. So much for so-called "compassionate conservatism." It's all about the $$$$.

If this would be happening in Cuba (as it is in Libya) they would be calling for the Marines and air strikes to stop Castro (Gaddhafi), but in the tyrannical Arab monarchies the mob is bad and the oppressor is good.

No, we wouldn't. I think the agreement we made was that we would NEVER invade Cuba, as part of the deal to remove the soviet missiles.

But this was the entire premise for Desert Storm....

The Devil: You are right.

Not only Iran, but Iraqi Shiites and Iranian Shiites should enter Saudi Arabia. Revolutionary gaurds need not use their uniforms.

Anyhow, Saudi ruling princes are raping their holy places, Mecca and Medina. So Shiites should liberate them too.

The US, British and others intervened to save with Iraqi wars some of the worst beastly rulers world has ever seen in the name of oil and got the title: Amerika and west are against Islam!

So west has no role to play except talking and enjoying what they have been giving us in TVs.

let the arabs deal with the arabs the usa needs to stay out of it and while were at it put the u.n in europe git it out of the usa

TIDubai (comment 2.1), a noble thought indeed. 'There is no reason to protect a dictatorship'. If only it were true. One example comes to mind. Iran, look what happened when the Aytollah went home. Perhaps your statement should have been, 'There should be no reason to protect a dictatorshop'. With these islamic religous ratbags having the influence in the populations that they do have more and more, the alternative would be even worse. Let alone your economy going down the gurgler, these crazies want to kill you and it seems there is only the odd dictator in their way.

Interesting, since we put the damned shah in power over their previously elected government in the first place.

You know, sometimes we do the wrong thing. Sometimes.

Completly agree with the western double standard. While they are calling for a no fly zone and military intervention in Libya, the atrocities of the Saudies in Bahrain are no big deal

The US govt isn't about to do anything to upset their buddies, the Saudis, because we get too much oil from them. If they decide to stop selling oil to the US, we'll be looking at 6-7 dollar gas. Not good.

9/11 was an inside job. Those buildings should have toppled over sideways, rather than a perfect vertical collapse. The fire retardent on the steel structure would have protected the structure from damage due to fire. A collapse of the floors above the planes would have been fairly likley, but should have occured almost immediately upon impact. Not to mention that WTC building 7 wasn't even hit by a plane and it imploded as well. Sure, it was on fire on the side next to the towers, but have you ever seen a fire cause an entire building to collapse all at once?

thomas, you may have had a point, but you can't make it with made-up @!$%#. What Saudi atrocities in Bahrain?

Of course, Obama knows that if he does not toe the line with the Saudis Obama's Presidency is all done. He can not afford the price of oil going up any further than it has already, because it will derail the fragile "recovery" that Obama wants to claim credit for in the 2012 elections. Consistently standing up for principals, like human rights, freedom of speech, assembly, press, etc.. and democracy don't matter when it comes to guys like Obama. Its all about what will keep them in power. If you think Obama is going to do anything to publicly chastise the Saudis or lend support to the opposition, you are sadly mistaken. The guy simply has no back bone and it is not within his own best interest to do so.

E John, you might to take another look at the design of the WTC towers. Rather than being concrete and wood buildings like you might be used to, they were basically tubes with a central column(containing the elevators, piping and such) that used the floors as bracing to keep the tubes upright.

Take a look at the fire retardant foam they spray on steel and then try to tell me how it is possible that that foam would stay on a beam after it's been hit by a 200+ ton jet flying at 400mph. Hell, you can perform an experiment yourself: Take a metal beam and spray foam insulation on it. After the insulation hardens, hit it with a sledgehammer. Then you might have an idea of why the fire retardant and the beams failed.

Due to the design of the building, the fire heated the metal beams to the point where they failed. the floors collapsed on to the floors below, those floors failed collapsing on the floors below and so on. When enough floors collapsed, the sides of the building, unable to take the weight of the collapsing floors in one location and without the bracing of the floors that collapsed, failed and the tower fell straight down.

sorry to get off topic everyone....

Kevin, what about the Bush family and their close friendship with the Saudi royal family? What were you saying three years ago?

Not to worry, most of us have become accustomed to skipping over the 'truther" post we see on here from time to time. We know they are not dealing in reality and it does not matter what facts or evidence you put before them, they will ignore it and go on with their idiotic spiel.

Sure wish conservatives had on e of those time machines the libbies going back into time with, and fixing the problems of the past.
Conservatives are restricted to working on the problems that are happening, right now.

I agree jerry. We need to fix what we can fix now. Free Libya, let the Sunni's deal with Bahrain. The Arab League backed a no fly zone in Libya, green light. Bahrain is a different problem, and we were not invited. As much as I would rather see freedom spread there as well, we do need to be mindful of where we have and have not been asked for help.

Rick

Here we go again, yet another attempt to try and justify Obama's incompetence and self interest by pointing to the Bush Presidency. One mistake does not justify another. But I'll tell you what, all those Obama "supporters"out there that voted for him based on the rejection of the Bush Presidency/policies need to do some serious soul searching between now and 2012, as Obama has essentially adopted, and in some cases expanded upon, the policies of George Bush. There really has been no difference when it comes to Afghanistan, Gitmo, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, China(Obama kisses their ass even more) and the list goes on and on. Of course I can't blame Obama, because he doesn't know any better, due to his lack of foreign policy experience and his demonstrated disinterest in dealing with foreign policy matters. You can't lead when you don't know how, so just follow in the foot steps of the last guy.

@Are your awake yet?-

Truthers not dealing in "reality"? WTF is this. Do you even deal with physics or engineering?

I for one do deal with engineering. I am an HVAC service tech who has worked on highrise structures for nearly 24 years. I know the insides of every nook and cranny fo most typical and atypical highrise structure.

I did have a tour of mechanical rooms in thwe WTC complex and WTC2. I understand structural engineering as I am dealing with these architecs and engineers constantly during planning and construction of these buildings.

WTCs were designed to handle the impact of of a 747 per the original architec. You obviously are not dealing with reality my friend. The fires though may be enough to warp the steel of the few floors in comparrison of the rest of the building, the collapse of the floors above would NOT make for the buildings to fall at "FREE FALL SPEED" inside their own footprints. Explain the pyroclastic flows and pulverization of all that concrete and steel? Explain the nano-thermite residue found in the dust and on what steel was allowed to be recovered by the public?

the top floors when they started to collapse would have "Eventually" slid to the sides and or "hug-up" at some point.

WTC7, few fires on random bottom floors. How does that fall within its own footprint at free-fall speeds?

I grew up in Philly PA, watched the Meridian highrise burn for 18+hrs. Fire sprinklers failed for majority of those floors, companies/contractors lost their buisnesses due to these failures as my friend worked for one as a sprinkler tech. Not one floor collapsed.

Do research yourself instead of relying on the Mass Media Propaganda Machine of the USA Military Industrial Complex.

nearly 1500 licensed Architecs/engineers who design these buildings and 12k more people like me in these fields have signed uop for this.

Educate yourself, do not rely on the BOOBTUBE!

Kevin, what would you have Obama do? Bomb North Korea? US troops are pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan and it takes time to do it, otherwise you will be back in a few years. Bush did one of the best things in his presidency when he used the surge to stabilize Iraq, and it would be stupid to take everyone out all of a sudden and destabilize the region and allow Iran to assert control. In terms of Iran it is also very difficult. The point is, that regime is weaker than it has been in many years(not because of Obama, but because of internal factors) and Obama and Israel and the West are doing a good job by not giving the regime any ammunition to deflect blame on the outside.

It's easy to blame Obama, but I don't think you have many reasons to do it. When Bush was in power, Americans were mad because he started the Iraq war

Hey Rick:

Saudi forces are now in Bahrain and have been for several days. Yes, they are there to kill people.

At least common S3nse is paying attn. I, too, spent several years buiding high rise steel structures. I worked for a large concrete co. and built several composite concrete/steel structures.

An impact from a plane would not compromise all of the fire retardant on the steel. Trust me, I've had to scrape that stuff off with a hammer and chisel in order to make changes to buildings that were still under construction. The fire retardant material isn't even close to the same as "Are yu awake yet?" cited. Nor would a fire cause a steel structure to collapse unless there was a propellent there to drive temps high enough and for a sustained amount of time long enough to begin melting steel I-beams with 3-4 inch rails. The only propellent there was jet fuel, which is basicall diesel fuel and would have burned off within seconds of impact.

Furthermore, the tower with no direct hit to the "core structure", and less fire, came down 29 minutes before the tower which had been 1st(and most) damage from impact. Not to mention the fact the collapses were almost identical. Come on sheeple, don't fall prey to the government's lies.

Pray tell John

Where those planes flown into the WTC and the Pentagon by our military or some special ops guy put in motion by G Bush and D Cheney? Or was it carried out by the alien invaders from Area 51? And why did Al-Qaida claim credit for the attacks? Was the earlier car bomb attempt to blow up the WTC also carried out by the same people? How about the earth quake, tsunami and nuke plant meltdown in Japan, where those carried out by the same secret operatives of G Bush?

Or are you, in fact, working for Al-Qaida in an effort to bolster their image by disclaiming the attack was carried out by them? Do you have pictures of Osama in your basement that you pray in front of every evening? Do you enjoy giving aid to our enemies?

yes indeed E John, we all know banging something with a hammer and chisel to remove it is the eqivalent of more than the force of a fully loaded jet liner crashing into it at full speed. Especially with your arms weiding the hammer, right!!!!

Shiites are infidels like us. In Pakistan, on Fridays, their mosques were bombed. Then the hospital, where the Shiites were being treated, were bombed.

Remember 9/11, London, Madrid and other terrorist bombings by the Sunni terrorists. See the way, how the Sunni world celebrated and the Sunni Trojan horses in our nations gave a bunch of lies and spins and some shoved some blames on us too!

Shiites have a right to live with dignity and not live with the constant fear of their girls and women being raped by Sunnis and again supported by Sunni rulers.

Shiites of Iraq and Iran should move in to UAE first, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia in that order.

Shiites of Bahrain should take up arms like those in Yemen. Throw out the Sunni ruling beasts and their supporters. Don't leave a single one.

Kevin

Are you going for that 33rd degree Masonry rank?

I don't know where you got the idea that I am anti Bush, but your assumptions make you sound like a retard. So does your ignorance for that matter. Who said any thing about aliens anyways?

911 goes higher that Bush or Cheney and was just an excuse for us to go to Iraq for the love of oil and money. We needed a reason to be there. If Bin Laden and his minions were responsibe for this, why hasn't the "greatest" military on earth brought these camel jockeys to justice. For that matter, why were these planes allowed to fly off course for 45 mn. to an hour with out being intercepted by airforce jets?

If your willing to believe that 911 was caused by some low IQ desert dwellers that couldn't even rent a small plane because their pilot skills were so poor, that's fine. Just keep your accusations about my faith or patriotism to yourself, since all you can do is fling empty insults that aren't even close to reality. If, as you say, Al Queida was so proud of the fact that they caused 911, how would it bolster thier image for people to discredit them?

As far as your stupid fire retardant arguement, I was illustrating the fact that the compound used bonds to the steel in such a manner that it is nearly impossible to remove by scraping, much less being shaken off by vibration as your theory implicates. Not to mention the fact that most of the steel structure wasn't even impacted. No, the fire retardant would not just fall off, no matter how hard you hit it with your sledgehammer. Have you even done any research on either side of your arguements? I didn't think so.

Assumptions suck!

LET THE ARABS DEAL WITH IT u.s out of everywhere that isnt u.s soil

Saudi Arabia did not just "go in". They were invited. Big difference.

Rick: Even here there is a hair splitting like Clintons. Arab League has mulitple faces/standards and not just double standards.

When required, nobody can do Ramadan style soap operas better than Sunni dominated Arab League and other organizations. Of course, there are many in the US, Britain and European nations to dance and clap on the tunes set by them.

There should be limit to blackmails in the name of oil.

Those, who give excuses of oil for each every nonsense these Sunni ruling beasts do, should decide what are important.

How anyone can support that Iraqi 1991 war to save Kuwait ruler with 65 plus wives, Saudi Arabia and other Sunni ruling beastly ME nations?

Agree. the double standard is the rule of the game. Is like the so call democracy we want to impose in the world, while at the same time we destroy democracies like taking out twice democratically elected presindent Aristide in Haitii.

I see your point, but its got to be hard to make everyone happy when our true interest is keeping the oil flowing. The unwritten position I'm sure is "we don't really care who is in charge as long as we get our oil and you don't breed terrorists". If the present regine meets that criteria, then why support the revolution? Just a thought.

To w2lucky........:

I agree and that's what makes us hypocritical. We're interested in the oil. But speaking of oil (and hypocrisy)..........what happened in Iraq? Our government told us the oil there would pay for the war and the rebuilding of Iraq. Have you heard of this ever happening? Me neither.

You are right on target Barry, we are a joke in the international community. The UN is impotent, we are impotent, a limp prick in the manhood of international affairs.

@ Barry - I don't think anyone will every find a positive associated with Iraq. I served there in the military as well as Afghanistan and I remain stumped. I don't see so much hypocrasy as I see deceit (my angle). As for our national public position, It will be refreshing if our President (this one or the next) comes clean someday by disclosing our true foreign policy and intentions. All they have to say is we will protect our imports and exports at all costs. Our economy depends on it. This probably won't happen in my lifetime.

Saudi Arabia is not a dictatorship. It is a kingdom, a monarchy, like Great Britain. In fact all of the Gulf Cooperation Council states are one form or another of monarchy, either kingdoms or emirates or sultanates. Kingdoms are one of the most ancient and time honored forms of government, mentioned in the Bible, Koran, and Torah. Even God is reputed to have a kingdom.

The US only opposes nonwhite dictatorships that directly oppose or obstruct the Western Agenda.

And JohnCarter,

shouldn't the US Goverment denounce all forms of despotism and totalitariansm? Whether its communist, military, or hereditary it is still a reign of tyranny.

The US is exposed as hypocrites

The United States is doing exactly what it should be doing..
Nothing.
All of you concerned people, feel free to use your time, life and money, leave the rest of us alone.

In point of fact, the United States government has consistently been pro-dictatorship in all areas of national security interest. It is cheaper and easier to control a country if it is ruled by a dictator who can be bought. A Democracy is not as easy to control and the masses can only be pacified with good jobs, human rights, and a decent standard of living. Now if we supported that in the Middle East the price of oil would shoot through the roof. If we supported that in Latin America then we might lose our status as Big Bully on the Block. In Africa the Diamond market would go haywire. In any place around the globe, democracy means the chance that other people might not want to do our bidding (heaven forbide). We are hypocrites because we continue to support these policies and still think we are a democracy loving people. Until we pull all of our troops out of foreign land (invited or not) and stop paying and arming dictators to control their own populations, we will continue to be the last remaining "evil empire."

Well said, Barry. I agree completely. Throwing our support behind SOME ruthless dictators while condemning others is complete hypocrisy. Personally, I think we should be uninvolved in middle eastern politics rather than selectively picking favorites.

So you want we should get into yet another war? Aren't you liberals screaming about the unjustified Iraq war? What qualifies this as justified? Someone doesn't like the status quo, so they become liberators, freedom fighters, the good guys. Probably Al Queda is more like it.

Barry Merchant:...Am I the only one that sees incongruity in the U.S. position against dictatorships?...

You are not the only one. Some of us want a continued petro dollar invested in the US so we support who ever brings the money to the US. That way you can have a job. Did you all cry that let the Arabs hash their own affairs. So stop crying...

For your info, Saudi has a great interest in this region as nearly all of these small countries were part of Arabia (SaudI) not long ago.

Wow, you guys must be really tired jumping to conclusions. Please point out where it says the USA is ok with this? Hint, it doesn't....

its just the way of the world....tell me, if you had a good friend or family member who happened to be a selfish jerk, you would go to great lengths to help him. However, when you hear of starving children, do you always give even $1 in pocket change? probably not, we are all guilty of being self interested.

Barry Merchant

Unfortunately, it's the name of the game. America and the Royal Saudi Family have been in bed together for decades, almost a century. It is in Americas favor that their friends, the Saudis, illegally invade Bahrain, just as Bush illegally invaded Iraq, except in this case, it's not to stop the killing, it's to preserve the U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, and, United States Fifth Fleet. Remember, this is the primary base in the region for the naval and marine activities in support of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).

American oil companies developed the Saudi oilfields. The Saudis didn't know how and looked to American know-how. The agreement for said help was that the dollar was the currency of exhchange for oil sales. Russia and China reached an agreement awhile back to trade oil sans dollars. Saudi oil isn't really the major source of american oil, in fact Mexico and Canada provide much of US oil.

I haven't heard any talk about a no fly zone over Great Britain. I haven't heard any calls to oust the Queen from Buckingham palace. Same goes for the Netherlands, or Sweden. Monarchies are common in the world. The US isn't one, but the US has avoided the trap of mob rule another way. Instead of becoming a democracy like the Soviet era communist nations, our Founders wisely formed the United States as a Republic instead of a democracy. They gave us a Constitution to protect us from the whims of the mob. In monarchies, that's the job of the King.

Last time I looked, the Queen of England no longer had any real power. The Prime Minister is an elected official, and the job changes hands frequently.

Israel is pushing for more construction with American Tax payers money. And we, here, are cutting on education, health care, social services, pensions, etc...because we have no money. ??????

Uh huh and the president of the US sent 780 million to the Gaza strip, to help them rebuild and another 21 million to fly Gaza refuges here to the states , feeding and housing them, while we cut money, on education, etc, etc.
What is your point?

@thomas this is the US we help everyone, banks, foreign countries, illegals, failed businesses etc.......now it is we the citizens who they have no money for :).

thomas-478127:...Israel is pushing for more construction with American...

At least they turn dessert in an oasis. So Israel, build build build and build some more. Get all the land that belongs to Israel.

Isreal helping settlers move in to palestinian territory sounds a lot like what american settlers did to the native americans and their territory.

Well joe biden did say that mubarak wasn't a dictator, and hillary had said that the dictator of chad is a good friend.

What do you know about Bahrain and its government, there is no such thing as tyranny in Bahrain. You can ask any american/british/european expats in Bahrain, they love the monarchy and Bahrain. Those so called peaceful protesters were nothing but brainwashed terrorists, trying to destroy a peaceful loving country.

Nope same sh8t different day.

What we should do is mind our own business, period.
We have enough democrats/libbies trying make a socialist government out of us to keep us busy defending ourselves.

Less worried about the supposed left's "socialist" agenda than the actual Right's Communist police state created by GW and his Department of Motherland Security.

Fortunes based on oil, which we buy.

Gary: Please give me your source for your comment about the "thieves in Bahrain". Bahrain is well known for sharing its wealth with its citizens which may explain the very high standard of living of its citizens.

Regarding many of the posts I've seen on Bahrain, I would also ask those who have posted suggesting that the protesters are on a quest for democracy for their sources. I have not seen the word "democracy" printed anywhere. There seems to be a baseless assumption going around that whenever there is unrest or a revolution against a dictatorship or a monarchy the revolutionaries are seeking to establish a constitutional democracy such as ours. I saw this assumption being made in Libya as well as Egypt. These things start with an unorganized rabble without any specific goal in mind other than get rid of the "bad guys". What form of government developes later is a crap shoot. In Russia, China and Cuba for example it was Communism. Sometimes its an equally oppressive junta or ruling committee. There are many forms of government, not just democracy. So get off the democracy kick until there is some strong indication that that is where any particular revolution is headed.

From what I have read, the protests were less about government structure, and more about equal opportunity. There is discrimination against the Shiites by the ruling Sunnis.

To Gil...........:

You make a good point. My understanding is that in Libya and perhaps many other Middle Eastern countries the real reason they were protesting was because they couldn't afford to buy food. I wonder how long before we see similar protests in the U.S. as unemployment and food stamps dry up. But the Wall Street people and the super rich top 1% are doing great - having recently stolen money from the middle class and invested it outside the country. This is indeed a sad time for so many.

Gil:
I'm in agreement with Barry on this one. The main gripes of the people, from what I've seen, is that they lack opportunities...Economic, social, political. Rising food prices, inflation, and unemployment squeezing out what was already a very marginal "middle class" puts these people in a desperate spot. While they may not have had real direction (a point I'm not arguing), they knew that a change was necessary when it came to the current regimes who were squandering money left and right.

The Bahraini government may have been known to share its wealth with the citizens. However, the troubling thing is the lack of opportunity for the people belonging to a certain group. It's a quest for equal representation and opportunities. And the fact that the government shares with its people doesn't mean that there aren't human rights violations going on. Look at the UAE....Ridiculous wealth, presitge, and status for many of those living and working there. However, there are those groups of laborers who don't even have a bed to call their own. They sleep in rotating shifts. Sounds like they might have a gripe of their own...

IoBeam:

I don't see where you, I and Barry are far appart. Before continuing, and to keep things short, I refer you to my prior post at #2.5. You will note in my post at #15.2 that I was careful to us the word "citizen". There probably is little or no opportunities for the illegal immigrant slum dwellers who are mostly Shiite. They are uneducated, probably uncouth and in a high tech modern society that they probably do not understand and within which they cannot operate. They remind me of the old movies where the farm boy goes off to the big city to make his fortune. There exist no opportunities for these people in Bahrain. Remember, nobody asked them to come.

On the other hand those Shiites that are "citizens" are well educated, many hold very resposponsible jobs, they send their kids to good colleges and reap the rewards of their government. I suspect, in Bahrain educated Shiites get along fine with educated Sunnis just as in this country educated whites get along with educated blacks. I doubt that there is any substantial predjudice within the citizenry. Admittedly there is one area of prejudice. The ruling dynasty is Sunni and has been for 200 years. Although Shiites represent 70% of the citizenry they do not hold, nor have been invited to hold, responsible positions in the government. The Sunni dynasty wants to remain a Sunni dynasty and quite frankly in the world of dynasties, they are entitled to do that - it's within acceptable tradition. While this lack of position, lack of influence, whatever you want to call it, is a bone of contention within the Shiite citizenry and is not liked by the Shiite citizenry, they are used to it and the Shiite citizenry isn't going to start a revolution over it. While they certainly want more direct involvement in the government I do not believe that, in their day to day lives, they are treated any different from the Sunnis. Admittedly I could be wrong. In any event, my point is that if this were just a matter of the Bahraini citizenry and the dynasty there would be no protests. I do not believe that you will find a single Shiite businessman standing behind a baricade blocking the street.

As I said in my post at 2.5, I believe these protests have arisen from the illegals in the slums, and the real issue is money not reform. I don't blame the dynasty for hanging tough. It has worked miracles for its people and built a modern, fiscaly responsible, world respected and trusted nation in the past 50 years from nothing. No0w a rabble wants to take all that work and wonder away. No!!!

Gil:
We're not far apart at all. There are some things that we can debate on, and that's fine. You make very valid points, backed by logic and critical thinking. The educated classes get along with each other for the most part. You'll find no argument from me on that. The lack of representation and influential positions for the Shiites in the country may not be so much a concern for those who are enjoying the fruits of their labor because let's face it...When people are content, they're not too pushy for change, right? As the old sayings go, "it could be worse", "be thankful for what you have", "at least I'm not that bad off", etc... Case in point, you don't see oil execs protesting for better pay, more representation, and so on...

The ones with little or nothing to lose are the ones orchestrating these revolutions. Sure they may not be citizens, probably uneducated and uncouth, and what have you. But they are there performing services that the rest of the citizens don't want to do. So while they may not have been invited, they are certainly utilized. Same thing with the migrant workers in Dubai. The Gulf summers are capable of making a person spontaneously combust, yet the construction and growth carry on because of the imported labor. Now if they were just there to drain the resources illegally without contributing anything, that's a different story...

Thanks for the compliment.

So your saying that saudi arabia and bahrain are not tyrannical, wow, and the hatred that you have to the poor, you sound like micheal savage. In saudi arabia there is no freedom of speech, freedom to protest and no freedom for women. It is right behind china when it comes to human rights. I'm sure the saudi army are not going in there to keep the piece. The fact that bahrain is cracking down on protesters shows they are ruthless. Poor people and immagrants have rights to. Whether shiites there or mexicans here. I think anyone with common sense should boycott doing businuess or visiting these countries. Not until the ruling families are destroyed.

Omar:

#1: Nowhere in my comments have I mentioned or discussed Saudi Arabia - my comments concerned Bahrain - I do not need you to elaborate for me.

#2: I believe my comments were clear, that my opinion, the protesters in Bahrain are not seeking "reform" but are trying to hold the government up for money to which, they as illegal aliens are not entitled. Just because we give money to illegal aliens doesn't mean everyone has to. I never said there is anything wrong with being poor and I certainly don't "hate" poor people.

#3 Is there something wrong with a government keeping protesters from shutting down major highways that must remain open in order for its economy to continue to operate? When you shut down highways into major financial districts in a country such a Bahrain, you essentially shut down the country's ability to do its business and cause the world to lose faith in its secure banking and financial institutions, which faith is essential to its continued economic prosperity. Under such circumstances, I see nothing wrong with the government clearing the protesters from the highways to keep them open. As a matter of fact I believe the government has an obligation to do so. Were the protesters who closed the highways, citizens, and not illegal aliens, I would say that their action was by definition "treason". What is your definition of "tyranny".

4: "I'm sure the Saudis are not going in there to keep the peace". What do you think they are doing - invading Bahrain?

5: Bahrain has every right to kick illegal aliens out of its country and/or control them. The fact that we are too weak to kick them out of this country and coddle them instead is irrelevant and I believe, and I said "believe" (unlike you I'm not going to put words in someone elses mouth) that you are trying to impose the policies of our country on Bahrain which, we have no right to do.

6: "The fact the Bahrain is cracking down on the protesters shows that they are ruthless". Are you saying the protesters are "ruthless"? That is one statement I can agree with. By the way, how far do "protesters" have to go before a government may crack down on them? Shoot people, bomb buildings or never? Please I'd like to have your opinion.

7: In your closing you said "ruling families" and "countyies". Once again I, never said anything in the plural which would cause one to believe that my comments reflected a generalized view of the Arab world. My comments were directed to Bahrain. Unlike you, I do not condone generalizations. Bigots do that.

I suggest you reread the thread two or three more times paying particular attention to my comments and those of Barry and Iobeam. It is a rather intelligent discussion. If you cannot read or do not understand what is being said, you do not belong on this thread. Post you hate somewhere else.

STexan---tis manic---stay out or turn the ME into a glass parking lot---tiring.

The price of a barrel of oil is set by OPEC, passed to the companies that refine the oil, then those nice people that sell it to us, pass the cost increase to the consumer. The oil companies will never absorb the increase in oil cost. They will always pass is on down.

I notice you're from Conroe. You should go to east Houston to that huge Shell refinery they have out there and raise a stink.

John, The Oil Companies don't run the country, but they have bent over so far and have the Saudis in every orifice that we dare not speak~!

Most of the world isn't ruled by fleebagger led mobs. Most of the world has a King or Emir or other hereditary leader as head of government. It is the most stable form of government.

Stable? You call that stable? History is littered with the overthrow of kings, shahs and emirs.

I'm all for marching on Washington. Unfortunately, because of the dicked up economy (thank you, Washington), I can no longer afford to travel. And paid time off? I wish.

Give me the date...but guess what you have so many American Citizens that will find an excuse not to go. I would take time off without pay and carpool.

I think that the time when Americans will be mowed down by gunfire is still off in the future somewhere. Be careful what you wish for Jeff.

Not lazy necessarily just like b8tch

w2lucky---I don't think anyone is naive--they know it's about the oil. It's America's longest lasting addiction and the powers have no interest in changing that.

I know. It's just amazing that people think we are or aren't protecting democracy or supporting a monarchy like Saudi Arabia.

What a proofless post.

Our support of Israel is due to the fact that they have one of the strongest militaries(sic?) in the world.

Bought and paid for by...the U.S. taxpayer.

True enough.

The only reason the French helped us was because they were looking for a way to defeat the Brits (revenge) after the 7-Years War butt-whipping they took, and wanted the Brits focus on the colonies instead of the West Indies. It took years of work from the likes of Ben Franklin to convince the French to help. I assure you the French involvement was solely so they could nurture French interests. Sorry wordcreatr, but your example is not a good comparison.

We have 104, 000 American military buried in Europe, from bailing France out in two wars..

I think we can call that debt paid with interest.

Our kids in the military enlisted to defend the USA.

They did not enlist to help the camel kissers in the ME.

This is not a movie, they will not yell cut and all of the dead get up and drink coffee, they will just be dead.

You want to use your time, life and money to help them, go ahead, that is your business.
You want to use our time, military lives and money, buzz off.

Actually, it's not that bad at all. We only go in when it's is in our best instrest to do so... mostly. We left Rwanda to rot, haven't looked twice at Zimbabwe, won't touch Bahrain or Saudi Arabia, might do Libya, but you know we hate Gadhafi, still we will take our time about it... Yeah, sounds pretty French to me.

If you read his post you see he stated , good thing the French didn't take a "it's none of our business" stance. They did take that stance for years. Stay with the program Dennis. Oh, and since when does the US get involved in African revolutions, civil wars, etc...? National interests = OIL.

Maybe you should read it again... It's called Sarcasm. I honestly feel we should bomb the crap out of Gadhafi.

the next big fight for resources is happening as the north pole melts and opens new fields and sea channels. i ride a bike to work and drive a neon. fill up once a month(maybe) still can do it for under $36. i work in the oil industry here in illinois and if the price stays over 100 a barrel and they lets us drill we would drill more domestic.

Besides the fact that Walker trampled all over the citizens first amendment rights isn't a beautiful sight to behold to see the US pick and choose which dictators to support in the Middle East?

when the protests get big enough to be a problem for our government

there will be a military crackdown......remember kent state

the WW1 vets were shot on the whitehouse lawn with machineguns on halftracks, for protesting for what they was promised. mac arthur was in charge of the shooting ordered by the president

Difference now it would be for all the world to see,,,unless they shut down the internet.

WTFX-------- Take your garbage down the road, I was at Kent State when that happened..
The punks that got their fannies shot off spent half of the morning breaking bricks in half and thought there were going to charge the National Guard throwing half bricks at them.
Any one of which wold ave broken bones put eyes out eyc on contact.
The punks were lucky hat it been me there with an automatic weapons there would have been a lot more punks dead.

Another important difference is that we can vote, and when enough voters unite, the incumbant can be replaced.