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.
No, slim, there YOU go; he's talking about the *OUTSIDE* of the building...
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?
"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
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.
"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
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?
Can you point out which other part of the Twin Towers had *webbing* or *netting* like a *screen* on a screen *door*?
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...
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.
"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
Do you see any major debris field outside of its *footprint*?
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.
"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
why wouldn't they just take the computers with them?
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.
"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
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.
"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
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?
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.
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...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...
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'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.
i think that is a cop out to the 25 rules of disinformation. which is funny because lurker uses that playbook too.., i wonder what kind of debate yall are having... i just might have to get the popcorn and unclown him to enjoy the show.
______________________________________
Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.
i think that is a cop out to the 25 rules of disinformation. which is funny because lurker uses that playbook too
Ah, I see the little weasle is at it again. It's really curious how you drop into a 9/11 thread and attack those who present the facts, and act as if you're some master of truth and honesty.
Why don't you get your act together and decide which side you're on, then either admit you're a backstabbing little shit or STFU.
"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
It was the failure of the trusses, caused by both the hear and the failure of the outer columns, that caused the collapse...
Again, the UNDAMAGED sections of the towers had absolutely NO reason to totally fail as they did. But keep believing the government lies if that's your thing.
And you're being absolutely idiotic if you think office fires can weaken steel to the point of failure used in the construction of skyscrapers.
"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
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.
And again, buildings don't collapse into their own footprint at free fall speeds unless they've been deliberately demolished with explosives.
Go see what Architects and Engineers have to say about the matter, and stop spewing pseudoscience explanations you've picked up from government disinformation sites.
And BTW, I AM an engineer.
"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
Oh no? So they're still standing there and there was no total collapse?
"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
Contrary to your claims, WTC 7 DID fall at free fall speed, and WTC 1 & 2 dropped at a rate VERY CLOSE to free fall speed.
An actual total collapse would have taken MUCH more time.
In reality, if a collapse were to have occured without the use of explosives, only the damaged upper section would have either slid off or toppled over, the remaining lower structure would have stayed intact.
"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
And you're being absolutely idiotic if you think office fires can weaken steel to the point of failure used in the construction of skyscrapers.
Office fires like this?
Also note that the ENTIRE face of exterior support columns have have been wiped ou.
Also note that construction steel's load bearing ability is reduced @ 620 degrees Fahrenheit and that's before adding on the concrete slabs of the WTC's flooring...
I studied electronics early in my life, then physics, then applied those fields to various software development roles.
"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
Also note that the ENTIRE face of exterior support columns have have been wiped ou.
Also note that construction steel's load bearing ability is reduced @ 620 degrees Fahrenheit and that's before adding on the concrete slabs of the WTC's flooring...
This fire in Madrid burnt for approximately 24 hours, yet the building did not collapse.
So you're full of it.
Tell me war, where do you get your talking points from?
"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
[This is a reposting of this video which was taken down from the original site, originally posted in August 2008 just after the release of the final draft of the NIST WTC7 Report, prior to the final version which was altered to admit a 2.25 second period of freefall.] This video tracks the motion of the NW corner of Building 7 of the World Trade Center on 9/11 2001. The building was in freefall for a period of ~2.5 seconds. This means it was falling through itself for over 100 feet with zero resistance, an impossibility in any natural scenario. This period of freefall is solid evidence that explosives had to be used to bring the building down. In the final draft for public comment (August 2008) NIST denied that WTC7 fell at freefall. In the final report in Nov 2008 they reversed themselves and admitted freefall, but denied its obvious significance. ----- [The WTC7 series has elicited a number of questions from people unclear on the details of how I did the measurements, compared to how NIST did them and how the representatives of NIST described their measurements. I have therefore created a WTC7 Measurement FAQ page: http://www.911speakout.org/WTC7- Measurement-FAQ.pdf ... . I will also use this FAQ as a place of reference for other questions that arise as well.]
"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
If there is free fall during ANY part of the collapse, then the building is dropping through an empty void caused by explosives.
"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
Looks like it's made mostly of concrete...where's the steel?