-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
I don't know Andrew your the expert it sounded like she was only speculating on
exotic weapons including lasers and there could of been a combination of methods
used to bring down the various buildings. I don't think she is trying to claim she
knows the answer just speaking generally about the various theories. Jim Fetzer
below seems to be favouring the 'mini nuke' as part of the destruction of the towers.
Jim Fetzer was on the Richie Allen show the other night and he queried something
Rebekah said. I don't find it a problem yet , as her main theme or the way she
is telling it is what matters. The finer details and there will be many as there are
still several theories going around and researchers like yourself will go over this
with a fine tooth comb, and I appreciate your views on this subject and watched
most of your presentations and I would not argue with you on the technical points.
But she seems pretty genuine to me .......
Jim Fetzer From 911Scholars.org With New Amazing
Revelations About What Really Happened On 9/11
Aprox 37 min in Jim is asked about Rebekah and he gives some comments....
Published on 11 Sep 2015
Please Support The Show – http://richieallenshow.com/donate/
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
Hi, Andrew — delighted to have you here with us.
Yes, it seemed pretty clear... it was clear the first time I heard it, but here's the transcript:
George Noory: International caller, Leah, in Ottawa, Canada — welcome to the program. Leah, you’re on the air with us.
Leah: Thanks for taking my call. Remember, George, you had a woman saying that it was Tesla technology that took down the towers?
George Noory: That was Dr Judy Wood.
Leah: Yes. I’m wondering, Rebekah, if you entertain those ideas at all, because it would even work in with your theory, because your concentration isn’t so much the buildings.
Rebekah: Well, you know, it’s interesting. I’ve actually been contacted by some scientists who are trying to give me a heads-up without losing their jobs and without, you know.... everything we do is monitored now, so almost some of our conversations almost in code.
And so getting to that, there is a technology that was used, I can almost guarantee you — even though I’m not a scientist, I am taking with one that was relating some information that... let me just put it to you this way, when... our military has established, and are actually using, things such as laser weapons.
We don’t know about it on the ground unless we’re in Research and Development and a scientist, or in the higher-up part of the Pentagon, perhaps.
The amount of things that were used to bring those towers down, there could have been a dozen or more methodologies. There may not have just been nanothermite — they did find nanothermite — that may only have only been one of the techniques used. They just needed to make sure that they were absolutely turned to dust.
And so I am not a building demolition expert, but I am open-minded to believe that... I know that ten years ago, if we would have said somebody had a laser weapon that could shoot through a tank, in five seconds or less, and burn through it in a hot-hot-hot... and that laser weapons, by the way, chemical lasers, actually do create a great deal of heat, and that’s one thing that we see reported from the World Trade Center towers. The degree of heat was much more beyond kerosene fires from jet fuel.
George Noory: Yes, there’s no doubt about that, too.
In summary: Rebekah is saying
- There were multiple explosive/demolition technologies used.
- She's been contacted by at least one scientist, who is being very cagey.
- Some of the technologies used may be classified, or highly advanced, and we may not know about them in the public domain.
- She cites military laser technology as an example.
- She states that kerosene could not have created the heat.
- She does not dismiss Judy Wood's ideas at all. (She also told that to me personally, not included in the interview that I presume you've listened to.)
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Hi Ron, She does sound a little vague and slightly confused in the sound clip to me. It is interesting she talks about intense heat in the buildings, could this heat have actually been microwave radiation and not heat from fires as she is implying?
Also I may be wrong (please correct me if I am) but I am sure I heard her say in a recent interview that the large explosion in the port of Tianjin, northern China displayed some similarities to 911 events with regard to burnt out cars from intense heat.
Could this be a subliminal with reference to Dr. Judy Wood's description of "toasted cars", these were in a large car park that was a very long way from the twin towers. These cars were not subject to any heat, yet they had the appearance of being burnt and had even turned rusty. I think she did reference Dr. Wood but inferred that heat again was the cause.
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Bill,
Well, yes - it's clear that she has no clue what she is talking about. She gives no real information "so almost some of our conversations almost in code." Wow! What code? Why is it code? It is saying a lot without revealing anything. More to the point, we KNOW how the towers were destroyed already - this was discovered by Dr Judy Wood between 2001 and 2007. The evidence pertaining to this destruction was taken to court in 2007. Didn't you know about this? Well, some people KNOW. I wrote a book which contains much of this important information. It's not in code and it's free! http://tinyurl.com/911ftb
So where did Roth work Bill? Did you ask her? What was the discipline of the scientist that she referred to in her interview?
If you look on my website and Dr Wood's website, you can find a lot about who we worked for and where we worked - and what our science/engineering experience is. I suppose Bill, you don't know how the towers were destroyed yet and you want to just get people to endlessly speculate about it. It's kinda fun, ay? Except that those that used the weaponry might use it again - and blame it on ISIS detonated nukes.
Of course she doesn't dismiss Wood's work - I didn't mention that in my original post though, did I?
However, she does not say "Yes, Dr Wood is correct. I've studied the documents she submitted to court. I know that SAIC are big benefactors of the black budget." Neither did she mention ARA - one of the other defendants in the court case. I bet she didn't mention Hurricane Erin either, nor the likely reason it was there. But hey, lets just speculate and not talk about evidence. People might actually realise what's going on, ye know!
Good luck!
For those that want a lot of detailed information, please refer to this page: http://tinyurl.com/911wrh, little speculation and should illustrate to you what the title of the page says i.e. "What Happened on 911 and How it is Covered Up". Also, folks might like to note what Mr Paul Hellyer realised a while ago. Here's info about that too... http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/...=412&Itemid=60
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Forgot to say - thanks for the transcript Bill - you've saved me a job! Cheers!
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
If you look on my website and Dr Wood's website, you can find a lot about
who we worked for and where we worked - and what our science/engineering experience
is. I suppose Bill, you don't know how the towers were destroyed yet and you want to
just get people to endlessly speculate about it. It's kinda fun, ay? Except that those that
used the weaponry might use it again - and blame it on ISIS detonated nukes.
I may not argue with you on the technical material Andrew , but that's a bit rude.
I know Bill can answer for himself if he wish's , but you sound a bit 'stressed' ...
Quote:
Forgot to say - thanks for the transcript Bill - you've saved me a job! Cheers!
That's better...LOL
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
Bill,
Well, yes - it's clear that she has no clue what she is talking about. She gives no real information "so almost some of our conversations almost in code." Wow! What code? Why is it code?
Because the scientist who was contact with her was aware he might well be being monitored. You and I have probably both experienced calls like that. One has to talk in inferences, and avoid certain keywords. Clearly, he was being super-cautious.
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
It is saying a lot without revealing anything. More to the point, we KNOW how the towers were destroyed already - this was discovered by Dr Judy Wood between 2001 and 2007. The evidence pertaining to this destruction was taken to court in 2007. Didn't you know about this? Well, some people KNOW. I wrote a book which contains much of this important information. It's not in code and it's free!
http://tinyurl.com/911ftb
Yes... Judy's work is not being questioned here: not by me (I am most interested in her work), and not by Rebekah. She's a former airline hostess (not a professional scientist), though she does have a degree in chemistry. She does not profess to be a career scientist.
Her expertise is in the airline industry. That's where we can all learn from her, because a bunch of us missed a lot of clues. That's her contribution. Nothing about high tech weaponry — which of course I'm certain exists, a view agreed on by everyone reading this now.
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
So where did Roth work Bill? Did you ask her? What was the discipline of the scientist that she referred to in her interview?
I don't think it matters what airline Rebekah worked for... it's very evident she has the experience and credentials. That should be clear to anyone who's listened to her interviews and/or read her books.
The discipline of the scientist... of course, I don't know. But why might he not be trying to tell her about exactly the kind of thing that Judy Wood has been postulating?
There are no contradictions or anomalies here — at all.
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
If you look on my website and Dr Wood's website, you can find a lot about who we worked for and where we worked - and what our science/engineering experience is. I suppose Bill, you don't know how the towers were destroyed yet and you want to just get people to endlessly speculate about it. It's kinda fun, ay? Except that those that used the weaponry might use it again - and blame it on ISIS detonated nukes.
With respect, I'd suggest that's not the point. Nowhere close! Rebekah's contribution, which is significant, is that the planes were flown to Westover Air Base, the calls were made from there, and the passengers all likely killed there and then, save a few who were in on the event.
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
Of course she doesn't dismiss Wood's work - I didn't mention that in my original post though, did I?
Right. But, please forgive me (and this is a genuine question) — then what problem do you have with her contributions from what IS her expertise? Why are you so hostile?
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
However, she does not say "Yes, Dr Wood is correct. I've studied the documents she submitted to court. I know that SAIC are big benefactors of the black budget." Neither did she mention ARA - one of the other defendants in the court case. I bet she didn't mention Hurricane Erin either, nor the likely reason it was there. But hey, lets just speculate and not talk about evidence. People might actually realise what's going on, ye know!
My guess (and I do not know, but I can ask her — so could you, of course: you know how to contact her, yes? If not, I can give you her contact details) is that she is not up to speed with those documents. That's not where her research line has been leading her.
This is a team effort. Everyone's contributions, including yours, of course, are needed and valued, and should be heard.
Do please continue to add your thoughts and perspectives... we welcome that, and I'm delighted you're here.
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
Can anyone else figure out what she is trying to say?
Probably not - that's the point, it seems.
Presumably in this question your asking if anyone else can figure out what Rebekah is saying pertains specifically to that MP3 clip of her responding to caller Leah on the George Noory show to the question of what brought the towers down.
Rebekah is quite clear in her answer (thanks Bill, for the transcript, posted just above), consistent with everything she has said all along, that she's not a building demolition expert, especially not in the more exotic technologies that must have been used on the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11. However she clearly agrees with the work of yourself and others such as Judy Wood that it took more than kerosene to so dramatically convert those two massive towers to mostly fine dust in 10 seconds per tower.
But your other more general criticisms of Rebekah and her 9/11 work are, in my view, uncalled for and seriously misguided. That you continue to persist, months ago on your blog, and now here, in slamming Rebekah Roth's excellent, expert and original work in analyzing what happened to the Planes and their crew and passengers on 9/11, with little or no substance that I can discern, makes me wonder what you're up to.
I urge readers to read with caution your comments so far regarding Rebekah's work on 9/11.
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
Paul
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
Can anyone else figure out what she is trying to say?
Probably not - that's the point, it seems.
Presumably in this question your asking if anyone else can figure out what Rebekah is saying pertains specifically to that MP3 clip of her responding to caller Leah on the George Noory show to the question of what brought the towers down.
Rebekah is quite clear in her answer (thanks Bill, for the transcript, posted just above), consistent with everything she has said all along, that she's not a building demolition expert, especially not in the more exotic technologies that must have been used on the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11. However she clearly agrees with the work of yourself and others such as Judy Wood that it took more than kerosene to so dramatically convert those two massive towers to mostly fine dust in 10 seconds per tower.
But your other more general criticisms of Rebekah and her 9/11 work are, in my view, uncalled for and seriously misguided. That you continue to persist, months ago on your blog, and now here, in slamming Rebekah Roth's excellent, expert and original work in analyzing what happened to the Planes and their crew and passengers on 9/11, with little or no substance that I can discern, makes me wonder what you're up to.
I urge readers to
read with caution your comments so far regarding Rebekah's work on 9/11.
I urge readers to read with caution your comments so far regarding my comments. I also urge them to study my references and contact me if they wish to ask any questions or check anything. Can we do that with you Paul? Do you have a website? Do you give public presentations? Do you post your name, address and telephone number like I do Paul? Or is this simply more "forum noise"?
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
And why are readers going round in circles on 9/11 when everyone has made up their minds years ago? I don't see much new information here, only rehashing minutiae.
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
Daozen
And why are readers going round in circles on 9/11 when everyone has made up their minds years ago? I don't see much new information here, only rehashing minutiae.
Some of Rebekah's insights and research are new, so far as I know. I have studied 9/11 for years, and I didn't know where the planes went, until her work. That's a critical piece of the puzzle, and helps provide further shape and insight to the overall events of 9/11.
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Sometimes it is very difficult to discuss differences of opinions and separate facts from speculation and intuition. Especially when one side is threatened by the possibility that he/she has been lied to/programmed (intentionally and unintentionally) since birth about so much from a variety of trusted sources.
When some people feel their foundation of trust is threatened they lash out at whoever has presented the offending information, be it true or false.
Differences of opinion need to be addressed with respect and a cool head. Otherwise the dark side becomes stronger.
It is very likely that some false information is planted in fertile ground to keep people distracted with arguments that may be of little value for finding solutions.
The bottom line is that we need to brainstorm about potential solutions instead of distractions. United we stand and divided we fall.
:focus:
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
Paul
Quote:
Posted by
Daozen
And why are readers going round in circles on 9/11 when everyone has made up their minds years ago? I don't see much new information here, only rehashing minutiae.
Some of Rebekah's insights and research are new, so far as I know. I have studied 9/11 for years, and I didn't know where the planes went, until her work. That's a critical piece of the puzzle, and helps provide further shape and insight to the overall events of 9/11.
Yes, I could have written exactly that. Rebekah's findings ARE new, and significant, too. But that's in one area of the broad 9/11 landscape... she doesn't pretend to know what hit the Twin Towers, or what brought them down, for instance.
No way for a career flight attendant to be an expert on that (except that she knows, and has shown beyond reasonable doubt, that it couldn't have been the passenger flights themselves that were claimed to have been the 'weapons').
Of interest, maybe, I'd like to copy here a brief exchange of views on the mods' Skype chat. Both posts I think are worth sharing with the members here.
One of the team wrote:To me, it seems as if Andrew Johnson is highly frustrated with the progress regarding the processing of 911 in the alternative arena and in general. I sense a lot of pain, which turns into hostility. In other words, I don't think he means to derail or be a troll, but is frustrated that "the little dummies everywhere still haven't figured it all out by now." Doesn't justify his conduct though, of course.
I replied:I see it as territorial. (Another word for control issues and jealousy.) Rebekah is the new kid on the block. Kerry Cassidy and I had the same experience when we suddenly came onto the scene in 2006 as unknowns. Others were really resentful, like we'd gate-crashed a party, uninvited. Merit and new approaches had nothing to do with it. We were seen (by some) as impostors.
This territoriality issue is an issue elsewhere... in archeology, for instance, it's endemic everywhere you look. If you don't seem to have the proper credentials, and have not served enough 'time', then no matter how smart (or correct!) you are, you're likely to be cold-shouldered and marginalized (or character-assassinated — Andrew, you'd not be trying to do that with Rebekah, would you? — by the establishment).
And we shouldn't deceive ourselves: there are 'establishment' figures (so to speak) in the alternative community, too. Those who feel they were here first, and resent new blood. That's really true, and it's a shame... truly great teachers, and truly great experts, genuinely welcome new blood, and new ideas.
This is not a competition. We're simply trying to get to the truth, and no-one can do it alone.
¤=[Post Update]=¤
Quote:
Posted by
Buddha's Palm
Today's 9/11 is unfolding in real time...
<— Bumping this. Please keep us informed.
:bump:
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
Quote:
Posted by
Paul
Quote:
Posted by
AndrewJohnson
Can anyone else figure out what she is trying to say?
Probably not - that's the point, it seems.
Presumably in this question your asking if anyone else can figure out what Rebekah is saying pertains specifically to that MP3 clip of her responding to caller Leah on the George Noory show to the question of what brought the towers down.
Rebekah is quite clear in her answer (thanks Bill, for the transcript, posted just above), consistent with everything she has said all along, that she's not a building demolition expert, especially not in the more exotic technologies that must have been used on the World Trade Center buildings on 9/11. However she clearly agrees with the work of yourself and others such as Judy Wood that it took more than kerosene to so dramatically convert those two massive towers to mostly fine dust in 10 seconds per tower.
But your other more general criticisms of Rebekah and her 9/11 work are, in my view, uncalled for and seriously misguided. That you continue to persist, months ago on your blog, and now here, in slamming Rebekah Roth's excellent, expert and original work in analyzing what happened to the Planes and their crew and passengers on 9/11, with little or no substance that I can discern, makes me wonder what you're up to.
I urge readers to
read with caution your comments so far regarding Rebekah's work on 9/11.
I urge readers to
read with caution your comments so far regarding my comments. I also urge them to study my references and contact me if they wish to ask any questions or check anything. Can we do that with you Paul? Do you have a website? Do you give public presentations? Do you post your name, address and telephone number like I do Paul? Or is this simply more "forum noise"?
We can feel that energy ... It's offensive to interrupt a cooperative effort to gather information with such rude expressions. I usually ignore such posts, but I feel like defending the nice people who are staying considerate and professional.
Can you please center and calm down and be peaceful in your heart?
It would be very much appreciated.
Love transmutes,
Mm
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
Buddha's Palm
Today's 9/11 is unfolding in real time...
Where did this get bumped to? Where is today's 9/11?
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
Michelle Marie
Quote:
Posted by
Buddha's Palm
Today's 9/11 is unfolding in real time...
Where did this get bumped to? Where is today's 9/11?
See post #129, here:The day after Jade Helm 15 concluded, on September 16, DHS and local law enforcement have been very active in downtown DC according to first-hand accounts, stationing personnel in the metro stations and this afternoon dozens of vehicles along a several block area adjacent to 1400 K St NW. One of our contacts in DC confirmed with DHS that the radical Muslim populations that have infiltrated the United States via porous borders and legal immigration from the Middle East and South America are already creating serious problems for law enforcement personnel. Jade Helm for all practical purposes has already "gone live".
Updates will be posted to http://event-x.blogspot.com/ as new information is received.
THIS IS NOT A DRILL...
It's up to Buddha's Palm (not me) to say more about who they are, but I think I can safely explain that they are well-connected, pretty smart, and very experienced — and if they are concerned about something, then we should pay some attention.
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
Ron Mauer Sr
The bottom line is that we need to brainstorm about potential solutions instead of distractions. United we stand and divided we fall.
:focus:
:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:
-
Re: Bill Ryan's interview with REBEKAH ROTH, 11 September, 2015
Quote:
Posted by
Bill Ryan
Quote:
Posted by
Michelle Marie
Quote:
Posted by
Buddha's Palm
Today's 9/11 is unfolding in real time...
Where did this get bumped to? Where is today's 9/11?
See post #129,
here:
The day after Jade Helm 15 concluded, on September 16, DHS and local law enforcement have been very active in downtown DC according to first-hand accounts, stationing personnel in the metro stations and this afternoon dozens of vehicles along a several block area adjacent to 1400 K St NW. One of our contacts in DC confirmed with DHS that the radical Muslim populations that have infiltrated the United States via porous borders and legal immigration from the Middle East and South America are already creating serious problems for law enforcement personnel. Jade Helm for all practical purposes has already "gone live".
Updates will be posted to http://event-x.blogspot.com/ as new information is received.
THIS IS NOT A DRILL...
It's up to
Buddha's Palm (not me) to say more about who they are, but I think I can safely explain that they are well-connected, pretty smart, and very experienced — and if they are concerned about something, then we should pay some attention.
Ok, thanks. I saw that, but I thought there was a new thread that I couldn't find.
AND...PS: after calling several bookstores to purchase "Methodical Deception," I had to order a copy since they don't have them in stock. Has anybody read it through yet? I'm really looking forward to it....arriving next week.
I read "methodical Illusion" in one sitting. I couldn't put it down!
Love to all!
MM
