| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
scubadiver
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 1850
Location: Currently Andover
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:27 am Post subject: FBI says Barbara Olsen NEVER called from the plane on 9/11 |
 |
|
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_bill_dou_080219_breaking_9_2f1 1_news_3a_.htm
| Quote: | We were fed a lie by Ted Olsen who served as Solictor General for the Bush Administration, when on 9/11 he held a press conference to tell America and the world that his dead wife had called him before her demise from the jet she was on that had just been hijacked.
Personally, I thought it was odd at the time that a man would decide to hold a press conference minutes after hearing of his own wife’s death, when it happened on 9/11. If my own wife had just died, the last thing I’d want to do would be to talk to anyone, let alone call a press conference. It didn’t “smell” right.
Now we know why it didn’t smell right. It was a lie. The FBI has reported that no such call between Barbara Olsen and Ted Olsen ever took place on 9/11/2001. |
_________________
Currently working on a new website |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Stephen
Moderate Poster
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:12 pm Post subject: Re: FBI says Barbara Olsen NEVER called from the plane on 9/ |
|
|
| scubadiver wrote: | http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_bill_dou_080219_breaking_9_2f1 1_news_3a_.htm
| Quote: | We were fed a lie by Ted Olsen who served as Solictor General for the Bush Administration, when on 9/11 he held a press conference to tell America and the world that his dead wife had called him before her demise from the jet she was on that had just been hijacked.
Personally, I thought it was odd at the time that a man would decide to hold a press conference minutes after hearing of his own wife’s death, when it happened on 9/11. If my own wife had just died, the last thing I’d want to do would be to talk to anyone, let alone call a press conference. It didn’t “smell” right.
Now we know why it didn’t smell right. It was a lie. The FBI has reported that no such call between Barbara Olsen and Ted Olsen ever took place on 9/11/2001. |
|
Mabe Ted Olsen knew that his with was going to die and wasnt emotionally attached to her any more and knew he could cash in on the insurance, or it could be just lies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Micpsi
Moderate Poster
Joined: 13 Feb 2007
Posts: 505
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can find the relevant US court trial material containing the FBI's report here:
http://coop.vaed.uscourts.gov/moussaoui/flights.zip
This is another smoking gun opening ever wider the cracks in the official 9/11 story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harassed
Minor Poster
Joined: 11 Oct 2006
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
THANKS for this Micpsi.
I downloaded the whole zip and there is a lot of info in there and I'm very limited for time as I'm on my works pc.
Could you please let me know specifically where the Barbara Olson bit is...I've got some pleb attempting to poo-poo the info again and would like to put him right.
Thanks again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TonyGosling
Editor
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
This rejection of Ted Olson’s story by American Airlines, the Pentagon, and especially the FBI is a development of utmost importance. Without the alleged calls from Barbara Olson, there is no evidence that Flight 77 returned to Washington. Also, if Ted Olson’s claim was false, then there are only two possibilities: Either he lied or he was duped by someone using voice-morphing technology to pretend to be his wife.17 In either case, the official story about the calls from Barbara Olson was based on deception. And if that part of the official account of 9/11 was based on deception, should we not suspect that other parts were as well?
The fact that Ted Olson’s report has been contradicted by other defenders of the official story about 9/11 provides grounds for demanding a new investigation of 9/11. This internal contradiction is, moreover, only one of 25 such contradictions discussed in my most recent book, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8514
_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11 |
|
|
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8514
| Quote: | Ted Olson's Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials
by David Ray Griffin, Global Research, April 1, 2008
Late in the day on 9/11, CNN put out a story that began: “Barbara Olson, a conservative commentator and attorney, alerted her husband, Solicitor General Ted Olson, that the plane she was on was being hijacked Tuesday morning, Ted Olson told CNN.” According to this story, Olson reported that his wife had “called him twice on a cell phone from American Airlines Flight 77,” saying that “all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers. The only weapons she mentioned were knives and cardboard cutters.”2
Ted Olson’s report was very important. It provided the only evidence that American 77, which was said to have struck the Pentagon, had still been aloft after it had disappeared from FAA radar around 9:00 AM (there had been reports, after this disappearance, that an airliner had crashed on the Ohio-Kentucky border). Also, Barbara Olson had been a very well-known commentator on CNN. The report that she died in a plane that had been hijacked by Arab Muslims was an important factor in getting the nation’s support for the Bush administration’s “war on terror.” Ted Olson’s report was important in still another way, being the sole source of the widely accepted idea that the hijackers had box cutters.3
However, although Ted Olson’s report of phone calls from his wife has been a central pillar of the official account of 9/11, this report has been completely undermined.
Olson’s Self-Contradictions
Olson began this process of undermining by means of self-contradictions. He first told CNN, as we have seen, that his wife had “called him twice on a cell phone.” But he contradicted this claim on September 14, telling Hannity and Colmes that she had reached him by calling the Department of Justice collect. Therefore, she must have been using the “airplane phone,” he surmised, because “she somehow didn’t have access to her credit cards.”4 However, this version of Olson’s story, besides contradicting his first version, was even self-contradictory, because a credit card is needed to activate a passenger-seat phone.
Later that same day, moreover, Olson told Larry King Live that the second call from his wife suddenly went dead because “the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well.”5 After that return to his first version, he finally settled on the second version, saying that his wife had called collect and hence must have used “the phone in the passengers’ seats” because she did not have her purse.6
By finally settling on this story, Olson avoided a technological pitfall. Given the cell phone system employed in 2001, high-altitude cell phone calls from airliners were impossible, or at least virtually so (Olson’s statement that “the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well” was a considerable understatement). The technology to enable cell phone calls from high-altitude airline flights was not created until 2004.7
However, Olson’s second story, besides being self-contradictory, was contradicted by American Airlines.
American Airlines Contradicts Olson’s Second Version
A 9/11 researcher, knowing that AA Flight 77 was a Boeing 757, noticed that AA’s website indicated that its 757s do not have passenger-seat phones. After he wrote to ask if that had been the case on September 11, 2001, an AA customer service representative replied: “That is correct; we do not have phones on our Boeing 757. The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack.”8
In response to this revelation, defenders of the official story might reply that Ted Olson was evidently right the first time: she had used her cell phone. However, besides the fact that this scenario is rendered unlikely by the cell phone technology employed in 2001, it has also been contradicted by the FBI.
Olson’s Story Contradicted by the FBI
The most serious official contradiction of Ted Olson’s story came in 2006 at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker. The evidence presented to this trial by the FBI included a report on phone calls from all four 9/11 flights. In its report on American Flight 77, the FBI report attributed only one call to Barbara Olson and it was an “unconnected call,” which (of course) lasted “0 seconds.”9 According to the FBI, therefore, Ted Olson did not receive a single call from his wife using either a cell phone or an onboard phone.
Back on 9/11, the FBI itself had interviewed Olson. A report of that interview indicates that Olson told the FBI agents that his wife had called him twice from Flight 77.10 And yet the FBI’s report on calls from Flight 77, presented in 2006, indicated that no such calls occurred.
This was an amazing development: The FBI is part of the Department of Justice, and yet its report undermined the well-publicized claim of the DOJ’s former solicitor general that he had received two calls from his wife on 9/11.
Olson’s Story Also Rejected by Pentagon Historians
Ted Olson’s story has also been quietly rejected by the historians who wrote Pentagon 9/11, a treatment of the Pentagon attack put out by the Department of Defense.11
According to Olson, his wife had said that “all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers.”12 This is an inherently implausible scenario. We are supposed to believe that 60-some people, including the two pilots, were held at bay by three or four men (one or two of the hijackers would have been in the cockpit) with knives and boxcutters. This scenario becomes even more absurd when we realize that the alleged hijackers were all small, unathletic men (the 9/11 Commission pointed out that even “[t]he so-called muscle hijackers actually were not physically imposing, as the majority of them were between 5’5” and 5’7” in height and slender in build”13), and that the pilot, Charles “Chic” Burlingame, was a weightlifter and a boxer, who was described as “really tough” by one of his erstwhile opponents.14 Also, the idea that Burlingame would have turned over the plane to hijackers was rejected by his brother, who said: “I don't know what happened in that cockpit, but I'm sure that they would have had to incapacitate him or kill him because he would have done anything to prevent the kind of tragedy that befell that airplane.”15
The Pentagon historians, in any case, did not accept the Olson story, according to which Burlingame and his co-pilot did give up their plane and were in the back with the passengers and other crew members. They instead wrote that “the attackers either incapacitated or murdered the two pilots.”16
Conclusion
This rejection of Ted Olson’s story by American Airlines, the Pentagon, and especially the FBI is a development of utmost importance. Without the alleged calls from Barbara Olson, there is no evidence that Flight 77 returned to Washington. Also, if Ted Olson’s claim was false, then there are only two possibilities: Either he lied or he was duped by someone using voice-morphing technology to pretend to be his wife.17 In either case, the official story about the calls from Barbara Olson was based on deception. And if that part of the official account of 9/11 was based on deception, should we not suspect that other parts were as well?
The fact that Ted Olson’s report has been contradicted by other defenders of the official story about 9/11 provides grounds for demanding a new investigation of 9/11. This internal contradiction is, moreover, only one of 25 such contradictions discussed in my most recent book, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press.
NOTES
1 This essay is based on Chapter 8 (“Did Ted Olson Receive Calls from Barbara Olson?”) of David Ray Griffin, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2008).
2 Tim O’Brien, “Wife of Solicitor General Alerted Him of Hijacking from Plane,” CNN, September 11, 2001 (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.olson).
3 This was pointed out in The 9/11 Commission Report, 8.
4 Hannity & Colmes, Fox News, September 14, 2001 (http://s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2001/foxnews091401.html).
5 “America’s New War: Recovering from Tragedy,” Larry King Live, CNN, September 14, 2001 (http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/14/lkl.00.html).
6 In his “Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture,” delivered November 16, 2001
(http://www.fed-soc.org/resources/id.63/default.asp),
Olson said that she “somehow managed . . . to use a telephone in the airplane to call.” He laid out this version of his story more fully in an interview reported in Toby Harnden, “She Asked Me How to Stop the Plane,” Daily Telegraph, March 5, 2002 (http://s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2002/telegraph030502.html).
7 I discussed the technical difficulties of making cell phone calls from airliners in 2001 in Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2007), 87-88, 292-97.
8 See the submission of 17 February 2006 by “the Paradroid” on the Politik Forum (http://forum.politik.de/forum/archive/index.php/t-133356-p-24.html). It is quoted in David Ray Griffin, 9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2008), 75.
9 United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui, Exhibit Number P200054 (http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecut ion/flights/P200054.html). These documents can be more easily viewed in “Detailed Account of Phone Calls from September 11th Flights”
(http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/calldetail.html).
10 FBI, “Interview with Theodore Olsen [sic],” “9/11 Commission, FBI Source Documents, Chronological, September 11,” 2001Intelfiles.com, March 14, 2008,
(http://intelfiles.egoplex.com:80/2008/03/911-commission-fbi-source-do cuments.html).
11 Alfred Goldberg et al., Pentagon 9/11 (Washington DC: Office of the Secretary of Defense, 2007).
12 O’Brien, “Wife of Solicitor General Alerted Him of Hijacking from Plane.”
13 9/11 Commission Staff Statement 16
(http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_statement_16.pdf ).
14 Shoestring, “The Flight 77 Murder Mystery: Who Really Killed Charles Burlingame?” Shoestring911, February 2, 2008 (http://shoestring911.blogspot.com/2008/02/flight-77-murder-mystery-wh o-really.html).
15 “In Memoriam: Charles ‘Chic’ Burlingame, 1949-2001,” USS Saratoga Museum foundation (available at http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/planes/analysis/chic_remembered.html ).
16 Alfred Goldberg et al., Pentagon 9/11 (Washington DC: Office of the Secretary of Defense, 2007), 12.
17 Of these two possibilities, the idea that Ted Olson was duped should be seriously entertained only if there are records proving that the Department of Justice received two collect calls, ostensibly from Barbara Olson, that morning. Evidently no such records have been produced.
This article is based on Chapter 8 of Dr. Griffin's new book, "9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press," (Northampton: Olive Branch, 2008).
This book reframes the central events of 9/11 as a series of 25 internal contradictions. The only way that its readers will be able to continue to accept the official story is to accept mutually contradictory accounts.
"9/11 Contradictions" may have the best chance of any of DRG's books (or indeed any book) of opening up a new investigation into 9/11.
David Ray Griffin is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Please support Global Research
Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers. |
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TimmyG
Validated Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 489
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
incredible that the only piece of evidence for the hijackers-with-box-cutters story (on flight 77) comes from the Solicitor general at the time,.. someone who was nominated for the job by bush himself ...
someone who also once said this
"It's easy to imagine an infinite number of situations where the government might legitimately give out false information,"
and this
"It's an unfortunate reality that the issuance of incomplete information and even misinformation by government may sometimes be perceived as necessary to protect vital interests."
you just can't make this stuff up
_________________
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scienceplease
Validated Poster
Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 288
|
| Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There has been the ongoing debate about Cell Phone on planes (which don't work on planes flying high and fast over mobile phone "cells") or whether it was seatback phones (which apparently were not available on the flight 93). According this news article, there was a phone call from a passenger in the toilet using a cell phone:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010911paplanep3.asp
Ipso facto. The claim is that cell phones were used and could not have been seatback phones. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James O'Neill
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 44
Location: Brisbane Australia
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:44 am Post subject: Cell phone calls |
|
|
The information about the absence of cell phone calls from the four allegedly hijacked flights (with two exceptions) has been known since the Moussaui trial in 2006. David Ray Griffin has published articles on this in 2007 and 2008 and it is extensively discussed in his book 9/11 Contradictions (2008).
Given that a number of people have said publically that they received cell phone calls from their spouses on the flights and the FBI said such calls never occurred, there are a number of possible explanations. the most likely (assuming the recipients to have been telling the truth) is that those calls were made using voice morphing technology. If that is indeed the case (and the onus is on the supporters of the official government theory to dispel it) then it is one more fatal blow to the official theory. If the calls had taken place, and the FBI says they did not, then there would be no reason to invent them. The fact they were in all probability invented just reinforces the sceptics position.
What is also really significant is that the FBI's evidence from the Moussaui trial was completely ignored by the mainstream media who continue to perpetuate the myth of heroic passengers etc having dramatic conversations with their loved ones. The absence of such calls incidentally also reinforces in my view the argument that there were no passengers on the planes at all. Again, if they really were on the planes, why the necessity to invent these calls? Despite years of requests the US government has yet to actually produce proof that there were passengers on the planes, as has been discussed by a number of researchers.
The fact that the mainstream press refuse to print any article, comment or letters pointing out the FBI evidence and how it utterly refutes the official mythology is of itself a compelling argument for government duplicity and the mainstream press's role in actively assisting the duplicity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scienceplease
Validated Poster
Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 288
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi James,
Just yesterday I made a comment about his cell-phone vs seatback phone argument in the Barbara Olsen case...
| Quote: | There has been the ongoing debate about Cell Phone on planes (which don't work on planes flying high and fast over mobile phone "cells") or whether it was seatback phones (which apparently were not available on the flight 93). According this news article, there was a phone call from a passenger in the toilet using a cell phone:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010911paplanep3.asp
Ipso facto. The claim is that cell phones were used and could not have been seatback phones. |
It's true that the mainstream press "knows" about the hijackers and their mode of operation from these cell phone calls. Assuming that not everyone in the media is in the pay of the secret services... how can anyone in the media be confident of their facts if the cell phone call evidence is removed? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redadare
Validated Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Posts: 204
Location: France
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry for being thick, but what is it you are saying?
scienceplease said | Quote: | There has been the ongoing debate about Cell Phone on planes (which don't work on planes flying high and fast over mobile phone "cells") or whether it was seatback phones (which apparently were not available on the flight 93). According this news article, there was a phone call from a passenger in the toilet using a cell phone:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010911paplanep3.asp
Ipso facto. The claim is that cell phones were used and could not have been seatback phones. |
Are you saying that cell phones did work from aircraft in 2001 and therefore the Barbara Olsen story is true? Or are you saying something else? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James O'Neill
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 44
Location: Brisbane Australia
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It would help if you read Griffin's book and the earlier research by Ke Dewdney. The short version however is that cell phones do not work above 5000 feet. The FBI said that only two calls were possible on 9/11, both from flight 93 and both at the end of the flight when the plane was at a low altitude.
In the case of Flight 77 (the Olsen flight) the FBI said that an attempted call by Barbara Olsen lasted 0 seconds. Other researchers have etablished that the flight did not have seat back phones. Ergo, the Olsen story told by Ted Olsen, repeated ad nauseum and featured in the 9/11 Commission Report is complete hokum.
One of the many important points that Griffin makes is that neither the FBI nor the mainstream media have bothered to advertise the fact that the original story(ies) were untrue. Hence the perpetuation of the "Lets Roll" myth among many others. Those myths clearly serve the government's purpose which is why I suggested that the true version of events reinforces the case for those who argue that the US government is lying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon (allegedly!) at 09:37, over half an hour after the second plane hit the WTC. It was virtually impossible to make a cell call in New York after the twin towers were hit because the lines were jammed with so many people trying to make calls. The idea that calls could miraculously be made from flight 77 when millions of other callers on the ground could not get connected is just another of those coincidences we are expected to swallow.
_________________
"The conflict between corporations and activists is that of narcolepsy versus remembrance. The corporations have money, power and influence. Our sole influence is public outrage. Extract from "Cloud Atlas (page 125) by David Mitchell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefan
Banned
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 1219
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James O'Neill wrote: | It would help if you read Griffin's book and the earlier research by Ke Dewdney. The short version however is that cell phones do not work above 5000 feet. The FBI said that only two calls were possible on 9/11, both from flight 93 and both at the end of the flight when the plane was at a low altitude.
In the case of Flight 77 (the Olsen flight) the FBI said that an attempted call by Barbara Olsen lasted 0 seconds. Other researchers have etablished that the flight did not have seat back phones. Ergo, the Olsen story told by Ted Olsen, repeated ad nauseum and featured in the 9/11 Commission Report is complete hokum.
One of the many important points that Griffin makes is that neither the FBI nor the mainstream media have bothered to advertise the fact that the original story(ies) were untrue. Hence the perpetuation of the "Lets Roll" myth among many others. Those myths clearly serve the government's purpose which is why I suggested that the true version of events reinforces the case for those who argue that the US government is lying. |
That puts it pretty succinctly. The fact that the MSM are not all over this is an unsurprising but depressing scandal...
_________________
Peace and Truth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scienceplease
Validated Poster
Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 288
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redadare wrote: | Sorry for being thick, but what is it you are saying?
scienceplease said | Quote: | There has been the ongoing debate about Cell Phone on planes (which don't work on planes flying high and fast over mobile phone "cells") or whether it was seatback phones (which apparently were not available on the flight 93). According this news article, there was a phone call from a passenger in the toilet using a cell phone:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010911paplanep3.asp
Ipso facto. The claim is that cell phones were used and could not have been seatback phones. |
Are you saying that cell phones did work from aircraft in 2001 and therefore the Barbara Olsen story is true? Or are you saying something else? |
Ted Olsen referred to an "airplane phone" - see Blackcat's earlier post which reproduced Griffin's description of Ted Olsen's changing story. Other apologists for the official story have also said if the cell phones don't work then the passengers must have used seatback phones.
We have also had information that the seatback phones were not operational on Flight 77.
And the story I pointed out about Flight 73, the passenger was in the toilet making the call so couldn't have been using the seatback phone.
So, seatback phones cannot explain the calls from the aircraft.
We have already determined that cell phones CANNOT work from aircraft in 2001 - Airlines have been putting in systems from 2007 which will allow them to work - but they could not work in 2001. Plus the fact as Blackcat says the cell phone system was completely overloaded and nobody could get through to anyone.
(I heard that the only Blackberry text messaging was working that morning).
So seatback phones: does not explain the calls. Cell phones don't work from aircraft. FBI states that no cell phone calls were made from the aircraft. Therefore, how on earth did these miracle phone calls happen? Step forward Journalists, Debunkers and Apologists and explain it!
Yet another reason for an Investigation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Having reviewed new evidence from Shanksville that the crash site was staged (which requires preparation) I am 99% sure no passenger planes were involved in any incident. The diversion to Cleveland, given the Israelis on board and their connection, suggest that the tower planes were re-routed under the guise of the exercise. ' Terrorist on board simulation'
Pentagon and Shanksville planes had too many insiders as passengers - doubt they even flew
I recall listening 5 live and the film reviewer guy went baliistic at the mere mention of 911 being an inside job. Really caught my ear he protested so much.
Look what I found just today and totally by chance
http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?ParentId=m12s28&SecId=28&AId=57814&ATyp eId=1
The conspiracy is ubiquitous
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
