Daily Dose of Sultnpapper 04/19/18 > With 30 years experience... how the little details can tell the story.
I have a great amount of respect for people who work at one profession for a substantial amount of time. There are some things about certain professions it takes years and years to learn, sometimes even decades or more to really have a grasp on what is going on. So when I hear someone speak who has 30 years of experience and all the knowledge that comes with those 30 years of experience, I listen and trust what they have to say regarding that business.
Recently I had a chance to hear an interview of one such person, her name is Rebekah Roth, and what she had to say in that interview was really interesting. Rebekah spent thirty years of her life up in the air attending to the needs of passengers on commercial airline flights as a flight attendant. If you are like me, we have flown our fair share, but we really don’t know what all the work of a flight attendant entails. So listening to her interview and how she was able to communicate very specific interesting details of that work made for an enlightening time for me.
The broader subject that was being discussed I was already pretty familiar with, but I had never heard anyone address the subject from a flight attendant’s perspective. She was able to break down certain situations that come up during the course of a flight attendant’s job duties and what the protocol is for those situations. She also shared some insider knowledge into the jet planes and the equipment those plains have that I wasn’t aware of and you probably aren’t aware of either.
I had always known that the official language of the skies is English, did you know that? That’s right; all air line pilots are required to speak fluent English because all communication between the air traffic controllers who manage the travel of the planes and the pilots is in English. The reason I knew this is that I have a brother in law who was an air traffic controller for right at twenty years, he retired back around 2009. He worked up in Ohio at the FAA regional control center in Oberlin, Ohio and he was actually working on 9/11/2001 when the decision was made to ground all airplanes at the nearest airport to where the plane was located at the time the decision was made.
It just so happens that Rebekah Roth’s interview had to do with 911, as the events of that September 11th have been come to be known as. She wasn’t flying that day as she says in the interview which allowed her to watch the events occur as it unfolded. She said that as things were unfolding she saw things that were just “not right”.
The first thing she brings up in the interview is that no fighter jets were “scrambled” to intercept or least engage these hijack airliners. The normal response time to send jets to investigate is six minutes, it took nearly an hour and half before the jets were summoned. Next she brings up how a BBC article from 9/23/2001 said that the Saudi government was threatening to file suit against the US for claiming that six Saudi nationals were among the supposed 19 hijackers. The reason the Saudi’s were so upset was that the six the US was claiming to be hijackers were still alive and living in Saudi Arabia.
In 2004 Rebekah retired from being a flight attendant and then devoted thousands of hours to investigate the happening of 9/11/2001. She used her 30 years of flying experience to look at all the reports and coverage of 911 to see what other discrepancies might show up with what supposedly took place that day.
The interview I listened to was right at an hour long and she makes some very good observations that a person like me, with no internal working knowledge of the industry, would probably never pick up on and there is a good chance you wouldn’t either. She elaborates on what is “universal protocols” that every airline uses in the event of a hijacking and how those protocols weren’t used. Also she digs really deep into the phone calls that were supposed to have been made from these hijacked flights and all the problems that those calls bring to light if you know what you are listening too and what to listen for.
One thing of particular note is that it seems each plane managed to get two phone calls out during the time they were hijacked but before they ended up being crashed. Most of the calls were made by flight attendants, but according to Rebekah, the descriptions of what was taking place on the plane didn’t match, even though the two flight attendants were on the same flights.
We all know that in a lot of instances eye witnesses aren’t the best at recalling events after time goes by, but this is real time event recall not months or years later. One flight attendant says no one has been stabbed, the other one from the same flight says a passenger has been stabbed and gives the passenger’s seat location.
The other big fly in the ointment is that there is no background noise on these calls, no jet engine noise yet where the flight attendant supposedly is there is a jet engine in close proximity and flight attendants have trouble conversing in the area without having to elevate their voices in order to hear each other with clarity.
She also brings up something known in the industry as the “flight termination system”, it is an add on to the planes computer system that in the event of a hijacking and when hijackers have breached the cockpit, the controls in the cockpit are overrode by the system and the plane is then controlled by people on the ground who manage the system. They can then fly the plane remotely and land it where ever they determine best to land the plane. This system was available at the time of 911 and she believes it was used. The system isn’t standard equipment on Boeing aircraft but is compatible with the planes that were involved on 911. I had no idea that this is available and was back then, but it makes perfect sense, and we see drones now in use all the time both commercially and in the military with similar controls systems.
The other interesting thing about the flight termination system is that once it is activated the planes transponder that is used to track the plane by ground radar is rendered useless, as is all the radio communications devices on the plane. The only thing that has control of the plane is the person on the ground working the flight termination program. She pieces together that the planes more than likely were never hijacked but were taken over by the system and landed at a remote location.
I won’t give a complete recap of her interview here and now, I will give you a link and you can listen to it yourself if you are inclined too. I will tell you this much, if you have never given much thought to 911 and what took place that day and you are happy with the story that the media and the government has told you about it, don’t click the link.
If you have unanswered questions or doubts about the story as it has been told to us then by all means give it a listen. The group called “Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth” was the first group that I had come across that was raising “issues” with the official government report on 911 and that got me started paying attention and questioning things that just don’t seem right. Listening to Rebekah’s interview will also have that same effect on you, if you are open minded and willing to listen to an expert with over 30 years of experience.
I had laid off of the 911 stuff for a while, but I can tell you that if there ever was a false flag event, as these type things are referred too, 911 is it. I found this as I was looking for something else and the recent airline emergency that happened a couple days ago where the engine exploded and ended up killing at least one passenger was more than likely just an accident.
In my opinion, and several other highly qualified individuals that have degrees and have years and decades of experience in their field of expertise, we think that 911 was no hijacking pulled off by 19 Jihadist terrorists.
To use an old saying, “the cat is out of the bag”. Whether or not you want to acknowledge it that is your personal choice. I just hope that if don’t acknowledge it; that same cat doesn’t come back to bite you on your butt at some point in the future. The more they do and get away with, the more they are inclined to do.
Until next time,
@sultnpapper
The video link is from YouTube account holder listed on the video and is their property not @sultnpapper property.
This is a cool premise for a post, and you follow through and deliver at high level of quality. You got my attention at “30 years of experience,” as that’s what I’m creeping up on in my own profession, and I’m just beginning to appreciate some of what that means. I don’t think we appreciate experience as much as we should, and perhaps that’s because we don’t necessarily appreciate age! On another note, I did a lot of reading about 911 a few years after, and I went down that path of conspiracy. I ended up coming back to a more conventional opinion on it, but what bothers me about the entire subject is that, in my opinion, there is just no way to know which approach carries more weight. I’m not a lazy researcher, and my balanced reading left me squarely in the middle. Is there any specific source that has convinced you of the conspiracy?
In my line of work I have a reasonable amount of interaction with professional engineers and architects on projects. I value what these professional have to say on this subject with very high regard. These are the people who design and engineer these high rise buildings.
When I first heard of the 911 event being a conspiracy I thought, "no way" and if so, it was a terrorist conspiracy for sure in my mind.
Then I came across the group, Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth. They don't take you down a path of conspiracy per say, but they do explain that the official government report on how and why the twin towers and building 7 came down is not worth the paper it was printed on because of all the errors that were made by NIST who did the investigation and prepared the report.
Never in the history of high rise buildings has a steel & concrete high rise building collapsed from fire as NIST's report claims to have happened until 911, and then three buildings on the same day collapse within 10 hours total time.
In any building failure there are protocol that needs to be followed in examining the building remains in order to determine the cause of the failure, in the case of 911 the protocol was not followed. For such a high profile disaster how could that happen is the first question that comes to mind for me.
Another red flag was that numerous fire fighters are on record saying that explosive charges were going off inside the twin towers. I have even watch videos that were taken that day where you could here the explosions while the television crews were interviewing fire fighters. Yet, the NIST investigators did not interview these fire fighters nor did they test any of the debris for explosive residue in the debris.
The NIST investigators said their report never went that direction because they knew the planes had crashed into the towers so what ever happened to bring the tower down had to be related to the impact and resulting fires.
The architects and engineers are very detailed in their assessment of the errors in the NIST report. The first glaring red flag is that no matter how much jet fuel were on those planes it could not have melted the steel structural beams that the buildings were constructed with, jet fuel does not burn at a high enough temperature to do that. All the office furniture and associated things that would be found in a typical office building also cannot burn hot enough either.
If you watch video that is readily available you can see streaming flows of molten steel running out of portions of the tower buildings before the collapse. There were also pools of molten steel even days after the collapse in the footprint of the collapsed towers.
Had Jihadist terrorists been the true cause of 911 every effort would have been made to document everything with i's dotted and t's crossed, the fact that the report is riddle with error and protocol not followed was the main reason I decided to keep looking, because if these mistakes and error's were made intentionally there could only be one other logical group that orchestrated 911 and the would be our own US government.
Since then I have from time to time come across things that help solidify my belief that it was in fact a government operation. Like this woman here, Rebekah, she explained a lot of things from her perspective as a flight attendant with 30 years experience. Things that untrained people like myself would not know about or would not think about simply because we don't have the knowledge and experience.
I would be curious to know the "more conventional opinion on it" that you keep ending back up at?
I will tell you that this is not a subject that is going to go away and just 10 days ago lawyers for the victims families filed a petition with the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York demanding that their office present evidence to grand jury for crimes committed involving the use of explosives in the 9/11 event in 2001 at the World Trade Center Complex. It is to early in the process to see how the US Attorney's Office is going to respond, but if they elect not to do anything, the lawyers will file for a writ of mandamus and force the process that way.
It’s Saturday night, so please excuse the lack of a more thoughful response, but this might be the single greatest response to a comment in Steemit history.
Well I was giving you a couple days to respond with something more,but it looks like this left your radar screen or you are just to busy. Either way no problem, it may be beneficial information for others to know. I'm still curious though on the "more conventional opinion" that you mentioned in your first reply, can you share that with us?
Thanks for the compliment on my response, it does take time and effort to do a good response and I think anyone who takes the time to read and ask questions is deserving of a decent response as there are plenty of posts to choose from to read and I'm honored when someone chooses one of mine.
Thanks,
@sultnpapper
Sorry for the delay. I was just mulling over what you wrote, and wondering how to respond. And busy! This is all very compelling info. I remember hearing some of what you shared about the impossibility of the collapse due to fuel, and the lack of investigation, interviews, etc. I really can’t remember all of the details that I read anymore. As far as “conventional” goes, I guess I just mean I ended up accepting that it was still somehow caused by the planes. But at the same time I’ve never been able to shake the idea that the President knew about it in advance, so I’m also contradicting myself. This probably sounds like a cop out, but as plausible or likely as the government operation theory might be, it just seems like we will never know, and there are a lot of other important issues that as a citizen I might actually be able to have some influence. The one thing most conspiracy theories seem to have in common is that we really are more or less powerless to bring any real light to them. So we can spend our time and energy on them, or on more “mainstream” issues. Like, for example, I attended a meeting this evening about three different absurd environmental bills that are sitting my governor’s desk, and how we can influence a veto on them. Because I feel like I need to be working on tangible issues, I’ve tried to convince myself to go along with the more mainstream opinions on things like 911. Does that make sense? I mean, in a way I know it doesn’t :), but you probably get what I’m saying. All that said, your comment definitely makes me want to stay tuned for updates, especially on details like the lawsuit you mentioned. So, thanks again! It’s refreshing to hear detailed thoughts in conversation here.
When they concocted that false flag event they knew that people seeing those planes hit the towers that was all they needed to convince 90% or more of the public, and the media kept replaying that video for weeks on end. The devil is in the details, and those have been well hidden away from the public, not one media outlet raised any concern over how that report was compiled.
Keep in mind that over 1700 registered professional engineers and architects have staked their professional careers on the line by joining in and signing that they disagree with the NIST report and they have nothing to gain except to set the record strait on what actually took place that day.
We as the public need to be demanding that every senator and congressman make this a priority to reopen an investigation. Attend a town hall meeting and ask questions of your elected officials or even ask the opponents of the sitting elected officials what their take is on it.
The thing that makes this so important is that over 3,000 Americans lost their lives that day and all the fingers seem to point at the government as being the culprit in this tragic event.
Hope your meeting helps with veto you are looking for.
I'll continue to follow this as time goes along, you can bet on that.
Congratulations! This post has been chosen as one of the daily Whistle Stops for The STEEM Engine!
You can see your post's place along the track here: The Daily Whistle Stops, Issue #111 (4/21/18)
The STEEM Engine is an initiative dedicated to promoting meaningful engagement across Steemit. Find out more about us and join us today.
Thank you so much for including this offering of mine for public consumption to your passengers. Hard to believe that @thesteemengine has made 111 runs through the steemosphere already. It is a pleasure to be associated with such a fine group of people who believe in supporting and encouraging each other on the platform.
I have some difficulty with 911. I do not, under any circumstances, think those buildings were wired. Comes from my knowledge of explosives and explosive protocol. Those planes brought the buildings down.
Now where I have problems is with defense protocol. How did that second plane get into that airspace at that time? I mean really? I can sorta see how the first one might have, but the second one was far enough behind that you could have scrammed fighters from Ohio and made it on time. And the Pentagon? Really? Andrews AFB is about 17 seconds scram to bam for an F16. Let alone the ground based defense set up to protect the Pentagon and the Capital.
So I have questions. Nobody has answers.
Sounds like you have some experience in explosives from military service? Have you spent much time on looking into any of it?
It is hard for good red blooded Americans to believe that it wasn't what we were told, if you have never seen the architects and engineers group on 911 and have time and what to know more look them up. These are the people who design these buildings, nothing inside those buildings can burn hot enough to melt steel, not even the jet fuel from the planes.
Did you know that the official government investigation by NIST, (National Institute for Safety and Testing) did not even test any of the debris for explosive residue?
Are you familiar with building seven that collapsed that day that wasn't struck by any plane? If not, just Google "building seven on 911" and watch how that building implodes, the craziest part of building seven was a BBC reporter is reporting live how building seven had collapsed, but the building is still standing and is visible over her left shoulder in the camera view, it collapsed about 20 minutes later. How does that happen?
The Pentagon is another good question, how can a big jet liner crash into there and not one single piece of debris be left from the plane? No bodies were ever recovered from that wreckage or the Shanksville, PA. crash, that just does not happen. Also a little know piece of information on the Pentagon story was that on 9/10/2001 Donald Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon was not able to account for trillions of dollars that were missing from their books. The "plane " just happened to crash into the area that does all the accounting for the military and all the records were destroyed. But that news only got about 16 hours of life being announced on the 10th, and the next morning all hell broke lose so it never got another mention in the mainstream news media.
There are answers, the questions you have more than likely can be answered but you have to search for them. The reason your fighter jets weren't scrambled in the normal time frame was that all the jets from those bases were doing "training " out over the Atlantic that morning, and the initial requests for jets was thought to be something to do with the training exercises and it caused "confusion" so that had to be sorted out before they could respond.
I've never been satisfied with the explanation we are given regarding 911. Far too many discrepancies and things that just don't feel right.
Instincts never lie...
Great share!
This woman's information that she shared goes real far in helping explain a lot of questions about why no wreckage of the planes was found in the rubble of the crash sites.
The government report on 911 should have come with two packages of grape kool aid attached to each copy. Glad you liked it.
There certainly are discrepancies in what we were told and what actually happened. So, all those that were killed or are suffering from the after-effects of being at ground zero are just collateral damage to a greater nefarious plan.
All of those people and all the people who have been killed and injured in the "War on Terror" that was declared by George Bush that has gone on for the last 16 and half years. We went to war with Iraq and the Taliban right after 911 and we have managed to keep that going since then so all of that can be considered as part of it as well , in my opinion.
The nefarious plan had several layers too it, war was just one of them.
No need to convince me as I totally agree and we never really heard anything more about the missing Trillions of dollars from the Pentagon or as they say "a discrepancy" not missing! So much of the narrative just doesn't/didn't make sense. Edited to say I just saw you response about the missing Trillions..lol!
Yes, "missing" is such a harsh word, that would imply something "funny" was going on. A "discrepancy" is much more business like and professional, that way it could imply that it was a "rounding error" or a misplaced decimal point or something minor like that, good catch.
It is good to have a normal discussion about some of these things. I used to believe things as they were "fed" to me but when I looked closer, things just didn't add up. I don't argue but I believe in discussing different views with an open mind. I'm always able to agree to disagree though! :)
Yes, the important thing is to THINK , when we actually do that it will lead to discussions and different possibilities. We just can't believe everything that the social actors reading scripts on television are telling us and reporting as news. Those days are long gone, it is up to each of us to explore and investigate come to our own conclusions. I have no problem either with agreeing to disagree with people , it is just part of life. Some people like vanilla and some like chocolate, but they are both ice cream.