9/11 Bombshell: Methodical Deception -- Rebekah Roth

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Took me a minute to find my old posting:

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
Well...

NYC Fire Dept. Lt. D. Rastussio:
"...it would come down on its own, or it would be taken down."
(min. 24:30)

Lies and lies, just lies.

Yes, the FDNY knew it would be pulled down.
Methodical Deception, the never ending story.

originally posted by: tinymind
a reply to: eisegesis

Actually, this is a part of my attempt at quoting a response from "skyeagle 409".
The quotaion boxes didn't work out this time.

Actually, I am still awaiting some kind of response from this person on the issue I raised.

Oh, I see. All fixed.

Maybe I'll get a reply?

a reply to: FlySolo

indeed, my post in your thread.

I still got no answer...

dont get me wrong... this is all very intriguing, and i always aim to find truth regardless of bias... but these dont sound like israeli nationals... maybe dual citizenship? but does that mean that 'Israel' per-se did 9/11?

originally posted by: AnteBellum Those jets were sufficient in bringing the TT down

never in a million years. your 'failsafe' was in fact the means of execution. the OS is/was/forever shall be absolute nonsense. garbage. and most folks bought it. so sad.

a reply to: eisegesis

Let's take a look here.

Mossad Warned CIA About 911 Threat On 5 Separate Occasions

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon authorised the leak of sensitive documents which reveal America's spy agencies were warned about a terrorist strike weeks before September 11.

www.historycommons.org...

a reply to: randyvs

You use the fact that people have to say certain things to keep their job a lot. Like water from a poisoned well.

That won't work. Over the years, I have compiled a long list where I have had to correct truthers on the way we do things in the world of aviation. I did so after I notice that truthers were posting false and misleading information that I knew from personal experience and knowledge, was false.

a reply to: RoScoLaz4

Why are you so angry because I don't believe the buildings were brought down with something other then jets?

In the end I still feel the same way you do about the OS. I'm just not trying to come off as a raving loon no one will listen to by relying on what can be proven and not unsubstantiated.
Truth is the buildings 'could have' collapsed due to 2 large fuel filled jets impacting them. With this true it even makes the conspiracy aspects easier to digest.
What difference does it make how they came down. If our government was behind it and the cover up, it all doesn't even matter anymore. Guilty is guilty!

a reply to: AnteBellum

Just look at his hair, it's a question of style I guess. I like him very much for doing so. It's a very weird movie we are trapped in, innit?



Anyway. I'm quite angry, that many people choose to believe lies without any shred of evidence, as well. So... there goes your point to Nevereverland. If 'it might' should be our new gold-standart, we could equally recycle both skunk-works and hoax-bin. I dunno, seems very foolish to me.
Just saying, hope you don't mind that I'm chiming in here. Besides from that I'll star your post and can only agree with your final conclusions. Well said.

a reply to: AnteBellum

Towers' Design Parameters

Twin Towers' Designers Anticipated Jet Impacts Like September 11th's

Structural engineers who designed the Twin Towers carried out studies in the mid-1960s to determine how the buildings would fare if hit by large jetliners. In all cases the studies concluded that the Towers would survive the impacts and fires caused by the jetliners.

Evidence of these studies includes interviews with and papers and press releases issued by engineers who designed and oversaw construction of the World Trade Center.

LINK
1960s-era Jetliners Compared to Boeing 767s

Contrary to widely promoted misconceptions, the Boeing 767-200s used on 9/11/01 were only slightly larger than 707s and DC 8s, the types of jetliners whose impacts the World Trade Center's designers anticipated.

911research.wtc7.net...

I never believe the airplane crash into the WTC was the cause of bring down the Towers.
The Engineers over design the WTC, just encase this happened. Also remember jet fuel burns very fast, after a few minutes most of the jet fuel would have burned out, leaving nothing but office fires.

Something else had to been planted in the WTC to cause the core columns to be blasted over five hundred feet in every direction.

The only thing scientifically that can explain this, is the use of very powerful demolition. NIST lied in a public statement claiming there were no eyewitness report of explosions.

There are over 500 credible eyewitness that went on record as of seeing, hearing, and being in explosions.

a reply to: AnteBellum

O K
Just for the sake of argument:
Let's say your mother was mugged, gang raped, set on fire, and left in the middle of the street to die.

Now does it matter to you who did it and why? OH yes, and when neither the law nor the media show an interest in solving this crime, does it really matter to you any more?

Actually some people feel much the same about this country as they do a close family member.

a reply to: olddognewtricks

FDNY Operations Chief Daniel Nigro

"The most important operational
decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse had
damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story
building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington
Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I
ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to
protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue
operations that were going on at the time and back the
people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did
collapse, we wouldn't lose any more people."

Firefighter Richard Banaciski

"They told us to get out of there because they
were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right
behind it, coming down."

graphics8.nytimes.com...


Lieutenant William Ryan, Ladder 85, FDNY
"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 o'clock, that they thought 7 was going to collapse."
www.nytimes.com...

There are plenty of accounts by FDNY members that they thought WTC 7 was going to COLLAPSE. Not be imploded, not be pulled down...but COLLAPSE.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Right, a few office fires in WTC 7 brought down a 47 story building in a few seconds.
No one is buying what your selling.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

And there are plenty of accounts from firemen and other rescue workers as well as survivors of explosions, visual sightings of squibs and firemen stating it was being pulled or similar so where does that leave us?

a reply to: Informer1958

Just a quick question.

Was it not Building 7 in which a reporter was walking and filming when he answered the calls from a man seemingly trapped on one of the lower floors. I remember watching a vid, but am not adapted enough to post it here, to fully illustrate my point.
That point being, look at the glass and debrie inside the building while the reported walked thru.
If it was only hit from the outside, and high up, by parts falling from the other buildings, why is the inside in such a condition?

a reply to: tinymind

I am not sure if it was building 7 I have not seen the video.
However the damage on WTC 7 from the side, looks to be blown outward and the building behind it had broken windows where the explosion took place matching the length of damage on the building behind WTC 7. Very strange

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: ontarff

I am very weary of you quoting "laws of physics" without explaining 3 modern steel column supported buildings falling at nearly free fall speed from structural collapse caused by the OS.

I have already explained why none of the WTC buildings fell at free fall speed. Who told you that they did? Please post your reference that said the WTC buildings fell at free fall speed.

Now let's take a look here and use the laws of physics. Note in the following photos that debris, which are falling at free fall speed, are outpacing the collapse of the WTC Towers.

Photo 1: No Collapse at Free Fall Speed

Photo 2: No Collapse at Free Fall Speed

Towers 1 and 2 took a little longer with the sequencing of the explosives from the top down. WTC7 was a better example.

My reference is here
AE911truth-Free fall

a reply to: tinymind

Your misinterpreting what I stated.

It doesn't matter because either way they ARE guilty.

You should refrain from using such analagies, it paints a negative picture to your cause and is somewhat tactless. Luckily I don't get easily offended by words, but many others do.

That's one of the problems I have with the 'truther' movement, it's not what your saying but how it's delivered.