See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Methodical Illusion: The 9/11 Con Begins to Crumble — Rebekah Roth (Flight Attendant)
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://sgtreport.com/2015/03/method ... egins-to-crumble-rebekah-roth/
Published: Mar 23, 2015
Author: Rebekah Roth
Post Date: 2015-03-23 10:33:47 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 19392
Comments: 557
Rebekah Roth has, in my opinion, blown the lid off of the lies surrounding the events on 9/11. Facts which are outlined in her recently released book, Methodical Illusion; a book, as of this writing, that is #1 on the Amazon Best Seller List for its category.--NorthWestLibertyNews Poster Comment: Roth’s research reveals ALL of the 911 cell phone calls from the passengers to their families and friends were actually made on the ground after the 4 planes landed at a remote military airfield and listen to what her research reveals about passenger 9B. This is a must listen. I agree with NorthWestLibertyNews's opinion that Rebekah has blown the lid off the 9/11 lies.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-173) not displayed.
.
.
.
#174. To: FormerLurker (#172)
I'm not sure why he chose today to tweet this out, but as you can see he's concerned about the story being hijacked (pun intended).
None of the WTC skyscrapers fell due to *fire*. They fell because some sort of massive impact had compromised their structural integrity. It wasn't a matter of *if*; it was a matter of *when*... And BTW, the jet fuel burnt out after the first 10 minutes. The remaining fires were simple office fires consisting of furniture, paper Another outright lie. Were you in the building? And please don't bother posting the *reports* of NYFD 20odd floors below the main impact reporting what it was like on one or two floors as being indicative of the ENTIRE building... and other low temperature fuel items. Wha...chuckle...huh? --Are you a *Jew*?
Don't know either. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I didn't say that anywhere. Of course they're not there, and they did NOT lean to any side and topple over, contrary to your spin doctor tactics and comments. I never stated that they toppled over... --Are you a *Jew*?
I use two very fake names for gaming and have never been asked. Ever. It's currently 73 *No* and 0 *Yes*... --Are you a *Jew*?
You are obviously oblivious to the fact that they were designed to withstand a direct hit from an airliner. The designer said something like, "it'd be like sticking a pencil into a net", where the immediate area of the entrance hole would be damaged but the net itself would remain intact. Another outright lie. Were you in the building? And please don't bother posting the *reports* of NYFD 20odd floors below the main impact reporting what it was like on one or two floors as being indicative of the ENTIRE building... Coming from a pathological troll who twists, distorts, and ignores any REAL facts, that's pretty much a compliment. The NIST report states that the jet fuel was spent after the first few minutes after the initial impacts. Read it yourself, troll. In other words, it was IMPOSSIBLE for the office fires to have superheated the structure itself, thus the supporting steel structure did NOT weaken or fail, and the tale of it happening that way is a certifiable LIE. https://youtu.be/9SSS0DDqfm0 You can clearly see the top part of the building falling to the left,.,, --Are you a *Jew*?
That image doesn't show the UNDAMAGED 100 or so floors BELOW it. If ONLY the top of the towers had slid off, then we would not be arguing about it.
Before the remaining 100 or so UNDAMAGED floors simply decide to behave as if they're made of pixie dust. You are obviously oblivious to the fact that it was the *webbing* of the outside of the building that was so constructed. Not the interior core. The NIST report states that the jet fuel was spent after the first few minutes after the initial impacts. Read it yourself, troll. Can you point out where I stated otherwise. Anyone who uses charcoal lto barbecue knows that *fuel* burns off. In other words, it was IMPOSSIBLE for the office fires to have superheated the structure itself, thus the supporting steel structure did NOT weaken or fail... It was not *impossible*. IN fact, it happened. At 700degrees the trusses become compromised. --Are you a *Jew*?
100 undamaged floors? The planes took out between 15 and 20 floors of 106 floor buildings essentially detaching the upper floors, which weighed TONS, from the lower floors... --Are you a *Jew*?
Ok, lets say the undamaged 75 to 90 floors below. The undamaged floors had ALWAYS supported the upper structure above them since they were built, and were designed to do so. And YOU claim the top structures basically toppled over, which they didn't, but if they HAD then there would have been NO weight above the remaining structure at all after the upper structures slid off the undamaged sections. There's absolutely no reason for the UNDAMAGED 75 to 90 floors below to act as if they weren't there. You are obviously oblivious to the fact that it was the *webbing* of the outside of the building that was so constructed. Not the interior core. Wow. You're trying to say the architects designed only the OUTSIDE of the WTC towers to withstand a direct hit from an airliner, they didn't care what happened to the structure itself? It was not *impossible*. IN fact, it happened. At 700degrees the trusses become compromised. Pure BS. The WTC years earlier had office fires raging through them that lasted for HOURS. On 9/11 the towers collapsed in LESS than an hour. AND, there's no physical way for the steel to fail due to a simple office fire, the heat is not sufficient. BTW, was yukon your mentor? You have the same tired old arguments he had made. Uh...no...the building was constructed with an outer frame to which vertical trusses were attached and then connected to an inner cement core. And YOU claim the top structures basically toppled over No I did not. I stated that they did not fall STRAIGHT DOWN...which is not only clearly shown in the video I provided but is apparent from the damage caused to the surrounding structures. --Are you a *Jew*?
“The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door—this intense grid—and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.” _Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, January 25, 2001: --Are you a *Jew*?
Apparently you have a problem with facts and reality. The Murrah building certainly did NOT collapse, it was still standing after the bombing. It appears they selectively enforce their rules then. Happy gaming! If u ever are critical of israel or the police state on fb maybe they will revoke your very fake gaming name.
"Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you". Sirach 4:28
_Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, January 25, 2001: So there you go, the man said the building could withstand MULTIPLE impacts from airliners without failing. No, slim, there YOU go; he's talking about the *OUTSIDE* of the building... --Are you a *Jew*?
What's all that debris on the ground? What's the big gouge on the left side from which debris is cascading in the direction of *gravity*? --Are you a *Jew*?
You are the only person whom I have ever read state this. --Are you a *Jew*?
Are you REALLY that dumb? So you think when the man said the structure could withstand multiple impacts from airliners, he was only talking about the decorative outer sheathing? What's the big gouge on the left side from which debris is cascading in the direction of *gravity*? The structure did not collapse into its own footprint did it. And while the explosion blew an entire slice of the building outwards, the building itself was still standing afterwards. Can you point out which other part of the Twin Towers had *webbing* or *netting* like a *screen* on a screen *door*? Thanks in advance... --Are you a *Jew*?
Do you see any major debris field outside of its *footprint*? --Are you a *Jew*?
Thanks in advance... The floors were connected to a central steel core, and that is part of the "netting" design in that nothing penetrating the building such as an airliner could or would cause the entire structure to fail. Uh, yep. And remember, the blast was INWARDS, yet falling debris did in act fall outwards. The point is, the structure did NOT collapse, any damage done was caused by explosives, and the buidling itself was still standing afterwards. You're claiming that since WTC7 had some damage on one side, the ENTIRE BUILDING decided to fall down into its own footprint at free fall speed. You are afflicted with "magical thinking" in that impossible events are possible, because to view it differently would destroy your inner security and worldview. How many computers do you suppose were in WTC7? I'd hate to hazard a guess. Even if you did take them along, you would have to transport them and have a place to store them until you could dispose of them. If you did manage to erase the hard drives on all of them, there are ways to bring back what was on them, as long as the hard drives are not written over with other material. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
I'll need to watch the video later, but thanks for posting it.
I think I do.
First, please show me another building that met the following criteria and did not collapse. A challenge to conspiracy theorists: 1) Find a steel frame building at least 40 stories high 2) Which takes up a whole city block 3) And is a "Tube in a tube" design 4) Which came off its core columns at the bottom floors (Earthquake, fire, whatever - WTC 7) 5) Which was struck by another building or airliner and had structural damage as a result. 6) And weakened by fire for over 6 hours 7) And had trusses that were bolted on with two 5/8" bolts.
Are you that uninformed? Bldg. 7 was a steel framed building, buildings 1 and 2 were of the tube design. Perhaps you should take the time to read up on the facts. You can't change the laws of physics just because you don't like them, and there's no possible way a structure falls into its footprint at free fall speed without the help of controlled demolition. Given that was all he mentioned, why would I *assume* that he was discussing anything else? If you'd actually research what the *egg carton* framework was supposed to do when it came to column failure then you wouldn't be exposing yourself by saying so much while knowing so little. PS: The designers never took in to account fires and damage to the inner core. --Are you a *Jew*?
How many did they need? --Are you a *Jew*?
Then you need to post a different picture... But if that's your criteria: Debris outside of the WTC footprint: Overview: Two blocks north of WTC7 on Greenwich: FROH --Are you a *Jew*?
You've been shown that it did not fall at free fall speed. You've also been shown that it did not have merely *SOME* damage...the entire South Face was compromised... --Are you a *Jew*?
Uh...no...the *floors* were built over the trusses. Steel trusses were connected to the outerframe and the inner core. It was the failure of the trusses, caused by both the hear and the failure of the outer columns, that caused the collapse...this is why the CT theory is absolutely insane...the failure in the Towers was horizontal, not vertical...it's why you can see the tops of both of the buildings tilt over as opposed to falling straight down... WTC7 was a vertical failure... --Are you a *Jew*?
The *netting* design was the outside of the building and not the cement core. --Are you a *Jew*?
You're missing the part about the fire burning for hours uncontrolled because the building was unstable and expect to collapse. The spray-on fireproofing for structural steel elements was gypsum-based Monokote which had a two-hour fire rating for steel beams, girders and trusses, and a three-hour rating for columns.[6] Wikipedia The fire burned long past the rating period of the fire proofing. NIST determined that diesel fuel did not play an important role, nor did the structural damage from the collapse of the Twin Towers, nor did the transfer elements (trusses, girders, and cantilever overhangs). But the lack of water to fight the fire was an important factor. The fires burned out of control during the afternoon, causing floor beams near column 79 to expand and push a key girder off its seat, triggering the floors to fail around column 79 on Floors 8 to 14. With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled – pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse.[7] Wikipedia Im sure I don't have to tell you that Im not a structural engineer, and I strongly suspect you are not an engineer either; that puts both of us in the position of having to rely on the expertise of others, not only for information, but also for analysis. I am still curious to know why your choose to believe the government blew up the WTC buildings.
Comments (214 - 557) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestHe's wrong on what he claims concerning the aircraft that hit the Pentagon.
#175. To: FormerLurker (#168)
Other than what happened on 9/11, show where in history any other skyscraper has come crashing down due to fire.
#176. To: Jethro Tull (#174)
I'm not sure why he chose today to tweet this out, but as you can see he's concerned about the story being hijacked (pun intended).
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#177. To: FormerLurker (#171)
(Edited)
So then, you're saying the remainder of the buildings did not collapse and are still there?
#178. To: Artisan (#173)
(Edited)
Well the question probably doesn't apply to most people because most people on facebook already use their name, which makes this issue irrelevant.
#179. To: war (#175)
They fell because some sort of massive impact had compromised their structural integrity. It wasn't a matter of *if*; it was a matter of *when*...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#180. To: FormerLurker (#172)
#181. To: war (#177)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#182. To: war (#180)
You can clearly see the top part of the building falling to the left,.,,
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#183. To: FormerLurker (#179)
You are obviously oblivious to the fact that they were designed to withstand a direct hit from an airliner.
#184. To: FormerLurker (#182)
Before the remaining 100 or so UNDAMAGED floors simply decide to behave as if they're made of pixie dust.
#185. To: war (#184)
The planes took out between 15 and 20 floors of 106 floor buildings essentially detaching the upper floors, which weighed TONS, from the lower floors...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#186. To: war (#183)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#187. To: FormerLurker (#185)
The undamaged floors had ALWAYS supported the upper structure above them since they were built, and were designed to do so.
#188. To: FormerLurker (#186)
Wow. You're trying to say the architects designed only the OUTSIDE of the WTC towers to withstand a direct hit from an airliner, they didn't care what happened to the structure itself?
#189. To: war (#149)
But the more important reason is that most of the building did collapse...not just one side of it...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#190. To: war (#178)
#191. To: war (#188)
“The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door—this intense grid—and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.”
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#192. To: FormerLurker (#191)
So there you go...
#193. To: FormerLurker (#189)
#194. To: Artisan (#190)
If u ever are critical of israel or the police state on fb maybe they will revoke your very fake gaming name.
#195. To: war (#192)
No, slim, there YOU go; he's talking about the *OUTSIDE* of the building...
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#196. To: war (#193)
What's all that debris on the ground?
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#197. To: FormerLurker (#195)
Are you REALLY that dumb? So you think when the man said the structure could withstand multiple impacts from airliners, he was only talking about the decorative outer sheathing?
#198. To: FormerLurker (#196)
The structure did not collapse into its own footprint did it.
#199. To: war (#197)
Can you point out which other part of the Twin Towers had *webbing* or *netting* like a *screen* on a screen *door*?
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#200. To: war (#198)
Do you see any major debris field outside of its *footprint*?
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#201. To: war (#101)
why wouldn't they just take the computers with them?
#202. To: FormerLurker. WAR (#200)
Ring of power_2_of_16 by Auzarmes
#203. To: Neo TryingtoWarnYou (#202)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#204. To: titorite (#167)
aerodynamiclly speaking , do you know what wake vortex is?
#205. To: FormerLurker (#168)
Other than what happened on 9/11, show where in history any other skyscraper has come crashing down due to fire.
#206. To: lucysmom (#205)
And is a "Tube in a tube" design
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#207. To: FormerLurker (#195)
Are you REALLY that dumb? So you think when the man said the structure could withstand multiple impacts from airliners, he was only talking about the decorative outer sheathing?
#208. To: BTP Holdings (#201)
How many computers do you suppose were in WTC7?
#209. To: FormerLurker (#200)
(Edited)
Uh, yep.
#210. To: FormerLurker (#200)
You're claiming that since WTC7 had some damage on one side, the ENTIRE BUILDING decided to fall down into its own footprint at free fall speed.
#211. To: FormerLurker (#199)
(Edited)
The floors were connected to a central steel core, and that is part of the "netting" design in that nothing penetrating the building such as an airliner could or would cause the entire structure to fail.
#212. To: FormerLurker (#199)
The floors were connected to a central steel core, and that is part of the "netting" design
#213. To: FormerLurker (#200)
You're claiming that since WTC7 had some damage on one side, the ENTIRE BUILDING decided to fall down into its own footprint at free fall speed.
.
.
.