9/11 Bombshell: Methodical Deception -- Rebekah Roth

a reply to: skyeagle409 you might want to pay more attention to the posts you are replying to.

TextNo, the bogus video that you posted, is a joke. Apparently, you were unaware that your video was a known bogus video.

Bogus video..lol.. it just shows photos of the Pentagon, and you call that bogus,, you slay me.. stop before you hurt yourself..

a reply to: wildb

Really, it just states facts,, shows photos, can you argue with them, the book was not burned, ect.. your a funny guy..

It seems that you are not aware that paper items do survive fiery airplane crashes. Chcck it out.

Photo: Dollar bill and Passport Survive Fiery Airliner Crash

a reply to: wildb

The photo of that dollar bill and passport that survived a fiery airliner crash in Nepal goes a long way debunking truther claims that passports cannot survive fiery airplane crashes.

a reply to: wildb

Reagan National tracked it when it got within range, and Center locations prior to there tracked it.

www.democraticunderground.com...

There was just over 8 minutes when ATC didn't see it on the radar, but it showed up when looking at the data later.

a reply to: wildb

Of course your video is bogus, especially in light of the fact that B-757 wreckage, along with human remains of passengers and crew American 77, were recovered at the Pentagon.

Further evidence that your video is bogus lies in the fact that even ATC personnel at Ronald Reagan Airport described the aircraft as a B-757, not to mention that FDR data confirmed the aircraft as American 77.

We can also add the fact that American 77 was tracked to the Pentagon on radar where it was visually identified as a B-757 by the pilot of a C-130.

BTW, have you seen photos of the impact marks on the wall of the Pentagon?

American 77 Wing Impact Marks on Pentagon Wall

So much for your bogus video.

a reply to: wildb

Let's take a look.





American 77 FDR Pressure Altitude Chart

a reply to: wildb

First, review the radar imagery on American 77, which I did not make up.

a reply to: jude11

It is evident that the claims of Rebekah Roth are so full of flaws and in many cases, her claims do not reflect reality. Perhaps, she can point out the time lines in the WTC videos where she thinks demo explosions are heard because I didn't hear demo explosions.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

The photo of that dollar bill and passport that survived a fiery airliner crash in Nepal goes a long way debunking truther claims that passports cannot survive fiery airplane crashes.

Well, no doubt, but you still missed the point. You failed to understand the significance of the passport. It was not merely that it was undamaged but that it was supposedly found lying on top of a heap of rubble, instead of what common sense would indicate - being buried under thousands of tons of rubble. This location so convenient for clean-up workers to discover as evidence of the official story about 9/11 is what raised so much suspicion that it had been deliberately placed there in order to be found. It was NOT so much the fact that it escaped damage. It was similar to Atta's bogus will being found in his car (ask any Muslim and you will discover why it was obviously not written by a Muslim).

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: jude11

It is evident that the claims of Rebekah Roth are so full of flaws and in many cases, her claims do not reflect reality. Perhaps, she can point out the time lines in the WTC videos where she thinks demo explosions are heard because I didn't hear demo explosions.

Perhaps if you opened your eyes, you might notice the demolition squibs dozens of floors below the collapse level due to some demolition charges going off prematurely.
Perhaps if you opened your ears and listened to the famous video of an interview with firefighters at the WTC, you might hear them talking about hearing the rapid sounds of explosions (Boom! Boom! Boom! Boom!). The fact that YOU didn't hear explosions means zilch, because you obviously did not watch the same videos as Roth did. Instead, you use this personal failure to rubbish Roth, Unless you can justify your vacuous charge that her claims are "so full of flaws", your disbelief will be rejected as yet another desperate attempt to discredit claims that you don't want to accept because you have so much emotional investment in sticking with the official story.

originally posted by: micpsi
the demolition squibs dozens of floors below the collapse level due to some demolition charges going off prematurely.

This again shows you have no clue at all how building demolition is done, why would they need those charges dozens of floors below the collapse level? After the collapse was started, nothing was going to stop it. Also why was no signs of all these demolition charges found in the debris? How did they smuggle the tonnes of explosives into the buildings past the bomb sniffing dogs?

a reply to: hellobruce

After the collapse was started, nothing was going to stop it.

there you go again exposing your ignorance, now you've been discredited ...

a reply to: hellobruce

According to the law of physics there should have been plenty to stop it i.e. the floors below. Falling anything will take the path of least resistance, for some reason these buildings all "chose" to take the path of most resistance straight down.

Oh and let us not forgot that the floors above were totally pulverised to dust...meaning...there was no weight to force down the remaining floors. With regards to "compressed air" as opposed to squibs, that again is subject to physics. There was no compressed air, the areas in question had plenty of escape routes for air broken windows holes in the floor...for it to be compressed air being ejected there would have had to have been no other way for "air" to escape

I do realise that minds cannot be changed on this subject but I just wish there could be some give and take, some thought and some logic applied possibly even some agreement

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
a reply to: hellobruce

According to the law of physics there should have been plenty to stop it

Exactly which "law of physics" would that be?

Falling anything will take the path of least resistance, for some reason these buildings all "chose" to take the path of most resistance straight down.

So please explain why they would fall sideways, and why do you think the pivot point to cause them to go sideways would be strong enough?

Oh and let us not forgot that the floors above were totally pulverised to dust

Please show some evidence for this "total pulverisation" and just why do you think this dust weighs nothing?

...meaning...there was no weight to force down the remaining floors.

Just when you thought truthers could not come up with any more silly ideas they surprise you.... now you claim all the floors above the collapse suddenly became weightless!

for it to be compressed air being ejected there would have had to have been no other way for "air" to escape

Ever heard of air con ducts? Apparently not!

some thought and some logic applied

Not a chance, as truthers do not stop and think about the crap that they post - like the building becoming weightless!

a reply to: hellobruce

So are you denying that the top floors and all subsequent floors were pulverised to dust?