9/11 Bombshell: Methodical Deception -- Rebekah Roth

a reply to: skyeagle409
I was wondering what your stance on the whole "cellphone" thing, as you are more informed than most of the capabilities of the craft at the time. Many here have many conflicting views on the subject. If you have nothing further to add than no problems.

a reply to: jude11
Let's not forget Glass-Steagall was repealed in November of 1999. Gave them time to create a heinous mess which needed covering up.....

a reply to: jude11

I dont understand something:

in the interview, she doesnt give an intro to herself or set the context of they story she is telling.

its as if there is no beginning...

Also, somewhere in the vid she says betty ong and amy sweeney contacted her... how is this possible?

a reply to: rossacus

The big problem started back on 9/11, when every call was referred to as cellphone calls. The first call we really heard about was Todd Beamers...which even when GTE (Airfone) Lisa Jefferson was interviewed about...became a "cellphone" call. And even when it started to be corrected as an Airfone call, a large segment of people cough truth movement folks cough still cling to the idea of cellphone calls.

On the morning of 9/11, 19 men armed with box-cutters led by a man on dialysis in a cave half way around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop, directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most guarded air space on the planet.
Overpowering the passengers and the combat trained pilots of 4 commercial aircraft before flying them wildly off course for over an hour without them being Chased or followed by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 terrorists, devoted Muslims, who liked drinking and snorting coc aine managed to knock down 3 buildings with two planes in NY, and in Washington a pilot who wasn't able to handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8000 ft descent hitting the Pentagon in the very same office where DOD staff was working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion taxpayer dollars the defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced missing the day before.

Luckily the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, and the administration knew within hours. The evidence literally fell from the sky.
They didn't bother to look who funded the attack because that question was "of little practical significance" The DIA, FCS and the CIA destroyed all their records on the case, as part of "standard record keeping".

Osama kept running for 10 years, finally he was found unarmed and not resisting, the only man who could tell what really happened, and they shot him....Then they dropped his body into the ocean, "in accordance to Islamic traditions", first of it's kind in 1400 years, then a couple dozen of the seal team that were involved in the operation died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan a few months later.

This is the story of 9/11. If you have any questions about it, you are a bat# paranoid tinfoil, dog-abusing, baby hater. If you love your country and or freedom, rock and roll, puppy dogs and apple pie you will never, ever express doubts about this story, to anyone, ever. ( sarcasm )

- Darth Fazer

originally posted by: AnteBellum
I need to dig a bit on the labeling on those boxes, without that evidence things start to get cloudy.

That's where I remembered it, BB 18's are also floor mounted steel wall studs, like ones used in TT renovations and construction. I wish I could get the words on those boxes any good photo enhancing guys here?

I am in industrial sales and I sold tons of BB-18 among other products from Cooper's B-Line. All of their products come in corrugated boxes with the item codes marked out for material handling purposes. These are indeed floor mounted studs.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

You're correct. I was thinking of another interview where he talked about the sound of equipment being moved around on a supposedly vacant floor in the days before the attack. Apologies.

a reply to: jude11

Kudos to Jude who is often right on top of bombshell information
such as this thread examples perfectly. This information worries me.
I fear, that if the balance of information swings to far in favor of the
truth. TPTB, Elite, NWO, OP (one percent), Masters of reality, what
have you?

Will become paranoid and deploy the plan we fear most using the
technology that has emboldened them obviously. And depop will
ensue despite the general populations lack of response to all
provocation. They will see our knowledge of the truth as reason
enough for our extermination. They are after all that insistant about
retaining power.

I guess my point is, if the information tilts to far in favor of the truth?
Things could go vicious over night. We might be wise not to consider
summertime after the viper strikes.

originally posted by: combatmaster
a reply to: jude11

I dont understand something:

in the interview, she doesnt give an intro to herself or set the context of they story she is telling.

its as if there is no beginning...

Also, somewhere in the vid she says betty ong and amy sweeney contacted her... how is this possible?

Bits and pieces.

Have a look here:



Jude

As always, there are a lot of things about that fateful day that don't add up. However, I have some questions which I feel are pertinent.

Apparently the images in question originated from a blog, referencing a book. Any other documented source?

Has the DEA report been vetted and confirmed genuine? What is its original, documented source?

And is there compelling evidence that these individuals are even in the WTC in the photos in question?

Someone earlier asked if BB 18 appears on any of the other boxes in the images. I can't do much with my lowly Photoshop Elements abilities, but from what I can, there might be another B appearing in the lower right of this image (in the same location on the box, too, relative to the other box markings and the tape/opening location:



And (though I can't make out with certainty what they say,) apparently, all over the place in this image. (My circles are a little hard to see due to color choice - my bad - but you can see what I mean.) Again always in the same location on the boxes, as near as I can tell.



So I think, unless we can prove the photos have been manipulated in some fashion, we can at least see that other boxes do say that or something like it on them.

But to get from that to, "That proves these people are 1) The purported group of artists, 2) in WTC, and 3) Mossad explosives experts," requires more evidence in my humble opinion. Especially when dealing with a writer whose interview begins by telling us she is combining fact with fiction in her book. Even if the interview's statements are presented as fact, in 2015 the line between fact and fiction in creative endeavors can be quite blurred for effect.

If we can prove they're in the WTC in the images (anyone capable of accurate analysis based on the images for certain? I'm not qualified or familiar enough to do so,) that they are ex-Mossad (is the DEA report genuine and how can we confirm that, and what proof is there that that's who these individuals are?) and that the other documents are real and have verifiable sources... then this would become far, far more compelling to me.

Until and unless that happens however, as usual I remain agnostic on what exactly transpired. Other than to say the OS does not add up for me personally in a compelling, persuasive way either. It never has. Coincidences do happen, but I find the precise constellation of coincidences that took place on that day incredibly improbable personally. I simply don't have persuasive proof by my standards of that intuitive feeling so far.

Peace.

has anyone brought up the phone thing? not the cellphone thing but the actual phones that are in the seats or something,on planes? one guy i read said that they found one of those phones in the wreckage, while another said those phones were not on the planes in question because they had never been installed in those types of planes.

to me the big wow moment was when she recalled the flight attendant who was supposedly talking on the cellphone for 2 hours, said something about stairs when the plane she was supposedly on didn't have stairs. yet another guy says the flight attendant never said anything about stairs in the conversation.

i'm confused and too lazy to see who is right. anyone know which one is right on these two issues (the seat phones i think they are called, and the flight attendant talking about stairs in the plane)

a reply to: cardinalfan0596
Cheers. Much appreciated.

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: Informer1958

Go to her site, find the pictures, look at the box she points out, then enlarge the photos and tell me if you can see any other box with BB-18 on any of them. Photographs can be manipulated. BB-18 on that one box is just too convenient.

www.methodicaldeception.com...

www.littelfuse.com...

< br />
better pictures
www.conspiracy-cafe.com...

a reply to: undo

767s and 757s both had seat back phones installed.

a reply to: undo

In the longer video, she discusses the phones. Long and the short of it, she says the flight that Susan Olsen allegedly called ted Olsen "collect" from didn't have AirFones, and even if it had , they would require a credit card swipe and didn't allow calling collect. I think that was what she said. She also says cell phones then didn't work about 1800 feet. Like I said earlier, this has always been a sticking point with me about all the alleged phone calls from flights that day and that whoever wrote that part of the script wasn't used to flying commercial.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Not true. Some did not.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: six67seven

9/11 was never a false flag operation. Whenever I ask for evidence, the Truth Movement fails to do so and they ignore the fact that prior to 9/11, a number of countries around the world had issued warnings to the United States that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, would use hijack airliners to attack America.

The earliest warning issued to the United States was from Philippines in 1995 and one of the targets listed was CIA headquarters. I might also add that one of the terrorist in the plot who escaped in Manila was Ramzi Yousef, the terrorist who bombed WTC1 in 1993 and whose uncle was one of the planners of 9/11.

False flag (or black flag) describes covert operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by entities, groups, or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them. Operations carried out during peace-time by civilian organizations, as well as covert government agencies, may by extension be called false flag operations if they seek to hide the real organization behind an operation.

In part from your own replies through out 9/11 threads, you determine for yourself it's a false flag.

No one is ignoring you (although they might as well) because you choose to ignore evidence presented. A plethora of evidence (ya know... those pesky facts!) has been provided, but if you don't review it & take it into consideration from an unbiased position, why should anyone consider your opinion?

a reply to: ~Lucidity

So, all the people who answered the phone calls made from the flights are liars? Is that your position?

a reply to: ~Lucidity

All four of the airliners involved that day, did.