Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politics

by **RichmondPhilsFan** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 14:59:19

Doll Is Mine wrote:A Hillary Clinton/Julian Castro ticket would be almost unbeatable, in my opinion.

Castro will be the first Latino-American president.

I don't know. The guy's resume is five years as Mayor of San Antonio and a year as Secretary of HUD. Let's not go crazy.

And it's not like he's going to deliver Texas for her. I think it's Mark Warner's gig as long as he wants it.

by **The Crimson Cyclone** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 16:32:33

I don't taking away a dem senator in a purple state is a good idea

by **CalvinBall** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 17:32:36

he is the us sec of hub

by **Doll Is Mine** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 17:42:34

CalvinBall wrote:he is the us sec of hub

He was referring to Mark Warner.

by **Bucky** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 18:57:45

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:
Doll Is Mine wrote:A Hillary Clinton/Julian Castro ticket would be almost unbeatable, in my opinion.

Castro will be the first Latino-American president.

I don't know. The guy's resume is five years as Mayor of San Antonio and a year as Secretary of HUD. Let's not go crazy.

but who doesn't love julian castro

by **Phan In Phlorida** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 19:28:09

by **Doll Is Mine** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 19:56:02

Bucky wrote:
RichmondPhilsFan wrote:
Doll Is Mine wrote:A Hillary Clinton/Julian Castro ticket would be almost unbeatable, in my opinion.

Castro will be the first Latino-American president.

I don't know. The guy's resume is five years as Mayor of San Antonio and a year as Secretary of HUD. Let's not go crazy.

but who doesn't love julian castro

This.

by **Youseff** » Fri Oct 16, 2015 22:55:07

by **SK790** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 06:14:42

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016 ... p=cur&_r=0

Bernie raised more than any Republican candidate in the 3rd quarter.

by **SK790** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 06:20:09

I hope Bernie spends none of his money then gives the 100MM or whatever it ends up being and sends checks to the poorest 10% of Americans.

It'd set him up for a nice run in 2024 at 105 years old.

by **pacino** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:20:59

Trump:

"When you talk about George Bush, I mean, say what you want, the World Trade Center came down during his time."

@JebBush

How pathetic for @realdonaldtrump to criticize the president for 9/11. We were attacked & my brother kept us safe.

3:08pm - 16 Oct 2015

Well, some of us safe. Trump is the sane one here. He appears to be able to read a calendar, at the very least.

by **jerseyhoya** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:26:48

Trump in an interview where he cited the competence of Bush regarding 9/11 happening and Obama with Sandy Hook happening during their presidencies is the sane one. Top notch analysis.

by **pacino** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:29:34

He can be right on 9/11 and wrong on Sandy Hook. The latter is a natural disaster of epic proportions; the former was an attack on our soil of which we were previously informed it was likely to happen.

HE KEPT US SAFE. After not keeping us safe. Then he started a war in a country that had nothing to do with it, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, destabilizing an entire region for likely decades to come, and had thousands of Americans also died in the process.

Most of us, I guess.

by **jerseyhoya** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:35:59

pacino wrote:He can be right on 9/11 and wrong on Sandy Hook. The latter is a natural disaster of epic proportions; the former was an attack on our soil of which we were previously informed it was likely to happen.

HE KEPT US SAFE.

Most of us, I guess.

I think it's remarkable to try to place any culpability for 9/11 on Bush personally, and for Trump to do so is obnoxious. The distance between knowing bin Laden wanted to try to do something within the US and suggesting this specific plot should have been discovered and foiled is vast. After it happened we did things like pass the PATRIOT Act and made it much easier for our intelligence agencies to gather and share information to prevent similar attacks in the future. The same people who oppose these steps are the ones who blame the Bush Administration for not doing more to gather information and connect the dots prior to 9/11.

And Sandy Hook was a mass shooting, not a natural disaster of epic proportions.

by **pacino** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:37:22

oh sheesh, i missed up my sandys

too many gals at the dance. guess i couldn't be president with that gaffe.

by **pacino** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:42:04

jerseyhoya wrote:
pacino wrote:He can be right on 9/11 and wrong on Sandy Hook. The latter is a natural disaster of epic proportions; the former was an attack on our soil of which we were previously informed it was likely to happen.

HE KEPT US SAFE.

Most of us, I guess.

I think it's remarkable to try to place any culpability for 9/11 on Bush personally, and for Trump to do so is obnoxious. The distance between knowing bin Laden wanted to try to do something within the US and suggesting this specific plot should have been discovered and foiled is vast. After it happened we did things like pass the PATRIOT Act and made it much easier for our intelligence agencies to gather and share information to prevent similar attacks in the future. The same people who oppose these steps are the ones who blame the Bush Administration for not doing more to gather information and connect the dots prior to 9/11.

And Sandy Hook was a mass shooting, not a natural disaster of epic proportions.

The PATRIOT Act is one of the great failures of a formerly great body. It was passed without any debate, without hardly any changes, amendments, and has lots of things that have absolutely nothing to do with 'keeping us safe'. We could've boosted our intelligence and coordinated agencies without delayed notification, rolling warrants, gathering of unnecessary intelligence on US citizens etc etc etc

And then, Iraq. We invaded Iraq on pretenses coming from 9/11. The populace, and many lawmakers, were completely fooled and led down a path that if only we toppled Saddam we'd have revenge for 9/11.

by **ReadingPhilly** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:46:07

pacino wrote:
ReadingPhilly wrote:pacino, what do you think the of the mayor candidates in reading having commuter rail service fairly high on their to do list?

that's great but it really would take a concerted effort on a state and federal level to actually get that thing up and running. we've had a very nice rebuilt station at 6th and franklin just sitting there empty because the commuter rail fell by the wayside for both Rendell and Corbett and the feds determined other rail lines were more feasible at the time. The mayor can only do so much. I mean it was first proprosed in 1998, I think, to be started in 2000 and ready by 2008.

FWIW, I don't know why the hell anyone would vote for Wally Scott. He seems like a fool. McHale or Graham seem like far better options who actually seem to know what the heck they'd do. I'd have voted for corrupt-ass Spencer again, FWIW. I did the first time but don't live in the city limits now to have a say.

that was sort of my thinking. would be really awesome for the area but seems like a monumental undertaking, and one mostly out of their hands, to really be focusing on as part of their campaign. i'd love to see someone develop a plan for the waterfront, which is much more realistic.

i agree on scott. i'm assuming he wins but his insistence on a railroad museum is laughable. doesn't seem like he gets it.

by **pacino** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 11:52:50

ReadingPhilly wrote:
pacino wrote:
ReadingPhilly wrote:pacino, what do you think the of the mayor candidates in reading having commuter rail service fairly high on their to do list?

that's great but it really would take a concerted effort on a state and federal level to actually get that thing up and running. we've had a very nice rebuilt station at 6th and franklin just sitting there empty because the commuter rail fell by the wayside for both Rendell and Corbett and the feds determined other rail lines were more feasible at the time. The mayor can only do so much. I mean it was first proprosed in 1998, I think, to be started in 2000 and ready by 2008.

FWIW, I don't know why the hell anyone would vote for Wally Scott. He seems like a fool. McHale or Graham seem like far better options who actually seem to know what the heck they'd do. I'd have voted for corrupt-ass Spencer again, FWIW. I did the first time but don't live in the city limits now to have a say.

that was sort of my thinking. would be really awesome for the area but seems like a monumental undertaking, and one mostly out of their hands, to really be focusing on as part of their campaign. i'd love to see someone develop a plan for the waterfront, which is much more realistic.

i agree on scott. i'm assuming he wins but his insistence on a railroad museum is laughable. doesn't seem like he gets it.

Yeah, it's a huge, slow process. I think from what I can tell what I'd do is vote for McHale if I still had a vote. He seems pretty insistent on talking about improving neighborhoods and local business, which is what is really going to affect Reading in the long-term. All the projects downtown can only do so much due to how much of those are funded and are off the tax books for years.

Focusing on the riverfront is smart, provided they figure out a way to deal with flooding. McMahon wasn't a bad mayor but he was fooled by a developer that proposed a huge development that went nowhere for years. I hate the idea of one developer controlling everything; I'd much rather have the city actually create a 20 year plan and STICK to it. It's much easier to present a plan yourself rather than have to figure out a developer's plan, which will always be tilted towards them and away from the city gaining tax revenue and a tax base.

Scott has people fooled. He's a nice guy in person and has fixed a lot of tickets and such for years. He's an elected judge who has very little apparent knowledge of the law or what it takes to run a city. It really scares me that the progress that's been made under Spencer to modernize both the city and its services is going to stall out under him. Hopefully the economy continues to improve enough that it doesn't matter so much. If there's another recession, it's screwed if he's the mayor, IMO. He has no clue. A fucking railroad museum!

edit: And yes, I realize Spencer was corrupt. That part saddens me because I think he's done a lot of good things while mayor. I wish he didn't let his own ego get in the way; basically paying people to vote his way and using campaign funds improperly.

by **pacino** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:00:41

Maine gov Paul LePage threatened to withhold fundingfrom a charter school if they didn't oust a Democrat from their ranks

by **Philly the Kid** » Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:31:44

jerseyhoya wrote:
pacino wrote:He can be right on 9/11 the former was an attack on our soil of which we were previously informed it was likely to happen.

HE KEPT US SAFE.

Most of us, I guess.

"I think it's remarkable to try to place any culpability for 9/11 on Bush personally, and for Trump to do so is obnoxious.

"New York Times article on 9/11 implies that controlled demolition of the Twin Towers would have been impossible, because no one could have snuck in all of the explosive equipment.

How Could They Plant Bombs in the World Trade Center?

Recently, a smart, accomplished person told me:

"I don't believe that the World Trade Center could have been destroyed by controlled demolition . . . how could they have possibly planted bombs without anyone seeing them?"

In fact, there were plenty of opportunities to plant bombs in the World Trade Center. For example:

Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers five days before 9-11

The Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11

There was a power down in the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved.

And -- as an interesting coincidence -- a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade centers, thus giving it free reign to the buildings.

These are just a few of the known, public examples of opportunities to plant bombs. There were undoubtedly many additional opportunities available to skilled operatives."

In addition to these facts, demolition and building collapse experts have purportedly raised the possibility of "explosive tenants" -- i.e. tenants in the World
Trade Centers who planted bombs in their own, rented space. For example, according to Webster Tarpley and others, Hugo Bachmann, professor emeritus of building dynamics and earthquake engineering at the world-famous Swiss Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule in Zürich:

“In the second scenario, an additional terrorist action would have caused the collapse of the buildings. In this way, according to Bachmann, buildings like the World Trade center can be destroyed without great logistical exertion.” The article went on to say that “Bachmann could imagine that the perpetrators had installed explosives on key supports in a lower floor before the attack.” If the perpetrators had rented office space, then these “explosive
tenants” could have calmly placed explosive charges on the vulnerable parts of the building “without having anyone notice.”

Archived

Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politics

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi

Re: Syrias as a heart attack: Electronic projects and politi